1 The region under the Han race was the first definition of Zhongguo. For instance, in the Chunqiu, “Zhongquo” was used to underline the concept of Hua yi zhi bian 華夷之辨 (the distinction between Chinese and barbarian). According to Wang Ermin 王爾敏, 145 out of 178 (=83%) pre-Qin references to Zhongguo imply the space controlled by the Han. See Wang Ermin, Zhongguo jindai sixiang shilun 中國近代思想史論 (Taipei: Huashi chubanshe, 1977), p. 442.

2 Joshua Fogel, “On Japanese Expressions for ‘China’,” Sino-Japanese Studies 2.1 (December 1989), p. 5.

3 Using Great Tang (Dai Tō) would cause problems in national identity and political independence. The Heian Japanese often solved the problem by applying the Japanese pronunciation of Chinese words (kunyomi 訓讀) to Chinese characters (kanji). By reading Da Tang as Morokoshi 諸越, literally the importation of miscellaneous goods, they thus reduced the Sinocentric flavor of the term in favor of a transnational dimension. See Kishi Toshio 岸傲男, Nihon kodai bunbutsu no kenkyū 曰本古代文物の研宄 (Tokyo: Hanawashobō, 1988), chapter 15.

4 See Maeno Michiko 前野みちて, “Kokugō ni miru Nihon no jiko ishiki 国号に見る 「日本」の自己意識”, Gengo bunka kenkyū sōsho 言語文化研究叢書 (Nagoya: Graduate School of Languages and Cultures, Nagoya Univ., 2006), Vol. 5, pp. 26–62.

5 Quoted in Kitajima Manji 北島萬次, Toyotomi seiken no taigai ninshiki to Chōsen shinryaku 豊臣政権の対外認識と朝鮮侵略 (Tokyo: Azekura shobō, 1990), p. 106.

6 Names for Japan also became more diversified in the Tokugawa period. Common names were Nihon (Hayashi Razan, Asami Keisai, Kumazawa Banzan, Dazai Shundai, Tokugawa Mitsukuni, Arai Hakuseki, Nishikawa Joken and Hayashi Shihei), Honchō (Hayashi Razan, Yamazaki Ansai, Yamaga Sokō, Watarai Nobuyoshi, Dazai Shundai, Keichū and Hayashi Shihei), Nihon koku 曰本國 (Hayashi Razan, and Hayashi Shihei), Dai Nihon 大曰本 (Nakai Chikuzan and Tokugawa Mitsukuni), and the terms wagakuni 我邦 (Hayashi Razan, Yamazaki Ansai and Watanabe Kazan), wagachō 我朝 (Hayashi Razan, Asami Keisai, Rai Sanyō and Ishida Baigan), shinkoku 神國 (Hayashi Razan, Fujita Tōko and Aizawa Seishisai), and kōkoku 皇國 (Motoori Norinaga, Ueda Akinari, Tachibana Moribe, Izumi Makuni, Katsu Kaishū and Satō Nobuhiro). Less common terms / names were honpō 本邦 (Yoshida Shōin), Yamato 大和 (Kaibara Ekiken), kōchō 皇朝 (Ikuta Yorozu), tenchō 天朝 (Yoshida Shōin and Aizawa Seishisai), shinshū 神州 (Fujita Tōko and Aizawa Seishisai), shinpō 神邦 (Sakuma Taika), Yamato 倭 (Dazai Shundai), Yashima 八洲 (Asami Keisai and Rai Sanyō), Ashihara nakatsukuni 葦原中國 (Yamazaki Ansai) and kōwa 皇和 (Rai Sanyō).

7 The three-nation worldview remained influential in Buddhist circles of the Tokugawa period Nevertheless, the role of China in the worldview of Tokugawa Japanese became increasingly marginalized. See Peter Nosco, “The Place of China in the Construction of Japan's Early Modern World View,” Taiwan Journal of East Asian Studies, 4.1 (June 2007), pp. 27–48.

8 Terajima Ryōan, Wakan sansai zu (Tokyo: Chūgai shuppansha, 1901), vol. 13, p. 259.

9 Kumazawa Banzan, Shūgi gaisho 集義夕卜書, in Inoue Tetsujirō 井上哲次郎 and Kanie Yoshimaru 蟹江義丸 (eds.), Nihon rinri ihen 曰本倫理彙編, vol. 2 (Tokyo: Ikuseikai, 1901), p. 61.

10 See Satō Saburō 佐藤三郎, Kindai Nitchū kōshōshi no kenkyū 近代曰中交涉史の研宄 (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kōbunkan, 1984), pp. 26–33.

11 Both Shina and Shitan were translated from Cina, the Sanskrit of Qin. Shina was primarily used by Buddhist monks including Kūkai 空海 (774–835), Kokan Shiren 虎關師鍊 (1278–1346), Banri Shūku 百里集九 (1428–) and Mangen Shiban 元師蛮 (1626–1710). In the mid-Tokugawa period Shina was introduced to Japan the second time through the translation of the Dutch term, China, by Arai Hakuseki (1657–1725). Mid- and late Tokugawa scholars who used Shina include Motoori Norinaga, Sugita Genpaku, Ōtsuki Gentaku, Tominaga Nakamoto, Kaiho Seiryō, Satō Nobuhiro, Terajima Ryōan and Takano Chōei. None of them used it in a negative way. Shina became more frequenly used in the Bakumatsu 幕末 period (late years of the Tokugawa shogunate). For instance, Yoshida Shōin 吉田松陰 (1830–1859) and Takasugi Shinsaku 高杉晉作 (1839–1867) used it to refer to China with a disqualifying undertone. The term became increasingly negative in Meiji times, especially after the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese wars.

12 See Haga Noboru 芳賓登, Nikkan bunka kōryūshi no kenkyū 日韓文化交流史の研究 (Tokyo: Yūzankaku shuppan, 1986), chapter 2.

13 Satō Saburō, Kindai Nitchū kōshōshi no kenkyū, pp. 25–66.

14 See Harry Harootunian, “The Functions of China in Tokugawa Thought,” in Akira Iriye (ed.), The Chinese and the Japanese: Essays in Political and Cultural Interactions (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Pr., 1980), pp. 9–36; Marius Jansen, China in the Tokugawa World (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1992), pp. 82–83.

15 Kumazawa Banzan, Shūgi gaisho, in Masamune Atsuo 正宗敦夫 (ed), Banzan zenshū 蕃山全集 (Tokyo: Meicho shuppan, 1978), p. 25.

16 The translation is from Paul Varley, A Chronicle of Gods and Sovereigns: Jinno Shotoki of Kitabatake Chikafusa (New York: Columbia Univ. Pr., 1980), p. 49.

17 Quoted in Kajiyama Takao's blog (http://edosakio.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2012/11/post-df96.html).

18 Keimō kōdōkan kijutsugi 啟蒙弘道館記述義, vol. 1 (Tokyo: Ryūeiken, 1885), p. 7. Digital Library, National Diet Library (http://kindai.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/756218).

19 Fujita Tōko, Kōdōkan kijutsugi 弘道館記述義, in Dai Nihon shisō zenshū kankōkai 大曰本思想全集刊行會 (ed.), Tokugawa Mitsukuni shū, Fujita Tōko shū, Hashimoto Sanai shū, Dai Nihon shisō zenshū 德川光 園集 藤田東湖集•橋本左内集•大日本思想全集, vol. 18 (Tokyo: Dai Nihon shisō zenshū kankōkai, 1933), p. 293.

20 Ibid., pp. 202–203.

21 Yamaga Sokō, Haisho zanpitsu 配所殘筆, in Hirose Yutaka 庾瀨豐 (ed.), Yamaga Sokō zenshū: shisōhen 山鹿素行全集 思想篇 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1940), vol. 12, pp. 591–593.

22 Watarai Nobuyoshi, Jingū hiden mondō 神宫秘傳問答, in Nishikawa Masatami 西川力頃士 (annot.), Shintō taikei: ronsetsuhen 7 Ise shintō Part 2 神道大系：論說篇 7 伊勢神道下（ (Tokyo: Shintō taikei hensankai, 1982), p. 74.

23 Goi Ranshū, Jūyakuron 十厄論, quoted from Tao Demin 陶德民, Kaitokudō shushigaku no kenkyū 懷德 堂朱子學の研宄 (Suita: Ōsaka daigaku shuppankai, 1994), p. 271.

24 Motoori Norinaga, Naobi no mitama 直昆靈，, in Umezawa Isezō 梅澤伊勢三 and Takahashi Miyuki 高橋美由紀 (annot.), Shintō taikei: ronsetsuhen 25, fukko shintō 3 神道大系 論說篇 25 復古神道下 (Tokyo: Shintō taikei hensankai, 1982), pp. 17–18.

25 Motoori Norinaga, Kakaika 呵刈葭 (1786), Ōno Susumu 大野晋 and Ōkubo Tadashi 大久保正 (annot.), Motoori Norinaga zenshū 8 本居宣長錢卷 8 (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1972), p. 404.

26 Izumi Makuni, Meidōsho 明道書 (1804), in Haga Noboru and Matsumoto Sannosuke 松本三之介 (annot), Nihon shisō taikei 51: Kokugaku undō no shisō 曰本思想大系 51: 国学運動の思想 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1971), p. 186.

27 Regarding the impact of the fall of the Ming and the rise of the Manchu dynasty on the worldview of the Tokugawa Japanese, see Han Dongyu 韓東育, Cong “tuoru” dao “tuoya”: Riben jinshi yilai “quzhongxinhua” zhi sixiang guocheng yanjiu 從「脱儒」到「脱亞」：曰本近世以來「去中心化」之思想過程硏宄 (Taipei: National Taiwan Univ. Pr., 2009), pp. 162–167. On the change of worldview caused by the Dutch learning, see Grant Goodman, The Dutch Experience (London: Athlone Pr., 1986), and Marius Jansen, Japan and Its World (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Pr., 1980).

28 Bitō Jichū, Seiki yohitsu 靜寄餘筆, in Seki Giichirō 闘儀一郎 (ed), Nihon jurin sōsho 日本懦林叢書 (Tokyo: Ōtori shuppan, 1971), vol. 2, p. 10.

29 Satō Issai, Genshiroku 言志錄，, in Sagara Tōru 相良亨’, Mizoguchi Yūzō 溝口雄三 and Fukunaga Mitsuji 福永光司 (annot.), Nihon shisō taikei 46: Satō Issai Ōshio Chūsai 本思想大系 46 大塩中斎、佐藤一 斎 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1980), p. 31.

30 Sugita Genpaku, Kyōi no gen 狂醫之言, Numata Jirō 沼田次郎 (annot.), Nihon shisō taikei 64: Yōgaku 1 曰本思想大系 64 洋学上 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1976), p. 230.

31 Goi Ranshū, Sago 瑣語, in Seki Giichirō (ed.), Nihon jurin sōsho 1, p. 44.

32 Motoori Norinaga, Tamakatsuma 玉勝間 (1795–1812), vol. 11, in Muraoka Tsunetsugu 村岡典嗣 (annot.), Tamakatsuma, Part 2 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1943), p. 57.

33 Tani Shinzan, Zokusetsu zeiben 俗說贅辯, quoted in Gotō Saburō 後藤三郎, Ansai gakutō no kokutai shisō 闇斎学統の国体思想 (Tokyo: Kinkōdō shoseki, 1941), p. 270.

34 Ise Sadatake, Ansai zuihitsu 安齋隨筆, vol. 1 (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kōbunkan, 1929), p. 401.

35 See Tokugawa Mitsukuni (ed.), Dai Nihonshi 大日本史, 117 kan (scroll), retsuden 列傳 44, the entry on Fujiwara Hirotsugu 藤原廣嗣.

36 Gan Huaizhen 甘懷真, “Shanlu Suxing Zhongchao shishi zhong de tianxia yu Zhongguo gainian 山鹿素行 《中朝事實》中的天下與中國概念,” in Ye Guoliang 葉國良 and Xu Xingqing 徐興慶 (eds.), Jianghu shidai Riben Hanxue yanjiu zhumianxiang: sixiang wenhua pian 江戶時代曰本漢學研宄諸面向：思想文 化篇 (Taipei: National Taiwan Univ. Pr., 2009), p. 123.

37 Yamaga Sokō, Chūchō jujitsu, in Hirose Yutaka (ed), Yamaga Sokō zenshū: shisōhen 山鹿素行全集：思想篇 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1940), vol. 13, p. 239.

38 Arai Hakuseki, Koshitsū wakumon 古史通或問, in Kuwabara Takeo 桑原武夫 (ed.), Nihon no meicho 15: Arai Hakuseki 日本の名著 15 新井白石 (Tokyo: Chūō kōronsha, 1969), p. 282. In addition, he also pointed out that ancient Japan was called Nakatsukuni 中津國 (Central Kingdom) in the Jinnō shōtōki.

39 Amenomori Hōshū, Taharegusa たはれ草, in Uemura Katsuya 上村勝彌 (ed), Dai Nihon shisō zenshū 大曰本思想全集 (Tokyo: Dai Nihon shisō zenshū kankōkai, 1933), vol. 7, p. 411.

40 Yamazaki Ansai, Bunkai hitsuroku 文會筆錄, in Nihon koten gakkai 曰本古典學會 (ed.), Yamazaki Ansai zenshū 山崎安斎全集 (Tokyo: Perikansha, 1978), vol. 1, p. 373.

41 Ono Takakiyo 小野髙潔，, Hyakusōro 百草露, in Nihon zuihitsu taisei henshūbu 曰本筆隨筆大成編集部 (ed.), Nihon zuihitsu taisei 3:11 曰本随筆大成, 11 (Tokyo: Yoshikawa kōbunkan, 1978), p. 72.

42 Asami Keisai, Satsuroku 割錄, in Nishi Junzō 西順藏, Abe Ryūichi 阿部隆一 and Maruyama Masao 丸山 真男 (annot.), Nihon shisō taikei 31: Yamazaki Ansai gakuha 曰本思想大系 31:山崎闇斎学派 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1980), p. 377.

43 Asami Keisai, Chūgoku ben 中國辨, ibid., p. 416.

44 Katō Naokata, Chūgoku ronshū 中國論集, ibid, p. 420. Naokata himself did not fully accept this view, arguing that the Central Kingdom should be based on geographic location.

45 Sasaki Takanari, Ben bendōsho 辯辯道書 (1736), in Saeki Ariyoshi 佐伯有義 (annot.), Dai Nihon bunko shintō hen: Suika shintō 3 大日本文庫神道篇：垂加神道下卷 (Tokyo: Shunyōdō shoten, 1937), p. 299.

46 Watarai Jōshō, Shintō meiben 神道明辨, in Arima Sukemasa 有馬祐政 (ed), Kinnō bunko 2 勤王文庫第二編 (Tokyo: Dai Nihon meidōkai, 1919), p. 115.

47 Fukagawa Yūei, Seidōron 正道論 (1776), ibid, p. 409.

48 Tokugawa Mitsukuni, Seizankō zuihitsu 西山公隨筆 in Uemura Katsuya, ed, Dai Nihon shisō zenshū 18 (Tokyo: Dai Nihon shisō zenshū kankōkai, 1933), p. 357.

49 Chun-chieh Huang, “The Idea of ‘Zhongguo’ and Its Transformation in Early Modern Japan and Contemporary Taiwan,” The Journal of Kanbun Studies in Japan 2 (March 2007), pp. 398–408.

50 It should be noted that Yamaga Sokō used Chūgoku and honchō (our dynasty) to refer to China and Japan respectively in his early writings such as the Seikyō yōroku 聖教要錄 (1666) and Yamaga gorui 山鹿. This serves as a footnote to show that his perception of names for China and Japan underwent tremendous changes at different stages of his life. See Tahara Tsuguo 田原嗣郎 and Morimoto Junichirō 守本順一郎 (annot.), Nihon shisō taikei 32: Yamaga Sokō 曰本思想大系 32 山鹿素行 (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1970), p. 8.

51 Yamaga Sokō, Chūchō jijitsu, in Yamaga Sokō zenshū: shisōhen 13, p. 225.

52 Ibid.

53 Ibid., p. 234.

54 Rai Sanyō, Shinsaku, in Uemura Katsuya (ed.), Dai Nihon shisō zenshū 15 Rai Sanyō shū (Tokyo: Dai Nihon shisō zenshū kankōkai, 1933), p. 131.

55 Fujita Tōko, Kōdōkan kijutsugi, in Dai Nihon shisō zenshū 18, p. 267.

56 Ibid., p. 268.

57 Ibid., p. 219.

58 See Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, Anti-Foreignism and Western Learning in Early Modern Japan: The New Theses of 1825 (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1986), p. 9.

59 Aizawa Seishisai, Shinron, annotated by Okamura Rihei 岡村利平 (Tokyo: Meiji shoin, 1939), p. 25.

60 It should be noted that Seishisai's view of the distinction between the civilized and the barbarians was multi-dimensional. See Lan Hongyue 藍弘岳, “Shenzhou, Zhongguo, diguo: Huize Zhengzhizhai de guojia xiangxiang yu shijiu shiji Riben zhi Yazhou lunshu 「神州」、「中國」、「帝國」：會澤正志裔 的國家想像與十九世紀曰本之亞洲論述,” Xin Shixue 新史學 22.3 (September 2011), pp. 87–90.

61 Some scholars of national learning and Shintoists condemned Confucians for using jōkoku and chūchō for China. However, I have not yet found any example in my reading of Tokugawa texts.