Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Daqin
View on Wikipedia
| Part of a series on |
| Historical Chinese exonyms |
|---|
Daqin (Chinese: 大秦; pinyin: Dàqín; Wade–Giles: Ta4-ch'in2; alternative transliterations include Tachin, Tai-Ch'in) is the ancient Chinese name for the Roman Empire or, depending on context, the Near East, especially Syria.[1] It literally means "Great Qin"; Qin (Chinese: 秦; pinyin: Qín; Wade–Giles: Ch'in2) being the name of the founding dynasty of the Chinese Empire. Historian John Foster defined it as "the Roman Empire, or rather that part of it which alone was known to the Chinese, Syria".[2] Its basic facets such as laws, customs, dress, and currency were explained in Chinese sources. Its medieval incarnation was described in histories during the Tang dynasty (618–907 AD) onwards as Fulin (Chinese: 拂菻; pinyin: Fúlǐn), which Friedrich Hirth and other scholars have identified as the Byzantine Empire.[3] Daqin was also commonly associated with the Syriac-speaking Nestorian Christians who lived in China during the Tang dynasty.
Chinese sources describe several ancient Roman embassies arriving in China, beginning in 166 AD and lasting into the 3rd century. These early embassies were said to arrive by a maritime route via the South China Sea in the Chinese province of Jiaozhi (now northern Vietnam). Archaeological evidence such as Roman coins points to the presence of Roman commercial activity in Southeast Asia. Later recorded embassies arriving from the Byzantine Empire, lasting from the 7th to 11th centuries, ostensibly took an overland route following the Silk Road, alongside other Europeans in Medieval China. Byzantine Greeks are recorded as being present in the court of Kublai Khan (1260–1294), the Mongol ruler of the Yuan dynasty in Khanbaliq (Beijing), while the Hongwu Emperor (r. 1368–1398), founder of the Ming dynasty, sent a letter of correspondence to Byzantine emperor John V Palaiologos.
Etymology
[edit]Daqin
[edit]The term Daqin (Chinese: 大秦; pinyin: Dà qín; Wade–Giles: Ta4-ch'in2, Middle Chinese: /dɑiH d͡ziɪn/), meaning "Great Qin", is derived from the dynasty founded by Qin Shi Huang, ruler of the State of Qin and China's first emperor who unified China's Warring States by 221 BC.[4] The prefix da (大) or "great" signified that the Roman Empire was on par with the might of the Qin dynasty and was viewed as a utopian land located to the northwest of the Parthian Empire.[4] The title Daqin does not seem to have any phonetic derivation from Latin Roma or Greek Romaikē. On the other hand, it is possible that the Latin term used for China, Serica (derived from Greek Serikon, commonly understood as "Land of Silk", from Chinese si Chinese: 絲; pinyin: sī, meaning silk), originated from the name Qin using Old Chinese pronunciation (with the final consonant pronounced with an -r sound).[5]
Fulin
[edit]The term Daqin was used from the Han dynasty (202 BC – 220 AD) onwards,[4] but by the beginning of the Tang dynasty (618–907 AD) a new name emerged in Chinese historical records for distinguishing the Eastern Roman Empire: Fulin (Chinese: 拂菻; pinyin: Fú lǐn). Friedrich Hirth surmised that Fulin may have been based on the accusative form of Konstantinoupolis, the Greek name of Constantinople, or rather its paraphrase hē Pólis ("the City"), giving (in the accusative) (tḕn) Pólin.[6] Using historical phonetic pronunciations of Cantonese and Japanese, Hirth also speculated that Fulin in Middle Chinese was pronounced Butlim or Butlam and thus might have also come from the Syriac pronunciation for Bethlehem.[7] While some scholars of the 20th century believed that Fulin was a transliteration of Ephraim, a reference to the Biblical Northern Kingdom, Samuel N. C. Lieu highlights how more recent scholarship has deduced that Fulin is most likely derived from the Persianate word for the Roman Empire shared by several contemporaneous Iranian languages (Middle Persian: hrwm; Parthian: frwm; Sogdian: βr'wm-; Bactrian: φρομο).[8]
History
[edit]
Early descriptions by Gan Ying
[edit]Following the opening of the Silk Road in the 2nd century BC, the Chinese thought of the Roman Empire as a civilized counterpart to the Chinese Empire. The Romans occupied one extreme position on the trade route, with the Chinese located on the other.
China never managed to reach the Roman Empire directly in antiquity, although general Ban Chao sent Gan Ying as an envoy to "Daqin" in 97 AD. Gan Ying did not reach Daqin: he stopped at the coast of a large sea, because "sailor(s) of the Parthian west border" told him that the voyage to cross the sea might take a long time and be dangerous. Gan Ying left a detailed account of the Roman Empire, but it is generally considered to have been based on second-hand information from Parthians:
「大秦國一名犂鞬,以在海西,亦云海西國。地方數千里,有四百餘城。小國役屬者數十。以石為城郭。列置郵亭,皆堊塈之。有松柏諸木百草。」 The Kingdom of Da Qin (the Roman Empire) is also called Lijian. As it is found to the west of the sea, it is also called the Kingdom of Haixi ("West of the Sea"). The territory extends for several thousands of li. It has more than four hundred walled towns. There are several tens of smaller dependent kingdoms. The walls of the towns are made of stone. They have established postal relays at intervals, which are all plastered and whitewashed. There are pines and cypresses, as well as trees and plants of all kinds.[9][10]


Gan Ying gives a very idealistic view of Roman governance which is likely the result of some story he was told while visiting the Persian Gulf in 97 AD. He also described, less fancifully, Roman products:
「其王無有常人,皆簡立賢者。國中災異及風雨不時,輒廢而更立,受放者甘黜不怨。其人民皆長大平正,有類中國,故謂之大秦......土多金銀奇寶,有夜光璧、明月珠、駭雞犀、珊瑚、虎魄、琉璃、琅玕、朱丹、青碧。刺金縷繡,織成金縷罽、雜色綾。作黃金塗、火浣布。」
Their kings are not permanent. They select and appoint the most worthy man. If there are unexpected calamities in the kingdom, such as frequent extraordinary winds or rains, he is unceremoniously rejected and replaced. The one who has been dismissed quietly accepts his demotion, and is not angry. The people of this country are all tall and honest. They resemble the people of the Middle Kingdom and that is why this kingdom is called Da Qin. This country produces plenty of gold [and] silver, [and of] rare and precious they have luminous jade, "bright moon pearls", Haiji rhinoceroses, coral, yellow amber, opaque glass, whitish chalcedony [i.e., langgan], red cinnabar, green gemstones, gold-thread embroideries, woven gold-threaded net, delicate polychrome silks painted with gold, and asbestos cloth.
「又有細布,或言水羊毳,野蠶繭所作也。合會諸香,煎其汁以為蘇合。凡外國諸珍異皆出焉。以金銀為錢,銀錢十當金錢一。與安息、天竺交巿於海中,利有十倍。[...]其王常欲通使於漢,而安息欲以漢繒綵與之交市,故遮閡不得自達。」
They also have a fine cloth which some people say is made from the down of "water sheep", but which is made, in fact, from the cocoons of wild silkworms. They blend all sorts of fragrances, and by boiling the juice, make a compound perfume. [They have] all the precious and rare things that come from the various foreign kingdoms. They make gold and silver coins. Ten silver coins are worth one gold coin. They trade with Anxi and Tianzhu by sea. The profit margin is ten to one. ... The king of this country always wanted to send envoys to the Han, but Anxi, wishing to control the trade in multi-coloured Chinese silks, blocked the route to prevent [the Romans] getting through [to China].[9][10]
Geographical descriptions in the Weilüe
[edit]In the Weilüe written by Yu Huan (c. 239–265), a text that is preserved in the Records of the Three Kingdoms by Pei Songzhi (published in 429), a more detailed description of the Eastern portion of the Roman Empire is given, particularly the province of Roman Egypt. The 19th-century sinologist Friedrich Hirth translated the passages and identified the places named in them, which have been edited by Jerome S. Arkenberg in 2000 (with Wade-Giles spelling):[3]
Formerly T'iao-chih was wrongly believed to be in the west of Ta-ts'in; now its real position is known to be east. [...] Formerly it was, further, wrongly believed that the Jo-shui was in the west of T'iao-chih; now the Jo-shui is believed to be in the west of Ta-ts'in. Formerly it was wrongly believed that, going over two hundred days west of T'iao-chih, one came near the place where the sun sets; now, one comes near the place where the sun sets by going west of Ta-ts'in. The country of Ta-ts'in, also called Li-kan, is on the west of the great sea [the Indian Ocean] west of Ar-hsi and T'iao-chih. From the city of Ar-ku, on the boundary of Ar-hsi one takes passage in a ship and, traversing the west of the sea, with favorable winds arrives [at Aelana, modern Elat, on the Gulf of Aqaba] in two months; with slow winds, the passage may last a year, and with no wind at all, perhaps three years. This country is on the west of the sea whence it is commonly called Hai-hsi. There is a river [the Nile] coming out from the west of this country, and there is another great sea [the Mediterranean]. In the west of the sea there is the city of Ali-san. Before one arrives in the country one goes straight north from the city of U-tan. In the south-west one further travels by a river which on board ship one crosses in one day [again the Nile]; and again south-west one travels by a river which is crossed in one day [still the Nile]. There are three great divisions of the country [i. e., Delta, Heptanomis, Thebaid]. From the city of Ar-ku one goes by land due north to the north of the sea; and again one goes due west to the west of the sea; and again you go due south to arrive there. At the city of Ali-san, you travel by river on board ship one day, then make a round at sea, and after six days' passage on the great sea [the Mediterranean], arrive in this country. There are in the country in all over four hundred smaller cities; its size is several thousand li in all directions of the compass. The residence of their king lies on the banks of a river estuary [Antioch-on-the-Orontes]. They use stone in making city walls. In this country there are the trees sung [pine], po [cypress], huai [sophora?], tzu [a kind of euphorbia?]; bamboos, rushes, poplars, willows, the wu-t'ung tree, and all kinds of other plants. The people are given to planting on the fields all kinds of grain. Their domestic animals are: the horse, the donkey, the mule, the camel, and the mulberry silk-worm. There are many jugglers who can issue fire from their mouths, bind and release themselves, and dance on twenty balls. In this country they have no permanent rulers, but when an extraordinary calamity visits the country, they elect as king a worthier man, while discharging the old king, who does not even dare to feel angry at this decision. The people are tall, and upright in their dealings, like the Han [Chinese], but wear foreign dress; they call their country another "Middle Kingdom" [probably from "Mediterranean" or "Middle of the Land"].[3]

The Weilüe also noted that the Daqin had small "dependent" vassal states, too many to list as the text claims, yet it mentions some as being the Alexandria-Euphrates or Charax Spasinu ("Ala-san"), Nikephorium ("Lu-fen"), Palmyra ("Ch'ieh-lan"), Damascus ("Hsien-tu"), Emesa ("Si-fu"), and Hira ("Ho-lat").[3] Perhaps some of these are in reference to certain states that were temporarily conquered during the Roman–Parthian Wars (66 BC – 217 AD) when, for instance, the army of Roman Emperor Trajan reached the Persian Gulf and captured Characene, the capital of which was Charax Spasinu.[11] The Weilüe provides the traveling directions and approximate distances between each of these cities, counted in ancient Chinese miles (li), and along with the Book of Later Han even mentions the pontoon bridge ("flying bridge") across the Euphrates at the Roman city of Zeugma, Commagene (in modern-day Turkey).[3]
Hirth and Arkenberg identified Si-fu (Chinese: 汜復) with Emesa. However, John E. Hill provides evidence that it was most likely Petra (in the Nabataean Kingdom), given the directions and distance from "Yuluo" (i.e. Al Karak) and the fact that it fell under Roman dominion in 106 AD when it was annexed by Trajan.[12] Even more convincing for Hill is the fact that Si-fu in Chinese means "an arm of a river which rejoins the main stream" or more aptly "rejoined water courses".[12] He believes this is directly related to the reservoir and cistern flood-control system harnessing the many streams running through the settlement and nearby canyons, or wadis, such as the Wadi Musa ("Valley of Moses").[12]
Christianity
[edit]

In later eras, starting in AD 550, as Syriac Christians settled along the Silk Road and founded mission churches, Daqin or Tai-Ch'in is also used to refer to these Christian populations rather than to Rome or the Roman church.[1] So, for example, when the Taoist Emperor Wuzong of Tang closed Christian monasteries in the mid-9th century, the imperial edict commanded:[13]
As for the Tai-Ch'in (Syrian Christian) and Muh-hu (Zoroastrian) forms of worship, since Buddhism has already been cast out, these heresies alone must not be allowed to survive.[14]
The name "Daqin" for Rome was used on Chinese maps as late as the 16th century, such as the Sihai Huayi Zongtu. The identification of "Daqin" with the Western Roman Empire, Eastern Roman Empire, or the Church of the East varies with the era and context of the document. The Nestorian Stele erected in 781 in the Tang capital Chang'an contains an inscription that briefly summarizes the knowledge about Daqin in the Chinese histories written up to that point and notes how only the "luminous" religion (i.e. Christianity) was practiced there.[3]
Capital cities
[edit]In the Hou Hanshu and the Weilüe, the chief city of Daqin is said to be more than 100 li around. It is described as being located near a river and having five palaces, with the king travelling to one of these palaces each day. Some scholars have identified in this description the city of Rome, the Tiber river and the Imperial residences of the Palatine hill. However, other scholars, including Hirth and Hoppál, identify it with Antioch. It has also been suggested that the capital of Daqin described in those works is a conflation of multiple cities, chiefly Rome, Antioch and Alexandria.[15]
In Gan Ying's report the capital of Daqin is "An-tu", Antioch.[16] However, the Old Book of Tang and New Book of Tang, which identified Daqin and "Fulin" (拂菻; i.e. Primus, the Byzantine Empire) as the same countries, noted a different capital city (Constantinople), one that had walls of "enormous height" and was eventually besieged by the commander "Móyì" (Chinese: 摩拽伐之; Pinyin: Móyì fá zhī) of the Da shi (大食; i.e. the Arabs).[3] Friedrich Hirth identifies this commander as Mu'awiyah I, who was first governor of Syria before becoming caliph and founder of the Umayyad Caliphate.[3]
Characteristics attributed from the Book of Jin to the Romans
[edit]The encyclopedic part of the Book of Jin classified the appearance of the Romans as being genuinely Xirong, a barbaric people who lived west of the Zhou dynasty, however, the characteristics attributed to Daqin tend to be more positive than the others, saying that their people when they reached adulthood looked like the Chinese, they used glass on the walls of their houses (considered a luxury item in the Tang dynasty), their tiles were covered with coral, their "king" had 5 palaces, all huge, and all far from each other, just as what was heard in one palace took time to reach another and so on.[17]
Embassies
[edit]Starting in the 1st century BC with Virgil, Horace, and Strabo, Roman histories offer only vague accounts of China and the silk-producing Seres of the distant east. The 2nd-century historian Florus seems to have conflated the Seres with peoples of India, or at least noted that their skin complexions proved that they both lived "beneath another sky" than the Romans. The 1st-century geographer Pomponius Mela noted that their lands formed the center of the coast of an eastern ocean, flanked by India to the south and the Scythians of the northern steppe, while the historian Ammianus Marcellinus (c. 330 – c. 400) wrote that the land of the Seres was enclosed by great natural walls around a river called Bautis, perhaps the Yellow River. In his Geography, Ptolemy also provided a rough sketch of the Gulf of Thailand and South China Sea, with a port city called Cattigara lying beyond the Golden Chersonese (i.e. Malay Peninsula) visited by a Greek sailor named Alexander.[18] Among the proposed sites for Ptolemy's Cattigara are Oc Eo, Vietnam, where Roman artefacts have been found.[19]
In contrast, Chinese histories offer an abundance of source material about their interactions with alleged Roman embassies and descriptions of their country. The first of these embassies is recorded in the Book of Later Han as having arrived by sea in 166 AD and came by way of Jiaozhou, later known as Annam (northern Vietnam), as would later embassies.[3] Its members claimed to be representatives of the Daqin ruler "Andun" (安敦), either Antoninus Pius or more likely his co-emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, and offered gifts to the court of Emperor Huan of Han.[20][21] Other embassies arrived sporadically afterwards. The Book of Liang mentions a Daqin embassy to Sun Quan of Eastern Wu in 226, while the Book of Jin records a Daqin embassy to Emperor Wu of Jin in 284.[3]
Although Emperor Yang of Sui (r. 604–618) had desired to send an embassy to Daqin, this never came to fruition.[3][22] Instead, an embassy from a country that was now called Fulin (拂菻, i.e. the Byzantine Empire), which the Old Book of Tang and New Book of Tang identified as being the same as Daqin, arrived in 643 at the court of Emperor Taizong of Tang and claimed to represent their king Bo duoli (波多力; i.e. Kōnstantinos Pogonatos, "Constantine the Bearded", the nickname of Constans II).[3] Several other Fulin (i.e. Byzantium) embassies during the Tang dynasty are mentioned for the years 667, 701, and 719.[3]
The Wenxian Tongkao written by Ma Duanlin (1245–1322) and the History of Song record that the Byzantine emperor Michael VII Parapinakēs Caesar (Mie li sha ling kai sa 滅力沙靈改撒) of Fulin (i.e. Byzantium) sent an embassy to China that arrived in 1081, during the reign of Emperor Shenzong of Song (r. 1067–1085).[3][23] During the subsequent Yuan dynasty (1271–1368), an unprecedented number of Europeans started to visit and live in China, such as Marco Polo and Katarina Vilioni, and papal missionaries such as John of Montecorvino and Giovanni de Marignolli.[24][25][26] The History of Yuan recounts how a man of Fulin named Ai-sie (transliteration of either Joshua or Joseph), initially in the service of Güyük Khan, was well-versed in Western languages and had expertise in the fields of medicine and astronomy.[27] This convinced Kublai Khan, founder of the Yuan dynasty, to offer him a position as the director of medical and astronomical boards, eventually honoring him with the title of Prince of Fulin (Chinese: 拂菻王; Fú lǐn wáng).[27] His biography in the History of Yuan lists his children by their Chinese names, which are similar to the Christian names Elias (Ye-li-ah), Luke (Lu-ko), and Antony (An-tun), with a daughter named A-na-si-sz.[27]
The History of Ming explains how the founder of the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), the Hongwu Emperor, sent a merchant of Fulin named "Nieh-ku-lun" (捏古倫) back to his home country with a letter announcing the founding of a new dynasty.[3][28][29] It is speculated that this "merchant" was actually a former bishop of Khanbaliq named Nicolaus de Bentra.[30] The History of Ming goes on to explain that contacts between China and Fulin ceased thereafter, whereas an envoy of the great western sea (i.e. the Mediterranean Sea) did not arrive again until the 16th century, with the Italian Jesuit missionary Matteo Ricci.[3]
Currency and coinage
[edit]
Although the ancient Romans imported Han Chinese silk while the Han-dynasty Chinese imported Roman glasswares as discovered in their tombs,[31][32] Valerie Hansen (2012) claimed that no Roman coins from the Roman Republic (507–27 BC) or the Principate (27 BC–284 AD) era of the Roman Empire have been found in China.[33] Yet this assumption has been overturned; Warwick Ball (2016) notes the discovery of sixteen Roman coins found at Xi'an, China (site of the Han capital Chang'an) minted during the reign of various emperors from Tiberius (14–37 AD) to Aurelian (270–275 AD).[34] The earliest gold solidus coins from the Eastern Roman Empire found in China date to the reign of Byzantine emperor Theodosius II (r. 408–450) and altogether only forty-eight of them have been found (compared to thirteen hundred silver coins) in Xinjiang and the rest of China.[33] However, Roman golden medallions from the reign of Antoninus Pius, and possibly his successor Marcus Aurelius, have been discovered at Óc Eo in southern Vietnam, which was then part of the Kingdom of Funan bordering the Chinese province of Jiaozhi in northern Vietnam.[18][35] This was the same region where Chinese historical texts claim the Romans first landed before venturing further into China to conduct diplomacy.[18][3]
Chinese histories offer descriptions of Byzantine coins. In discussing trade with India, the Parthian Empire and the Roman Empire, the Book of Jin, as well as the later Wenxian Tongkao, noted how ten ancient Roman silver coins were worth one Roman gold coin.[3] With fluctuations, the Roman golden aureus was worth about twenty-five silver denarii.[36] The History of Song notes how the Byzantines made coins of either silver or gold, without holes in the middle yet with an inscription of the king's name.[3]
Law and order
[edit]
The History of Song described forms of punishment in criminal law as they were carried out in Daqin (Roman Empire) and Fulin (Byzantine Empire). It states that they made a distinction between minor and major offenses, with 200 strikes from a bamboo rod being reserved for major crimes.[3] It described their form of capital punishment as having the guilty person being stuffed into a "feather bag" and thrown into the sea.[3] This seems to correspond with the Romano-Byzantine punishment of poena cullei (from Latin "punishment of the sack"), where those who committed parricide (i.e. murder of a father or mother) were sewn into a sack, sometimes with wild animals, and thrown into either a river or sea.[37] The History of Song also mentioned how it was forbidden by law to counterfeit the coins minted by Fulin.[3] These descriptions from the History of Song are also found in the Wenxian Tongkao.[3]
Naming conventions
[edit]In the Chinese histories, the names of Romans and Byzantines were often transliterated into Chinese as they were heard, yet occasionally the surname stemmed from their country of origin, Daqin (大秦). For instance, the Roman merchant Qin Lun (秦論), who visited the Eastern Wu court of Sun Quan in 226 AD, bears the surname derived from the name for his homeland, while having a given name that is perhaps derived from the Greek name Leon (e.g. Leon of Sparta).[38] In the Han-era stage of the spoken language intermediate between Old Chinese and Middle Chinese, the pronunciation for his given name "Lun" (論) would have sounded quite different from modern spoken Mandarin: K. 470b *li̯wən / li̯uĕn or *lwən / luən; EMC lwən or lwənh.[38]
Granting Roman individuals the surname "Qin" followed a common Chinese naming convention for foreign peoples. For instance, people from the Parthian Empire of ancient Persia such as An Shigao were often given the surname "An" (安) derived from Anxi (安息), the Arsacid dynasty. The Sogdians, an Eastern Iranian people from Central Asia, were also frequently given the surname "An" (e.g. An Chongzhang), especially those from Bukhara, while Sogdians from Samarkand were surnamed "Kang" (康; e.g. Kang Senghui), derived from Kangju, the Chinese term for Transoxiana.[39][40][41][42] The name given for either Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius Antoninus in the Chinese histories was "An Dun" (安敦).[20][note 1]
See also
[edit]- Christianity in China
- Church of the East in China
- Daqin Pagoda
- Europeans in Medieval China
- Foreign relations of imperial China
- Michael Shen Fu-Tsung, Chinese visitor to Europe in the 17th century
- Nestorian Stele (Memorial of the Propagation in China of the Luminous Religion from Daqin)
- History of the Han dynasty
- Seres and Serica, Latin Roman words for Chinese and China, respectively; see also Sinae
- Sino-Roman relations
- Zhang Qian, Western-Han Chinese explorer of Central Asia during the 2nd century BC
Notes
[edit]- ^ The surname "An" (安) used here for the surname of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus is the same as the aforementioned surname used for Parthians and Sogdians.
References
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ a b Jenkins, Philip (2008). The Lost History of Christianity: the Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia – and How It Died. New York: Harper Collins. pp. 64–68. ISBN 978-0-06-147280-0.
- ^ Foster, p. 3.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w Hirth, Friedrich (2000) [1885]. Jerome S. Arkenberg (ed.). "East Asian History Sourcebook: Chinese Accounts of Rome, Byzantium and the Middle East, c. 91 B.C.E. - 1643 C.E." Fordham.edu. Fordham University. Archived from the original on 2014-09-10. Retrieved 2016-09-10.
- ^ a b c Lieu (2013), p. 126.
- ^ Lieu (2013), p. 126 f.; the same character for "Qin" (i.e. 秦) was used by the Chinese of the Han period to transcribe foreign words ending in an -r sound.
- ^ Lieu (2013), p. 227.
- ^ Hirth (1939) [1885], pp. 286-290.
- ^ Lieu (2013), p. 127 f.
- ^ a b Hill (2009), p. 25.
- ^ a b Description of the Western regions (in Chinese).
- ^ Garthwaite, Gene Ralph (2005), The Persians, Oxford & Carlton: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd., ISBN 1-55786-860-3, p. 81.
- ^ a b c Yu, Huan (September 2004). John E. Hill (ed.). "The Peoples of the West from the Weilue 魏略 by Yu Huan 魚豢: A Third Century Chinese Account Composed between 239 and 265, Quoted in zhuan 30 of the Sanguozhi, Published in 429 CE [Section 11 – Da Qin (Roman territory/Rome)]". Depts.washington.edu. Translated by John E. Hill. Retrieved 2016-09-17.
- ^ Philip, TV (1998). "Christianity in China". East of the Euphrates: Early Christianity in Asia. Archived from the original on 2015-09-24. Retrieved 2008-11-30.
- ^ Foster, John (1939). The Church in T'ang Dynasty. Great Britain: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. p. 123.
- ^ "Chinese notions of Daqin" in The Archaeology of Knowledge Traditions of the Indian Ocean World(2020), Himanshu Prabha Ray, India: Taylor & Francis.
- ^ Foster, p. 4.
- ^ "晉書/卷097 - 维基文库,自由的图书馆". zh.wikisource.org (in Chinese). Retrieved 2024-01-22.
- ^ a b c Gary K. Young (2001), Rome's Eastern Trade: International Commerce and Imperial Policy, 31 BC - AD 305, London & New York: Routledge, ISBN 0-415-24219-3, p. 29.
- ^ Granville Allen Mawer (2013), "The Riddle of Catigara" in Robert Nichols and Martin Woods (eds), Mapping Our World: Terra Incognita to Australia, 38-39, Canberra: National Library of Australia, ISBN 9780642278098, p. 38.
- ^ a b de Crespigny, Rafe. (2007). A Biographical Dictionary of Later Han to the Three Kingdoms (23-220 AD). Leiden: Koninklijke Brill, p. 600, ISBN 978-90-04-15605-0.
- ^ Yü, Ying-shih. (1986). "Han Foreign Relations", in The Cambridge History of China: Volume I: the Ch'in and Han Empires, 221 B.C. – A.D. 220, 377-462. Edited by Denis Twitchett and Michael Loewe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 460–461, ISBN 978-0-521-24327-8.
- ^ Warwick Ball (2016), Rome in the East: Transformation of an Empire, 2nd edition, London & New York: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-72078-6, pp 152-153.
- ^ Fuat Sezgin; Carl Ehrig-Eggert; Amawi Mazen; E. Neubauer (1996). نصوص ودراسات من مصادر صينية حول البلدان الاسلامية. Frankfurt am Main: Institut für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften (Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University). p. 25. ISBN 9783829820479.
- ^ Jonathan D. Spence (1998). "The Chan's Great Continent: China in Western Minds". The New York Times. ISBN 0-393-02747-3. Accessed 15 September 2016.
- ^ Frances Wood (2002), The Silk Road: Two Thousand Years in the Heart of Asia, University of California Press, pp 125-126, ISBN 0-520-24340-4.
- ^ Stephen G. Haw (2006), Marco Polo's China: a Venetian in the Realm of Kublai Khan, London & New York: Routledge, p. 172, ISBN 0-415-34850-1.
- ^ a b c Bretschneider, Emil (1888), Medieval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources: Fragments Towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of Central and Western Asia from the 13th to the 17th Century, Vol. 1, Abingdon: Routledge, reprinted 2000, p. 144.
- ^ R. G. Grant (2005). Battle: A Visual Journey Through 5,000 Years of Combat. DK Pub. pp. 99–. ISBN 978-0-7566-1360-0.
- ^ Hirth, Friedrich (1939) [1885]. China and the Roman Orient: Researches Into Their Ancient and Mediaeval Relations as Represented in Old Chinese Records. Leipzig, Munich, Shanghai, & Hong Kong: Georg Hirth; Kelly & Walsh. p. 66. ISBN 9780524033050.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Edward Luttwak (1 November 2009). The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire. Harvard University Press. pp. 170–. ISBN 978-0-674-03519-5.
- ^ Brosius, Maria (2006), The Persians: An Introduction, London & New York: Routledge, p. 122 f., ISBN 0-415-32089-5.
- ^ An, Jiayao (2002), "When Glass Was Treasured in China", in Juliano, Annette L. and Judith A. Lerner, Silk Road Studies: Nomads, Traders, and Holy Men Along China's Silk Road, 7, Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, pp. 79–94, ISBN 2-503-52178-9.
- ^ a b Hansen, Valerie (2012), The Silk Road: A New History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 97, ISBN 978-0-19-993921-3.
- ^ Warwick Ball (2016), Rome in the East: Transformation of an Empire, 2nd edition, London & New York: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-72078-6, p. 154.
- ^ For further information on Oc Eo, see Milton Osborne (2006), The Mekong: Turbulent Past, Uncertain Future, Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, revised edition, first published in 2000, ISBN 1-74114-893-6, p. 24 f.
- ^ John Pike. (last modified 11 July 2011). "Roman Money". Globalsecurity.org. Accessed 15 September 2016.
- ^ Richard A. Bauman (2005), Crime and Punishment in Ancient Rome, London & New York: Routledge, reprint of 1996 edition, ISBN 0-203-42858-7, p. 23.
- ^ a b Yu, Huan (September 2004). John E. Hill (ed.). "The Peoples of the West from the Weilue 魏略 by Yu Huan 魚豢: A Third Century Chinese Account Composed between 239 and 265, Quoted in zhuan 30 of the Sanguozhi, Published in 429 CE". Depts.washington.edu. Translated by John E. Hill. Archived from the original on 2005-03-15. Retrieved 2016-09-17.
- ^ Hansen, Valerie (2012), The Silk Road: A New History, Oxford University Press, p. 98, ISBN 978-0-19-993921-3.
- ^ Galambos, Imre (2015), "She Association Circulars from Dunhuang", in Antje Richter, A History of Chinese Letters and Epistolary Culture, Brill: Leiden, Boston, p. 872.
- ^ Hill, John E. (2015) Through the Jade Gate - China to Rome: A Study of the Silk Routes 1st to 2nd Centuries CE. CreateSpace, North Charleston, South Carolina. ISBN 978-1500696702, note 2.17, p. 183.
- ^ For information on Kang Senghui, see: Tai Thu Nguyen (2008). The History of Buddhism in Vietnam. CRVP. pp. 36-. ISBN 978-1-56518-098-7.
Sources
[edit]- Bauman, Richard A. (2005). Crime and Punishment in Ancient Rome. London & New York: Routledge, reprint of 1996 edition, ISBN 0-203-42858-7.
- Ball, Warwick (2016). Rome in the East: Transformation of an Empire, 2nd edition, London & New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-72078-6.
- Bretschneider, Emil (2000) [1888]. Medieval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources: Fragments Towards the Knowledge of the Geography and History of Central and Western Asia from the 13th to the 17th Century, Vol. 1, reprint edition. Abingdon: Routledge.
- Brosius, Maria (2006). The Persians: An Introduction. London & New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-32089-5.
- Foster, John (1939). The Church in T'ang Dynasty. Great Britain: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
- Galambos, Imre (2015). "She Association Circulars from Dunhuang", in Antje Richter, A History of Chinese Letters and Epistolary Culture. Leiden & Boston: Brill.
- Garthwaite, Gene Ralph (2005). The Persians. Oxford & Carlton: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd., ISBN 1-55786-860-3.
- Grant, R. G. (2005). Battle: A Visual Journey Through 5,000 Years of Combat. DK Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7566-1360-0.
- Hansen, Valerie (2012). The Silk Road: A New History, Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-993921-3.
- Haw, Stephen G. (2006). Marco Polo's China: a Venetian in the Realm of Kublai Khan. London & New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-34850-1.
- Hill, John E. (2004). The Peoples of the West from the Weilue 魏略 by Yu Huan 魚豢: A Third Century Chinese Account Composed between 239 and 265. Draft annotated English translation. [1] Archived 2005-03-15 at the Wayback Machine
- Hill, John E. (2009). Through the Jade Gate to Rome: A Study of the Silk Routes during the Later Han Dynasty, 1st to 2nd Centuries CE. BookSurge, Charleston, South Carolina. ISBN 978-1-4392-2134-1.
- Hirth, Friedrich (2000) [1885]. Jerome S. Arkenberg (ed.). "East Asian History Sourcebook: Chinese Accounts of Rome, Byzantium and the Middle East, c. 91 B.C.E. - 1643 C.E." Fordham.edu. Fordham University. Archived from the original on 2014-09-10. Retrieved 2016-09-10.
- Hirth, Friedrich (1939) [1885]. China and the Roman Orient: Researches Into Their Ancient and Mediaeval Relations as Represented in Old Chinese Records (reprint ed.). Leipzig, Munich, Shanghai, & Hong Kong: Georg Hirth; Kelly & Walsh. ISBN 9780524033050.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - Jenkins, Philip (2008). The Lost History of Christianity: the Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia – and How It Died. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-147280-0.
- Lieu, Samuel N.C. (2013). "The 'Romanitas' of the Xi'an Inscription," in Li Tang and Deitmer W. Winkler (eds), From the Oxus to the Chinese Shores: Studies on East Syriac Christianity in China and Central Asia. Zürich & Berlin: Lit Verlag. ISBN 978-3-643-90329-7.
- Luttwak, Edward. (1 November 2009). The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-03519-5.
- Mawer, Granville Allen (2013). "The Riddle of Catigara" in Robert Nichols and Martin Woods (eds), Mapping Our World: Terra Incognita to Australia, 38–39. Canberra: National Library of Australia. ISBN 9780642278098.
- Osborne, Milton (2006) [2000]. The Mekong: Turbulent Past, Uncertain Future. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, revised edition. ISBN 1-74114-893-6.
- Ostrovsky, Max (2007). Y = Arctg X: the Hyperbola of the World Order. Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Plymouth: University Press of America. ISBN 0-7618-3499-0.
- Sezgin, Fuat; Carl Ehrig-Eggert; Amawi Mazen; E. Neubauer (1996). نصوص ودراسات من مصادر صينية حول البلدان الاسلامية. Frankfurt am Main: Institut für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften (Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University).
- Wood, Frances(2002). The Silk Road: Two Thousand Years in the Heart of Asia. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24340-4.
- Young, Gary K. (2001). Rome's Eastern Trade: International Commerce and Imperial Policy, 31 BC - AD 305. London & New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-24219-3.
- Yü, Ying-shih. (1986). "Han Foreign Relations," in Denis Twitchett and Michael Loewe (eds), The Cambridge History of China: Volume I: the Ch'in and Han Empires, 221 B.C. – A.D. 220, 377–462. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-24327-8.
- Yule, Henry (1886). Cathay and the Way Thither. Downloaded 22/12/04 from: http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/III-2-F-b-2/V-1/ and http://dsr.nii.ac.jp/toyobunko/III-2-F-b-2/V-2/.
Further reading
[edit]- Leslie, D. D., Gardiner, K. H. J.: "The Roman Empire in Chinese Sources", Studi Orientali, Vol. 15. Rome: Department of Oriental Studies, University of Rome, 1996
- Pulleyblank, Edwin G.: "The Roman Empire as Known to Han China", Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 119, No. 1 (1999), pp. 71–79
External links
[edit]- Accounts of Daqin in the Chinese history of the Later Han Hou Hanshu
- Chang'an the ancient capital of China
Daqin
View on GrokipediaEtymology
Origins of the Term Daqin
The term Daqin (大秦), literally translating to "Great Qin," emerged in Chinese nomenclature to designate a remote western polity perceived as comparable in grandeur and sophistication to the Han Empire itself, with "Qin" evoking the foundational Chinese dynasty of the same name (221–206 BCE).[1] This descriptive appellation underscored a cultural analogy rather than a direct phonetic rendering of foreign nomenclature, reflecting Chinese historiographers' tendency to frame distant realms through familiar imperial paradigms.[6] Initial attestations of Daqin appear in Eastern Han dynasty (25–220 CE) compilations, with the term entering records by the late 1st to early 2nd centuries CE amid reports of western lands beyond Parthia (Anxi).[1] These references, preserved in texts like the Hou Hanshu (compiled circa 445 CE from earlier Han sources), denote Daqin as a vast domain west of known intermediaries such as the Parthian Empire, without implying direct contact but drawing on secondhand intelligence from Central Asian traders and envoys.[2] The naming convention avoided transliterations, favoring instead this honorific structure to signify an advanced, centralized state akin to China's own historical archetype. Scholars posit that Daqin likely originated via linguistic intermediaries in Parthia or Central Asia, where terms for the Roman sphere—possibly echoing Indo-Iranian or Aramaic descriptors for eastern Mediterranean powers—were adapted into Chinese to convey equivalence with the "Middle Kingdom."[7] This etymological pathway aligns with the Han era's reliance on overland Silk Road networks for geographical intelligence, though primary texts provide no explicit phonetic precursor, emphasizing instead Daqin's symbolic parity to imperial China.[8]Relation to Fulin and Terminological Shifts
In Tang dynasty (618–907 CE) historical texts, such as the Jiu Tangshu and Xin Tangshu, the term Fulin (拂菻) supplanted Daqin as the designation for the eastern remnants of the Roman polity, now recognized as the Byzantine Empire. These sources explicitly equate the two names, stating that Fulin was the same entity as the Daqin described in earlier Han and Wei records, with the continuity affirmed despite variations in reported details like capital locations or tributary practices.[9][10] This identification persisted because the polity's core attributes—vast territory, advanced metallurgy, and maritime trade—aligned across accounts, reflecting empirical continuity rather than invention of a new realm. The terminological shift arose from phonetic adaptations in 7th-century transmissions, likely via Sogdian or Syriac intermediaries who rendered "Rome" or its eastern form (phrōm) as Fulin, diverging from the Han-era Daqin, which evoked "Great Qin" based on perceived civilizational parity and initial Parthian-filtered reports. Renewed contacts, including purported Byzantine embassies to Chang'an in 643, 667, and 701 CE, facilitated this update, as Tang records note envoys presenting lion images and glassware akin to Han descriptions of Daqin imports.[12] These interactions bypassed earlier Sassanid Persian gatekeeping, which had constrained direct knowledge and preserved the archaic Daqin label; post-651 CE Arab conquests of Persia further rerouted Silk Road information flows, introducing fresher Byzantine self-references over outdated Roman ones.[13] Causal realism underscores that the change was not arbitrary but driven by evidentiary accumulation: Tang compilers cross-referenced prior texts like the Hou Hanshu with new tributary data, resolving discrepancies (e.g., Fulin's reported 64 prefectures versus Daqin's 80 cities) as updates from empire contraction after 476 CE, without fabricating equivalence.[14] Intermediary disruptions, such as Sassanid monopolies on Roman silk trade until the 6th century, had earlier stifled terminological evolution, but Tang-era Nestorian Christian networks—evidenced by steles like the 781 CE Xi'an inscription—enabled phonetic refinements that better matched Byzantine realities.[9] Later Song dynasty (960–1279 CE) histories retained Fulin while occasionally reverting to Daqin for pre-Tang retrospectives, illustrating pragmatic nomenclature tied to chronological specificity rather than ideological rupture.[10]Earliest Accounts
Gan Ying's Mission and Initial Reports (97 CE)
In 97 CE, during the ninth year of the Yongyuan era under Emperor He of the Eastern Han dynasty, Protector-General Ban Chao dispatched Gan Ying as an envoy to Daqin, the Chinese designation for the Roman Empire, with the aim of forging direct diplomatic and trade relations beyond the Parthian (Anxi) frontier. Gan Ying traversed Central Asian routes under Han influence, advancing through Parthian territories to reach Tiaozhi—a coastal region bordering the Persian Gulf and the Western Sea—without incident, demonstrating the extent of Han reconnaissance capabilities at the time. This expedition constituted the earliest documented Han effort to probe directly westward via overland paths toward the Mediterranean world, motivated by intelligence on Daqin's wealth and desire for Han goods like silk.[15][16] Upon arrival at the Gulf, Gan Ying prepared to embark by sea but was dissuaded by Parthian sailors who depicted the crossing to Daqin as extraordinarily hazardous: even with favorable winds, it would require three months, while adverse conditions could prolong it to two years, demanding provisions for three years owing to the sea's isolating vastness, which induced fatal homesickness in travelers. These warnings were deliberate misinformation propagated by Parthian authorities, whose economic self-interest lay in preserving their monopoly as Silk Road intermediaries; direct Han-Daqin contact would have circumvented Parthian markup on Chinese exports like silk, which they resold at profit to Roman markets, thus incentivizing obstruction of rival access. Lacking means to verify the claims independently and facing prohibitive logistical risks, Gan Ying heeded the counsel, forgoing the maritime leg and returning eastward, thereby failing to achieve firsthand observation of Daqin.[16] The mission's immediate outcome included preliminary reports relayed back to the Han court, framing Daqin as an expansive polity west of the sea endowed with seafaring prowess, numerous fortified settlements, and substantial trade volume with intermediaries like Parthia and India (Tianzhu). These accounts, derived from Gan Ying's inquiries among border populations rather than direct evidence, introduced a measure of geographic and descriptive concreteness to prior vague hearsay, highlighting Daqin's remoteness yet accessibility via sea from Parthian shores. The Hou Hanshu records the Parthian rationale transparently: "The people of Anxi wished to carry on trade with it [Daqin] in preference to the Han, and therefore purposely gave Gan Ying a false account of the difficulties of the journey," underscoring how intermediary powers' trade incentives causally thwarted deeper Sino-Roman engagement at this juncture.[16][15]Descriptions in the Hou Hanshu
The Hou Hanshu, compiled by Fan Ye during the Liu Song dynasty in the early 5th century CE, incorporates earlier 2nd-century reports, including Gan Ying's aborted mission in 97 CE and Ban Yong's geographical updates around 125 CE, to describe Daqin as the preeminent western power beyond Parthia.[15] This account positions Daqin west of the sea (Haixi), portraying it as a maritime-oriented realm with territorial extents of over 18,000 li (approximately 9,000 kilometers) east-west and 20,000 li (approximately 10,000 kilometers) north-south, subdivided into more than eighty dependent states ruled by subordinate kings under a loose central kingship.[1] Governance is depicted as hereditary rather than appointive, with a chief administrator termed the "Great Governor" overseeing the polity; the people are characterized as tall, fair-featured, and resembling Han Chinese in appearance, fostering the nomenclature "Daqin" (Great Qin) as a mirror to the Middle Kingdom.[1] Societal traits emphasize tranquility, with no reported theft—doors remain unlocked—and capital punishment limited to strangulation, underscoring a purported aversion to militarism and internal strife.[1] The text notes a dense, urbanized population across walled cities, producing rarities like gold, silver, pearls, coral, tortoise shell, asbestos, and glass, alongside woven fabrics incorporating gold threads and five-colored silk designs.[1] Agricultural yields include pomegranates, ginger, and wine, but omit staples like olives, figs, oxen, or horses, revealing gaps in direct knowledge filtered through Parthian intermediaries who likely monopolized Silk Road exchanges to preserve trade advantages.[1] While elements such as glass imports align with archaeological evidence of Roman vessels in Han-era tombs (e.g., Guangzhou, 1st-2nd century CE), the idealized portrayal of unarmed, tax-free harmony incorporates mythical embellishments absent in contemporaneous Roman records, attributable to hearsay and cultural projection rather than empirical observation.[1]Accounts from the Three Kingdoms and Jin Periods
The Weilüe and Expanded Geographical Details
The Weilüe, authored by the historian Yu Huan during the Cao Wei period (circa 239–265 CE), refines earlier Han dynasty reports on Daqin by incorporating itinerary-based geographical details drawn from second-hand merchant accounts rather than eyewitness testimony. These descriptions aggregate hearsay from traders traversing the western routes, which introduces potential inaccuracies such as exaggerated distances and travel durations, reflecting the empirical constraints of indirect knowledge transmission across vast distances.[17][2] The text situates Daqin west of Anxi (Parthia) and Tiaozhi (southern Mesopotamia), separated by a "great sea" understood as the Mediterranean, with access primarily via maritime paths from intermediary ports. One outlined sea route begins at Angu (likely Gerrha in the Persian Gulf), taking approximately two months with favorable winds or up to three years in adverse conditions to reach Haixi (coastal Egypt), underscoring the hazards and variability of ocean voyages as reported by intermediaries.[17][18] Overland continuations from Angu proceed north to Haibei, then west to Haixi, and south through Wuchisan (identified with Alexandria), followed by a six-day sea crossing to Daqin proper. Specific distances are estimated in li (ancient Chinese miles, roughly 415 meters each): from Lüfen (possibly Leukê Kômê) to a major Daqin city, 2,000 li; Qielan to Sifu, 600 li; and Sifu to Yuluo, 340 li. The administrative capital is described as exceeding 100 li in circumference and situated near a river mouth, with five palaces spaced 10 li apart, to which the ruler rotates daily—details likely distorted through successive retellings by non-Chinese traders.[17][3]Characteristics in the Book of Jin
The Book of Jin (Jīn shū), compiled circa 648 CE during the Tang dynasty by order of Emperor Taizong, synthesizes earlier Han and Wei dynasty accounts of Daqin while appending details of interactions during the Western Jin era (265–316 CE). This portrayal emphasizes Daqin's ordered society, meritocratic governance, and technological prowess, attributing traits that align with observable Roman practices—such as specialized crafts—but filtered through Chinese historiographical lenses that favor virtuous rule and causal links between leadership and natural order. The text locates Daqin west of the Western Sea, beyond Parthian (Anxi) territories, and describes its people as tall, honest, and profit-oriented in trade, with customs prohibiting usury and mandating equitable exchange to sustain commerce.[2] Central to the account is Daqin's kingship system, depicted as non-hereditary and merit-based: rulers are selected for their virtue and capability, but deposed if calamities like floods or droughts occur, interpreted as signs of incompetence or divine disfavor. This mechanism, stated as "they elect the most worthy and appoint him to the throne; if misfortune arises, such as unseasonable winds or rains, he is removed," parallels idealized Confucian meritocracy more than the hereditary imperial succession of 3rd-century Rome, though it may derive from garbled reports of republican consular elections preserved via Indo-Parthian intermediaries. No direct evidence supports literal elections in Daqin; instead, the description reflects Chinese projection of causal realism, linking ruler quality to environmental stability, absent in verifiable Roman sources. Laws emphasize anti-tyranny measures, with the populace empowered to execute unjust kings, underscoring a polity where authority derives from performance rather than lineage— a trait unverifiable in Roman imperial records but evocative of senatorial checks during the late Republic.[3][19] Technological and material characteristics highlight Daqin's advanced crafts, including the production of huǒwǎn bù (fire-washed cloth), an asbestos fabric that withstands flames and cleans by burning off impurities, sourced from mineral fibers rather than the mythical "water sheep" down sometimes misattributed. Other innovations encompass fine glassware (liú lí), coral-inlaid architecture, and perfumes like sūhé (styrax), yielding trade profits of ten- to hundredfold via maritime exchanges with India (Tianzhu). These details corroborate archaeological finds of Roman glass in Han tombs and asbestos use in Mediterranean textiles, indicating indirect knowledge diffusion rather than direct observation, as Chinese texts conflate Daqin with its peripheral exporters. The Book of Jin notes embassies purportedly from Daqin in 226 CE (under Cao Wei) and 284 CE (under Jin Emperor Wu), delivering tribute like ivory and rhinoceros horn; however, Roman imperial records lack reciprocation, and logistical distances (over 7,000 km via Silk Road) plus Parthian monopolies suggest these were opportunistic missions by Sogdian or Kushan traders impersonating Daqin envoys to gain favor, a common intermediary ploy documented in Periplus accounts.[20][2]Perceptions of Geography and Polity
Chinese Views on Location, Extent, and Borders
Chinese historical texts from the Eastern Han period positioned Daqin as lying far to the west, beyond the Parthian realm of Anxi and the adjacent Tiaozhi, immediately adjacent to the Great Sea, interpreted as the Mediterranean.[17] This placement derived from reports by traders and envoys who traversed overland routes through Central Asia or maritime paths via the Indian Ocean, yielding a conceptual map centered on accessible trade endpoints rather than comprehensive surveys.[1] The Hou Hanshu (c. 445 CE compilation) identifies Daqin as the preeminent domain west of the Bai Congling (Pamir Mountains), emphasizing its remoteness from China proper, approximately 12,000 li (roughly 5,000 km) distant.[1] Regarding extent, the Weilüe (3rd century CE) delineates Daqin as spanning several thousand li in every direction, encompassing over 400 walled cities and towns alongside dozens of dependent principalities, suggesting a vast but decentralized polity unified under a central king.[17] Borders were perceived as maritime-dominated: to the east interfacing with Parthian territories, northward abutting Haibei (regions north of the sea, akin to Syria-Jordan areas), southward with Haixi (Egyptian domains), and westward confronting an expanse of seawater, rivers, and mountains, evoking a peninsular or insular form bounded by oceans.[17] Such delineations reflect inferences from Silk Road commerce, underestimating continental Europe's breadth by conflating the empire's core with peripheral outposts like Petra (Sifu) or Azania (Zesan), without discerning extensions toward Britannia or Gaul.[3] These Han and Three Kingdoms portrayals persisted into the Jin and Sui-Tang eras, with terminological shift to Fulin denoting the Byzantine continuation post-476 CE. Tang compilations like the Xin Tangshu (11th century CE) acknowledged territorial contraction following internal upheavals that fragmented the original Daqin into eastern and western segments, with Fulin retaining control over diminished eastern holdings amid Arab expansions, aligning observed trade disruptions with reduced scale from prior "hundreds of divisions" to focused Anatolian-Levantine cores.[21] This evolution underscores reliance on intermittent merchant intelligence over direct exploration, preserving a static western terminus amid evolving geopolitical realities.[3]Attributed Capital Cities and Administrative Structure
Chinese sources from the Eastern Han and Three Kingdoms periods attributed the primary capital of Daqin to a city known as Andi (安地), described as encircled by stone walls exceeding 100 li (approximately 50 kilometers) in circumference and featuring grand palaces and markets.[1] This locale was situated near the mouth of a great river, interpreted by modern scholars as likely referring to Rome adjacent to the Tiber, though some accounts may conflate it with eastern provincial centers like Antioch due to indirect transmission via Parthian intermediaries.[17] The Weilüe (c. 239–265 CE) elaborates that the capital housed the king's residence and administrative hub, surrounded by over 400 subordinate cities and towns, with dozens of appointed minor kings overseeing regions.[17] Attributions of Daqin's administrative structure emphasized non-hereditary rule, with kings selected based on merit and virtue rather than bloodline, contrasting sharply with China's imperial dynastic norms.[17] The Hou Hanshu (5th century CE, drawing on earlier reports) and Weilüe describe rulers as temporary, chosen from among the populace during times of stability but replaced unceremoniously amid calamities like unusual floods or winds, purportedly to install a more capable leader; some interpretations suggest terms of five to ten years, though primary texts lack explicit durations.[22] Governance involved a council of 36 leaders deliberating policy, with decisions requiring consensus and petitions funneled through a centralized archive system.[17] The king maintained five palaces, rotating residences daily to oversee the realm.[17] Later Tang dynasty sources (7th–10th centuries CE), shifting terminology to Fulin for the Byzantine continuation of Roman polity, described an eastern capital—evidently Constantinople—with triple-layered walls, moats, and opulent structures housing over a million inhabitants, reflecting updated hearsay from maritime traders.[2] These accounts, while vivid, derive from unverified second- or third-hand reports via intermediaries like Persians or Arabs, lacking archaeological or diplomatic corroboration of direct Chinese observation; the idealized meritocratic elements may stem from admiration for perceived republican echoes or distortions of consular elections, unsubstantiated against Roman imperial realities of hereditary or military successions.[1][17]Societal and Economic Descriptions
Laws, Order, and Governance Practices
The ancient Chinese texts portray Daqin's governance as a merit-based system without hereditary monarchy, where the ruler was selected by the people or elders for virtue and could be deposed for failures such as natural disasters or calamities. According to the Weilüe, the king was not permanent; in times of unusual phenomena or disasters, the people would replace him with a virtuous individual, releasing the former ruler without resentment or reprisal.[17] Similar accounts in the Hou Hanshu describe kings as non-permanent, chosen for worthiness, with deposition occurring upon extraordinary events like untimely storms, after which the ousted king resigned cheerfully.[23] These mechanisms suggest an anti-tyrannical check, emphasizing accountability to the populace rather than divine right or lineage, though such depictions likely idealized distant reports to align with Chinese moral preferences for sage-rule over despotism. Governance practices emphasized consultative assemblies and direct petitioning. The Weilüe notes the king, supported by 36 leaders, toured five palaces daily, collecting public petitions in a leather bag for personal review of their merits before issuing judgments, with an official archives department maintaining records.[17] Trials or decisions involved communal input, evoking distorted echoes of Roman senatorial consultations, but applied to the sovereign level in Chinese narratives. Order was maintained without reported reliance on standing armies; the texts highlight a lack of internal bandits or thieves, attributing social harmony to mutual trust and light penalties, such as fines in gold for minor offenses rather than corporal or capital punishment except in severe cases.[17] Punishments were described as lenient overall, fostering a self-regulating society where crime was rare due to prosperous communal bonds rather than coercive force. These portrayals, derived from third-hand intelligence via Parthian intermediaries rather than direct observation, exaggerate republican elements possibly observed in provincial city councils or client kingdoms, misaligning with Rome's centralized imperial autocracy under emperors who appointed governors and wielded absolute authority.[2] The emphasis on elective removal and mild justice served didactic purposes in Chinese historiography, contrasting Daqin's supposed equity with Han autocratic excesses, but lacks corroboration in Roman sources and reflects filtered, moralized hearsay rather than empirical fidelity to metropolitan practices.[2]Currency, Coinage, and Economic Systems
![Bronze coin of Constantius II (337–361 CE) found in Karghalik, Xinjiang][float-right] The Hou Hanshu describes Daqin's monetary system as utilizing coins made from gold and silver, with an exchange ratio of ten silver coins equaling one gold coin.[15] These coins were reportedly cast in square shapes and stamped, reflecting a standardized medium of exchange that facilitated trade with intermediaries like Parthia and India.[1] Chinese sources emphasize the purity of these metals, attributing the absence of counterfeiting to their unadulterated composition, which contrasted with contemporaneous systems prone to debasement.[3] Daqin's economy is portrayed as tribute-oriented, with the ruler overseeing resource extraction from state-controlled mountains yielding gold, silver, copper, and other metals essential for coinage and crafts.[1] The Hou Hanshu notes no imposition of tribute taxes or forced labor on the populace, suggesting a lightweight fiscal burden that supported prosperity through maritime commerce rather than internal levies.[15] This depiction aligns partially with Roman imperial practices of mining imperial domains and minting aurei and denarii, though Chinese accounts likely idealized uniformity and benevolence based on indirect reports, overstating the lack of fiscal pressures evident in Roman tax records.[2] Archaeological evidence, such as Roman coins discovered in Central Asia, corroborates the circulation of such currency eastward, including a bronze coin of Constantius II (337–361 CE) unearthed in Karghalik, indicating potential spillover from Daqin's described system despite the predominance of precious metal denominations in textual accounts.[1] The Weilüe echoes these economic traits, reinforcing state monopoly over mineral resources without detailing further monetary innovations, underscoring a perceived reliance on high-value exports over diversified coinage.[2]Products, Technology, and Daily Life Attributions
The Hou Hanshu attributes to Daqin the production of glass (liuli), described as a material derived from grinding and melting stone into colored vessels and ornaments, with the manufacturing process deliberately concealed to maintain exclusivity.[20] This reflects Roman expertise in glassblowing and molding, centered in regions like Syria and Egypt by the 1st century CE, though Chinese awareness likely stemmed from indirect imports via Parthian or Kushan traders rather than original innovation.[20] Similarly, fine textiles such as gold-thread embroideries (lajinlüxiu) and asbestos cloth (huowan bu), which withstands fire for cleaning, were credited, aligning with Roman exports of Syrian- or Egyptian-sourced fabrics adapted for elite use.[20] The Weilüe provides an expanded catalog, enumerating over 30 luxury items including gems and pearls like red coral (shanhu), yellow amber (hupo), bright moon pearls (mingyuezhu), and nine-colored jewels, alongside metals such as gold, silver, copper, iron, lead, and tin used in ornaments and vessels.[19] Medicines featured prominently, with rhinoceros horn for treating fevers and convulsions, bear gall for liver ailments, myrrh (muer), storax (suhe), and resins like dragon's blood for dyes and remedies.[19] Technologies implied advanced dyeing and weaving for multicolored wool carpets (wuse tadeng) and sea wool (shuiyang), derived from mollusk filaments, but no explicit details on chariots or musical instruments appear, suggesting these attributions emphasized exotic imports over mechanical inventions.[19] Later accounts in the Book of Jin introduce attributions like steel mirrors, reflecting evolving reports possibly influenced by Byzantine advancements, alongside fantastical claims such as sheep emerging spontaneously from the ground in Daqin's northern territories—likely a distorted echo of Central Asian legends like the "vegetable lamb" (Cibotium barometz fern myth), mislocalized through oral transmission rather than empirical observation.[24] Such elements underscore causal limitations: while core products like glass and pearls plausibly diffused westward via Persian and Indian intermediaries, hyperbolic or mythical additions indicate hearsay amplification, where rarity bred exaggeration without verifiable mechanisms for direct technological transfer.[24][20]Cultural and Religious Elements
Naming Conventions and Social Customs
The Weilüe, a third-century Chinese geographical treatise, reports that the people of Daqin employed a distinct Western script for writing, separate from Chinese characters, though specific conventions for personal nomenclature are not detailed.[17] The kingdom was alternatively designated Lijian in some accounts, reflecting possible phonetic renderings or regional associations via trade intermediaries, but individual names follow no elaborated structure such as prefixed elements combined with localities. These descriptions, transmitted indirectly through Parthian or Syrian merchants, likely incorporate distortions from oral relays across vast distances, prioritizing observable traits over precise onomastics.[17] Social customs attributed to Daqin inhabitants emphasize honesty and straightforwardness, with the Weilüe portraying them as tall, virtuous, and uncrafty, akin to the Chinese in physique and moral character—hence the appellation Daqin, or "Great Qin." They wore hu (Central Asian-style) garments, contrasting Han dress norms, and engaged in daily practices like grain cultivation (including wheat and millet) and animal husbandry with horses, mules, donkeys, and camels. No accounts specify mourning rituals or crisis-induced vegetarianism, though the texts idealize a societal uprightness without deceit, potentially mirroring Chinese utopian projections onto distant polities.[17][19] Family and inheritance practices receive scant direct attention, but leadership succession is described as non-hereditary: during calamities or inept rule, a worthy replacement was selected, with the incumbent retiring amicably, averting resentment. This elective meritocracy was viewed as equitable, enabling responsive governance, yet liable to factional instability absent the continuity of bloodline primacy, diverging from Chinese patrilineal dynastic norms where hereditary transmission ensured stability. Such reports, filtered through merchant intermediaries like Syrians familiar with adoptive Roman practices, may conflate elite political selection with broader familial customs, though patrilineal descent aligns with inferred Mediterranean patterns without explicit confirmation in the sources.[17][19]Evidence and Perceptions of Christianity
Early Chinese accounts of Daqin's religious practices, as recorded in the Hou Hanshu (c. 445 CE) and the Weilüe (c. 239 CE), describe customs lacking explicit Christian doctrine, such as the veneration of human images without demonic worship and reliance on a fasting holy man who prays to heaven during calamities.[19] These features, while occasionally interpreted by modern scholars as monotheistic or proto-Christian, align more closely with pagan Roman rituals or indirect reports filtered through Parthian intermediaries, given the texts' composition before Christianity's full institutionalization in the Roman Empire post-Constantine (313 CE).[2] The Xi'an Stele, erected in 781 CE during the Tang dynasty, offers the earliest direct textual connection between Daqin and Christianity, identifying Jingjiao ("Luminous Religion") as a faith originating from Daqin and introduced to China in 635 CE by the missionary Alopen, who brought Syriac scriptures and images.[25] The inscription details imperial tolerance under Emperor Taizong, including edicts permitting monastery construction and scripture translation, portraying Daqin as the source of a messianic figure (Messiah) and emphasizing ethical teachings akin to Church of the East (Nestorian) doctrine. However, this Tang source retrojects later Syriac Christian traditions onto the classical Daqin concept, with no corroborating pre-Tang archaeological evidence of Christian communities in China.[26] Perceptions of Daqin's religion often conflated Christianity with Zoroastrianism (xianjiao), both categorized as Persian-derived "western" faiths involving luminous or fire rituals, reflecting Chinese tendencies to group foreign religions under broad hu (barbarian) labels rather than doctrinal distinctions.[27] While Tang policies initially tolerated Jingjiao—evidenced by state-sponsored translations and elite patronage—its impact remained limited to urban enclaves among Sogdian and Persian traders, lacking deep societal penetration and facing suppression during the Huichang Persecution of 845 CE, which dismantled foreign religions including Christianity.[28] This marginal status underscores causal transmission via Sassanid Persia rather than direct Roman ties, with pre-Tang descriptions likely capturing a non-Christian Roman polity.[29]Evidence of Contact and Exchange
Reported Embassies and Diplomatic Missions
The Hou Hanshu records an embassy from Daqin arriving in 166 CE during the reign of Emperor Huan (146–168 CE), with envoys claiming to represent King Andun—who scholars identify with Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (r. 161–180 CE)—having entered via the maritime route through Rinan commandery in southern Vietnam.[30][31] The delegation presented tribute of ivory tusks, rhinoceros horns, and tortoise shells, items described in the text as commonplace rather than exceptional.[2] Historians assess this as lacking evidence of direct Roman orchestration, attributing it instead to freelance merchants from Roman Egypt or the eastern Mediterranean, who acquired the gifts opportunistically and misrepresented themselves as official representatives to exploit Han trade policies and evade Parthian intermediaries amid disruptions from the Roman-Parthian War (161–166 CE).[30][2] The Weilüe describes another purported Daqin contact in 226 CE, when a merchant named Qin Lun reached Jiaozhou (modern northern Vietnam) under Eastern Wu rule, delivering ivory, tortoise shells, and "bright moon pearls" as tribute.[2] This incident, echoed in the Book of Liang, aligns with patterns of sporadic maritime arrivals but is dismissed by analysts as a commercial venture rather than diplomacy, with the envoy's status and gifts suggesting local fabrication or exaggeration to curry favor with Wu authorities for market access.[2] Tang records in the Jiu Tangshu report embassies from Fulin (Byzantium, the perceived successor to Daqin), beginning with a 643 CE mission to Emperor Taizong bearing red glassware and green-gold artifacts, followed by delegations in 667, 701, and 719 CE.[18] These accounts reflect heightened Eurasian connectivity via Sassanid Persia and Nestorian Christian intermediaries, yet scholarly scrutiny highlights their unverified status in Byzantine sources, interpreting them as trader groups—possibly leveraging religious ties—masquerading as state envoys to secure imperial privileges, consistent with Chinese historiographical tendencies to amplify foreign submissions for dynastic legitimacy.[2]Traded Goods and Archaeological Findings
Archaeological evidence confirms the presence of Roman glassware in Han dynasty tombs, indicating indirect trade flows along maritime and overland routes. A green glass cup of Roman origin, characterized by its deep form and flared lip, was unearthed from an Eastern Han tomb (25–220 CE) in Guixian, Guangxi Province, southern China.[32] Similar vessels, including ribbed bowls, have been recovered from sites like Yangzhou, associated with elite burials such as that of Prince Liu Jing.[33] These artifacts, absent native Chinese glass production at the scale seen in the Mediterranean, likely arrived via Southeast Asian ports and the South China Sea, with earliest examples dating to the 1st century BCE in Guangzhou tombs.[34] Roman coins, though sparse, provide further material evidence of western currency circulating in Chinese territories. Over 100 coins from the Eastern Roman Empire have been documented along Silk Road sites in China, peaking in finds from the 1st–4th centuries CE.[35] Notable discoveries include 16 silver and bronze coins spanning Tiberius (14–37 CE) to Gallienus (253–268 CE) in Shanxi Province, and a bronze coin of Constantius II (337–361 CE) in Karghalik, Xinjiang.[36] Eastern Roman gold coins from the 5th–6th centuries appeared in a tomb near Xi'an, often repurposed as ornaments rather than currency.[37] The limited quantity—fewer than two dozen securely identified pre-5th century Roman coins—suggests minimal direct economic integration, with items traveling through intermediary Parthian, Kushan, or Indian networks rather than bulk shipments.[35] Chinese silk exports to the Roman world, while voluminous in textual accounts, leave scant archaeological traces due to organic decay, but indirect confirmation arises from Roman demand driving silver outflows estimated at millions of denarii equivalents by the 1st–2nd centuries CE.[38] No evidence supports direct maritime voyages between Roman ports and China; instead, fragmented finds underscore a trickle trade peaking during the 1st–2nd centuries CE, constrained by overland distances and monopolistic middlemen.[38] Other Roman imports, such as ivory or textiles, remain unverified archaeologically in Han contexts, highlighting glass and coins as primary empirical markers of exchange.[38]Assessment of Direct vs. Indirect Interactions
Interactions between Daqin (the Roman Empire) and Han China were predominantly indirect, mediated by Parthian and later Sassanid intermediaries who controlled key segments of the Silk Road to preserve their economic monopolies.[39] Geographical obstacles, including the vast Taklamakan Desert, the formidable Pamir Mountains, and expansive steppes, imposed formidable natural barriers that deterred sustained direct overland travel, rendering such ventures logistically prohibitive without intermediary support.[40] These factors, combined with the self-interested policies of middlemen empires, explain the absence of verified bilateral diplomatic exchanges or military reconnaissance, rather than any purported mutual disinterest.[41] Archaeological and textual evidence underscores this indirect dynamic: while sporadic Roman coins and artifacts appear in Chinese border regions, they reflect trickle-down trade rather than bulk direct imports, with no reciprocal dominance of Chinese items in core Roman sites like Rome or Ostia.[42] Chinese records, such as the Hou Hanshu, portray Daqin through hearsay filtered via Parthian informants, exhibiting inaccuracies like conflating Roman governance with vague western stereotypes and omitting specifics of imperial succession or urban layouts.[43] Similarly, Roman authors like Pliny the Elder describe Seres (associated with China) in mythical terms, ignorant of Han political upheavals or administrative details, indicating knowledge derived from secondary caravan reports rather than firsthand observation. Claims of direct contact, such as the alleged 166 CE embassy from "An Dun" (possibly Antoninus Pius), likely represent opportunistic merchant groups posing as diplomats, intercepted or exaggerated by intermediaries to inflate prestige without enabling true reciprocity.[44][38] This mediated structure facilitated limited cultural diffusion—evident in the gradual transmission of metallurgical techniques and astronomical concepts across Eurasia—but at the cost of distorted information and suppressed innovation sharing. Parthian and Sassanid rulers, by levying tolls and restricting access, prioritized revenue extraction over fostering endpoint alliances, causal drivers that perpetuated informational asymmetries and precluded deeper strategic awareness.[45][46] In essence, while trade volumes sustained economic ties, the systemic barriers ensured interactions remained fragmented, debunking notions of robust direct engagement as unsubstantiated romanticism unsupported by primary records or material correlates.[47]Modern Scholarly Analysis
Consensus on Identification with Rome and Byzantium
Scholars predominantly identify Daqin (大秦), as described in Han dynasty texts such as the Hou Hanshu (compiled c. 445 CE) and the Weilüe (c. 239–265 CE), with the Roman Empire prior to its division in the 5th century CE. This consensus rests on geographical itineraries in these sources that align with known Roman territories: the Weilüe outlines a route from Tiaozhi (likely Characene in southern Mesopotamia) across a "great sea" (the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean) to Haixi (possibly Alexandria or the Egyptian coast), then westward to Daqin, paralleling overland and maritime paths to Roman Syria and Anatolia. Descriptions of Daqin's capital, featuring a royal palace, walled cities, and administrative structures, further match Roman urban centers like Antioch, a key eastern hub, rather than a vague western abstraction.[2][16] In contrast, Fulin (拂菻), appearing in later Tang dynasty records like the Xin Tangshu (c. 1060 CE), corresponds to the Byzantine Empire, reflecting post-Western Roman collapse nomenclature derived from Frankish or Syriac terms for Constantinople (e.g., Middle Persian Hrōm). This distinction is supported by shifts in descriptions: Fulin accounts emphasize Constantinople's walls and Christian elements, absent in earlier Daqin portrayals focused on pre-Christian Roman customs and trade goods like glassware and coral. Linguistic analysis reinforces this, tracing "Daqin" to phonetic renderings of "Rome" or "Roman" via Parthian intermediaries, not a generic "West." Recent 21st-century reassessments, including philological examinations of Weilüe fragments, affirm these identifications through cross-referencing with Roman authors like Pliny the Elder on eastern trade routes, dismissing speculative links to non-Roman entities.[3][2] While minority interpretations posit Daqin as a broader "western barbarians" construct or limited to Roman eastern provinces (e.g., Syria-Coelesyria), empirical source geography—such as specified distances and ports—prioritizes the full Roman Empire, as articulated in syntheses of Han ethnographies. These views, often from earlier 20th-century scholarship, yield to modern consensus favoring integrated Roman identity due to consistent material and textual correspondences, including unearthed Roman artifacts in Han tombs validating trade descriptions.[48][16]Debates Over Source Accuracy and Fantastical Elements
Scholars have long contested the accuracy of Chinese textual depictions of Daqin, citing fantastical elements as evidence of distortion rather than direct observation. The Weilüe (c. 239 CE), a key source on western regions, claims that Daqin features trees yielding a floss-like substance from which cloth is woven, a description modern interpreters link to misunderstood cotton cultivation but rendered in terms evoking self-replicating wool without human intervention.[19] Accounts of articulate birds, possibly derived from parrots traded along the Silk Road, further exemplify hearsay amplification into mythical traits.[2] Such motifs parallel ancient misconceptions elsewhere, like Pliny the Elder's reports of vegetable lambs, underscoring how intermediary transmissions—via Parthian or Central Asian merchants—warped empirical details into literary wonders.[49] These embellishments arise from causal factors including geographic remoteness, reliance on unverified second-hand reports, and conventions in Chinese historiography that favored allegorical geography over strict empiricism. Analyst John E. Hill dismisses them as "fabulous stories," arguing they reflect imaginative filler absent verifiable anchors, while Edwin G. Pulleyblank attributes inconsistencies to fragmented oral relays prone to accretion.[19] Ethnocentric lenses, wherein Han authors projected Confucian ideals of harmony onto "barbarian" superiors, compounded distortions, as Daqin served didactic purposes in affirming a balanced world order.[2] The Hou Hanshu (c. 445 CE) exacerbates reliability concerns through utopian portrayals, depicting Daqin as a thief-free society where rulers emerge by public acclaim of virtue, omitting Rome's pervasive slavery (affecting up to 20-30% of the Italic population by the 1st century CE), dynastic intrigues, and expansionist wars.[2] This idealization clashes with Roman realities documented in sources like Tacitus, suggesting not neutral reportage but imposition of Daoist or moral-utopian templates, where western polities mirrored eastern exemplars to resolve cognitive dissonances in cosmology.[50] Critics contend such narratives prioritize narrative coherence over causal fidelity, with modern scholarship sometimes underemphasizing Chinese biases due to institutional preferences for critiquing Western sources disproportionately.[14] Proponents of partial credibility counter that fantastical veneers overlay verifiable kernels, such as administrative hierarchies echoing Roman provincial governance, validated indirectly through convergent textual and material traces.[2] Yet epistemic rigor demands discounting uncorroborated claims, as the texts' compilation from disparate, unvetted inputs—spanning centuries without cross-examination—renders them unreliable for unfiltered history, a point reinforced by comparative analysis with Armenian or Persian intermediaries revealing similar mythologizations.[51]Implications for Understanding Ancient Eurasian Connectivity
The Daqin accounts in Chinese records, such as the Hou Hanshu, reveal the Silk Road's facilitation of luxury trade across Eurasia while highlighting profound barriers to deeper integration, with intermediary empires like Parthia controlling routes and limiting direct exchanges to sporadic merchant ventures rather than state-led diplomacy. No evidence exists of transformative technological transfers, such as Roman concrete engineering or Chinese papermaking reaching the opposing sphere during the Han-Roman era (circa 206 BCE–220 CE), preserving each civilization's independent advancements in hydraulics, metallurgy, and governance. Geographic realities—spanning over 7,000 kilometers of deserts, steppes, and mountains—imposed high costs and risks, ensuring that connectivity remained a thin conduit for goods like silk westward and glass eastward, without dissolving cultural silos or stereotypes of the distant "other" as exotic producers.[3][52][53] Archaeological data from the 2020s, including isotopic and compositional analyses of Roman glass fragments at sites like Guangzhou and Luoyang, confirm a trickle of imports—fewer than 20 securely dated vessels from the 1st–2nd centuries CE—transiting via Southeast Asian maritime paths or Central Asian oases, but without local replication of blowing techniques that might indicate knowledge diffusion. Roman coins, such as those of Constantius II (r. 337–361 CE) recovered in Xinjiang, similarly evince passive circulation through nomad intermediaries, not active bilateral commerce fostering innovation. These findings counter exaggerated claims of ancient globalization, as the volume of exchanged artifacts pales against domestic production scales, underscoring how trade's marginal economic share (under 1% of GDP estimates for Han China) failed to catalyze revolutions in either realm.[38][54][55] This limited interplay implies Eurasia's ancient polities thrived via endogenous causal drivers—resource endowments, institutional evolution, and localized experimentation—rather than exogenous Eurasian synergies, with persistent myths in Daqin descriptions (e.g., self-replicating palaces) reflecting informational asymmetries from filtered reports. Scholarly consensus prioritizes such realism over romanticized interconnectivity, attributing civilizational peaks to internal resilience amid vast distances that rendered mutual reinforcement negligible until post-medieval maritime breakthroughs.[48][56]References
- https://www.[jstor](/page/JSTOR).org/stable/592825
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Green_glass_Roman_cup_unearthed_at_Eastern_Han_tomb%2C_Guixian%2C_China.jpg