Explanation: Both the Roman Empire and Han China adhered to a remarkably similar dichotomy in which everyone was either civilized (ie part of and acceptable to the ruling culture) or a filthy barbarian. This, at first, may sound intuitive, especially as we in the modern day are brought up in a culture of civic and cultural nationalism sprouting from the 19th century AD, but it’s actually somewhat unusual in the time period - both the Romans and the Han Chinese viewed the important signifier of civilization not as residence, power, or descent, but the practice of the ‘correct’ cultural norms and customs. Of particular note is that the Roman use of ‘barbarian’ held weaker essentialist connotations than the original Greek term it was derived from - people were not born barbarians, they were made barbarians by their inferior cultural circumstances.
As such, their condemnation of outsiders as barbarians was both welcoming, and yet, arrogant - welcoming because it necessarily extended the possibility of civilization to others, no matter how far-flung or how distant the common descent between peoples - arrogant because it denigrated literally everyone who refused to be Roman/Han Chinese as part of a lesser, savage state of being. What barbarians! Dohohohohoho!
Other civilizations probably also had similar distinctions, but the fact that we inherited the perspective of Rome and Han China on this means they won.
Probably. Modern racism wasn’t invented until the (late?) 1600s (maybe 1500s if you include the Spanish colonial style), but being grossed out by unfamiliar foods seems biological in origin. Nationality by geography is even more modern, only really getting into swing post-WWI with the arrival of closed borders.
Rome was pretty unique for actually practicing integration as well, though. I know less about Han China, because there just doesn’t seem to be a lot of English-language resources. (Recommendations very welcome)
+1 for the recommendation, I have always been interested in that subject.
If only the stupid P*rthians weren’t in the way, they could have been bros.
Definitely, definitely. I’m sure that’s how it would have went. /s
Funny enough, there was some limited contact between the two. The Chinese referred to the Romans as Daqin, ‘Great Qin’, itself suggesting that the Chinese saw the Romans as a great dynasty like the Qin before the Han. Fuckin’ Parthians put effort into making sure the two didn’t meet though - would’ve been bad for Parthian trade if the Parthians weren’t in such a great position as middlemen, with two major business partners almost completely unaware of each other. Good business sense though, I’ll give the Parthians that.
bar bar bar
