Daqin

It has long been known that Chinese records provide a considerable amount of information on Daqin 大秦 i. e. Great Qin [synonym of Roman Empire in Chinese records]. Nevertheless, interpretation of these accounts requires a more coherent nexus. Apart from problems of authenticity of written works, characteristics of Chinese historiography and other genres should also be considered. In light of such complexities, grouping Chinese sources on Daqin by relevance, type (e. g. historiographies or geographical treaties etc.) and date (referring to events before or after the 5th/6th century) might lead towards a better understanding of multifaceted perceptions defined by their description. In this manner, through a comparison of Daqin-picture(s) given by these accounts with a review of Roman and Roman-related archaeological finds discovered in China, the paper aims to give a more sophisticated interpretation of the reception of Rome in the Middle Empire and also intends to highlight problems on understanding Sino-Roman relations.

Relations between the Roman and the early Chinese Empires have been considerably popular fields of research, however, principally from a trade-oriented point of view. Contextualising Roman-related glass finds unearthed in the People's Republic of China provides a more complex nexus. Transparent glass vessels carry multiple testimonia of cultural impacts and interactions , leading towards a stereotyped and utopian perception of the Imperium Romanum. This paper focuses on the complexity of such inter-imperial connections through contextualising the most significant Roman-interpreted glass finds in China. Furthermore, by a detailed and critical examination of Roman-related transparent glass vessels , it also aims to highlight problems of earlier identifications and interpretations. In addition, a precise recollection of the existing data not only allows to catalogue these various glass objects, but also helps to insert these glass artefacts into the Roman glass typology system.
The extended version of paper presented at The 25th Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference. University of Leicester, Friday 27 to Sunday 29 March 2015.

TISICUM XXIII (2014) [2015] 323-328.
The bilingual, Chinese-Syriac limestone block called Nestorian Stele or Nestorian Monument was erected in 781 and serves as an outstanding document of early Chinese Christianity and Tang cosmopolitanism. As the heading on the stone informs the ‘Stele of the Transmission of the Brilliant Teaching’ was originated in Daqin, which is accepted to be the ancient term for the Roman Empire. The detailed but archaized description of Daqin on the Monument gives a remarkable reflection on integration of foreign. The incorporation of Nestorian Christianity into the complex, utopian and multileveled Daqin-tradition helps to understand local answers to the Non-Local. Furthermore, the text of the Stele allows an insight into an 8th century approach of seeing and being seen. Through focusing on the Daqin-perception of the Nestorian Stele, present paper aims to provide new aspects to the Chinese reception of another civilization far away in the westernmost part of the World.

The first part of the paper concentrates on the opportunities and limits of archaeological investigation conducted by foreigners in the People's Republic of China, through giving an outline of the Chinese cultural heritage protection system. It not only presents the history of preserving archaeological records and describes its legal and institutional backgrounds, but also details how the existing legal provisions limit the opportunities of on-site research for foreigners. Other problems of the heritage protection are also listed. Despite increasing legal efforts tourism, archaeological looting, large scale constructions, and many other destructive factors all result in significant damage, and call for improved protection of archaeological property. Additionally, a shortage of experienced professionals and some major weaknesses of Chinese academic writings (such as the relative absence of comprehensive theoretical works, reliable databases, objective and detailed descriptions etc.) require further reforms. While the above situation makes the use of published data more difficult, it also increases the number of interdisciplinary research groups in the context of Sino-foreign cooperations. However, for individual scholars archaeological investigation in China can still present a significant challenge.
In this manner, the second part of the paper provides an example of the limits and opportunities detailed above through summarizing the results of the author's own research conducted in China.