People, you are great! Thanks for the nice forum!

I am really interested in Tang dynasty relations with other countries, more specifically with Byzantine empire, since a lot of Byzantine coins were found in China. As I've read they were used for burial purposes, but what do you think about the way they entered China. Do you think it was merchants from Asia that brought them in through the Silk Road, or Roman people managed to China.
If you are familiar with readings concerning the topic, I'll be grateful if you write. Thanks again!

The answer is that it was probably both, since trade between China and Rome was well established by the time of the Han.

I would just add a note about coinage, and that is that outside the country in which it is minted, coinage does not necessarily have an intrinsic value, unless of course it is made of precious metal. Even then, the notional value of the coin and the value of its metal are not always the same, and this was definitely the case in the past as well as the present.

Merchants would still use coins from countries other than their own, but the degree of fungibility of that coinage, depended on a wider acceptance of its worth. While it is possible that Byzantine coins were used as a means of exchange in China, I would have thought their value would decrease the further one got from the extremities of the Byzantine Empire. Their role in China might be more as a collectible, or for decoration therefore.

You are quite right that their value and functions shifted in China, since most of the coins were found in tombs, serving the burial practice OBOLUS which is buring the dead with a coin in his mouth or hand. And of course in some cases they were used as jewels because some of them had one or two holes, which means they were used as buttons or necklaces.
But the question is how they entered China? It's known that foreign merchants,usually Arabs exchanged it for Chinese goods, but I can't find evidence if Romans themselves reached Tang dynasty China.

There is a separate thread on diplomatic relations between Rome and China, which you will find interesteing, since it has branched a little wider to examine the role of soldiers and merchants. The general consensus from that seems to be that merchants travelled through the Silk Road and by sea, either indirectly at first through the Levantine Coast, and then later directly. Of course Byzantium was the Eastern Roman Empire.

My personal view is that there was an additional trading route that tapped into the Silk Road, but which ended in the Urals or the top of the Black Sea, and that this had been in existence much earlier, since this was the site of a meatllurgical complex through which numerous technological advances made their way to China.

Most of the coinage would have entered China via merchants, therefore. Remmebr that at various times it was common for Roman soldiers to be paid in other than coinage, especially when far from home. Salt was a frequently cited method of payment.

在中国发现很多拜占庭的金属钱币，我想是以下几点原因：


1、当时两个帝国之间已经有了相当规模的贸易往来，而拜占庭需要很多中国的丝绸和瓷器，因为在拜占庭的贵族们看来，能够拥有来自中国的瓷器或者饰品，是非常值得荣耀的事情，因此政府和商人们用很多拜占庭的货币来买这些东西，而中国古代的墓葬很流行“陪葬制度”，也就是说，当人们去世以后，会把死者生前用过的东西或者稀有珍贵的东西一起埋葬在棺椁之中，这也就成为了我们今天挖掘出如此数量的拜占庭金属铅笔的根源；

2、中国在唐代非常强盛，如同今天美国一样的地位，那个时代没有公平可言，只有强弱之分，拜占庭虽然是个大帝国，但是与当时的唐朝相比起来，还是显得弱小，为了阻止唐朝的领土扩张和唐朝军队的入侵，以及追赶匈奴残部的唐朝军队的袭扰，拜占庭要在规定的时间内向唐朝缴纳很多的金币，以此来稳定世界的格局，换取拜占庭的和平，为使人民免受战争的苦难，拜占庭不得不做出让步，用金币来换取拜占庭国内贵族们的统治；

3、A.Stein的《Innermost Asia,Detailed Report of Explorations in Central Asia Kan Su and Eastern Iran》里面记载很多东罗马的钱币是在古老的丝绸之路上被发现，这有可能因为来在拜占庭的商人们在丝绸之路遭遇了劫匪，劫匪驱赶商人们的驼队，抢劫他们的财物，为了躲避强盗们的追击，拜占庭商人们只能扔掉大部分的财物，而这些财物有的被劫匪洗劫一空，有的则散落在当地。

其实关于发现的拜占庭钱币的问题，我们有种种推测，以上是我自己想的，希望对你有所帮助，如果你不同意我的观点，就当我没有说过上面的话好了。

Hello,

It all looks very interesting, but as a courtesy to members, perhaps it would be best to offer some degree of translation? Thanks.

Thats complete nonsense.

I agree with Warhead. No evidence at all.

aakkoo's post included an argument that these coins were a regular tribute paid by the East Roman (Byzantine) Empire to the Tang Empire in order to keep the Tang from expanding further westwards.

Oh. That's ridiculous. Is that the "China-dominated-the-world" theory?

It is largely a matter of conjecture.Sorry.

I English is very poor.

I have a feeling that this is an opinion from someone, not a fact. The first sentence is actually a little bias towards China. May the person who quoted the source please kindly state the website that you got it from, or the book? Thanks a lot!

Liu Bang

是的，以上我说的三点都是我的猜测，不过请不要揪住第2点不放好吗？这是我的猜测之一，不应该象触动大家的神经一样，要知道，谁都无法还原历史，当时的情况没有人可以知道，有不同的声音出现，才会有进步，或许我们所掌握的都不是对的，即使我说的第1点和第3点，都不一定正确，但是我敢于发表自己的看法，我想这对整个历史的研究是有好处的。Tang maniac也是带着疑问而来，我们大家一起帮助他，一起研究并提出自己的分析，一切都源于我们对中国历史的喜爱，我不希望这件事成为对我的“批斗会”，我们因中国历史而结缘，我们都有着至少一点的共同兴趣，不应该相互指责，我们都会努力的。Thinks！

Ya, the aim is to discuss some problems that arise

But I think it is impossible for the Roman Empire to pay tribute to China at that time, and at the same time - if it was for that purpose, scientists would have found plenty of Byzantine coins.
And, in addition I think Romans did not reach China in this period (7-10 c.) - it is too far to do it directly. Maybe the relation is for example: Byzantine empire - Arabs/Persians - Tang China. But that's my opinion

There are some archeological evidences included an 8th century coin manual used by a Kievan merchants which included some Chinese coins. Constantinople has become the main partner in trading with many Russian principalities including Kiev, Muscovy, Chernigov. Trading rout extended from these states through Khazar and Polovtsians' territories to reach Islamic states of Umayyad dynasty. Thus, through trading circle betweem Constantinople - Chernigov - Kiev - Muscovy - Volga Bulgar and Khazar, one could expect to see Byzantine coins in China. Apart from these facts, I know nothing of tribute or value of these coins in China.

Nothing is proven, but you can't just invent information from no where. 无中生有

The suggestion that Rome would pay tribute to China is fairly fanciful, I must say.

Roman policy was to engage opponents until they were overcome. It could do this at the time because of the socio-military structure of its society. The Punic Wars showed the willingness and capability of the Republic and early Empire to pursue war relentlessly by continuing to raise new levies.

On the rare occasion the Romans paid tribute to someone, it was a s a temporary measure until that opponent could be overcome. It was also only used as an expediaent in the case of a threat to Rome or Roman Italy itself.

There would simply be no reason to pay tribute to a country so far away.

Would you please tell me where I can read more about that? Thanks

我觉得罗马人到过中国，难道，东罗马的钱币是通过第三方传递过来的？唐朝人到罗马旅游的纪念品？

我们都在无中生有，在没有任何文献资料可供参考的前提下，后人对1000年前的事情只能做推测，后人研究前朝的历史，能与当时符合30%就不错了，是的我们都在无中生有，但这源于我们对历史的喜爱，对于为什么会在中国发现拜占庭的钱币，最确切的答案，我想只有古人乘坐时光机来告诉我们，我们能做的仅仅只是推测。

我也很想知道，谢谢。

This argument is flawed thanks to a little logical tool we have known as the Occam's razor.(奥卡姆剃刀 )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

This is correct. I would say that even if plentiful Byzantine coins were found, that still doesn't necessarily mean that the Byzantine Empire entered into a tributary relationship with Tang China. I think in some sense, this would have required some sort of, at least, direct diplomatic links, and at most, military force. As we can all see by simply looking at any map the latter would have been too difficult an undertaking for a reward not guaranteed. On top of having to maneuver a large military across the steppes, mountains and deserts, they would need enough supplies to actually last in a war against the Byzantines, putting the Byzantines in a position where Tang could force them into a vassal state.

If anyone can tell me the logistic possibility of Tang defeating the Byzantine Empire in a war on the Byzantine's own borders, I think that would be interesting.

As for the former (direct diplomatic ties), most of the trading was done I believe, by independent traders and merchants. I don't even think the Tang dynasty and the Byzantine Empire came into any actual direct contact with one another. I could be wrong however.

By the way, if you are interested in the topic, you can have a look here:

http://www.silk-road.com/newsletter/vol3num2/4_ying.php

This is a good atricle I recently found!

A very good article indeed.

I was particularly interested in the imitation solidi, which had been pierced to allow them to be worn either as pendants, or sewn onto clothes. The fact that an imitation coin would be used in this way shows both that the owner wished to be identified by it as part of some minority, and also that official solidi were quite rare. These would put paid to any suggestion that tribute was being paid, or even that the coins were in anything other than very rare circulation.

I found out that the same author - professor Lin Ying has other publications about solidi, I'm going to send you another link, if you are interested !
www.transoxiana.org/0106/lin-ying_turks_solidus.html