1. Da Qin 大秦 [Ta Ch’in] = Rome or Roman territory, depending on the context. The use of such a name (literally, ‘Great Qin’ = Great China) for a foreign state probably reflects the common process of mythologizing distant and unfamiliar cultures. Pulleyblank (1999), p. 77 notes that it “...is clearly not a transcription of a foreign word” and that the “...earliest datable occurrence seems to be with reference to Gān Ying’s mission of 97 C.E.”
          There are several whimsical stories about Da Qin in this section of the text. This was a common process – in more recent times Europeans fantasized about ‘noble savages’ and searched for the fabled golden city of El Dorado in the jungles of South America. A similar process is clearly reflected here in the astonishingly naive etymology for the name Da Qin in this section of the Hou Hanshu:

“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.”

Yü Ying-shih (1986) p. 379 remarks:

“Moreover, as their geographical knowledge of the world grew with time, the Han Chinese even came to the realization that China was not necessarily the only civilized country in the world. This is clearly shown in the fact that the Later Han Chinese gave the Roman Empire (or, rather, the Roman Orient) the name of Great Ch’in (Ta Ch’in). According to the Hou-Han shu, the Roman Empire was so named precisely because its people and civilization were comparable to those of China.”

          Mark Passehl, in a personal communication (7 July, 2003) writes: “I’m not sure the “noble savage” analogy is the right one with regard to Chinese attitudes to the Romans – although the tallness of the imperial bodyguards (mainly Germans and Galli) may well have impressed Chinese traders. As I read it the trade was all-important and the Romans impressed the Chinese by the rigour of their organisation and a weights and measures system equal in sophistication to their own.”
          Hirth, and many other scholars who followed him, have taken Da Qin to refer specifically to the ‘Roman Orient.’ I have, however, found that the term is often used in a broader sense than this to mean the Roman Empire in general, and is even sometimes applied to any territory under the control of Rome. 
          Even today we find this sort of usage. For example, it is commonly said that one is “entering China” when one enters territory inhabited by other people, but controlled by the Chinese, such as Tibet, or Chinese Turkestan (Xinjiang).
          It is true that most of the dependencies mentioned in the Weilue are probably to be found in the ‘Roman Orient,’ but the text specifically says that it only lists a few of the many countries dependent on Da Qin. These are presumably the ones visited by the Chinese, or reported about to the Chinese because of their importance for east-west trade. Quite naturally, they tend to be territories in Rome’s easternmost territories, in other words, the ‘Roman Orient.’
          Sometimes the name is used more specifically. The Weilue gives directions across a ‘Great Sea’ (the Mediterranean) to “that country” (i.e. Da Qin) from Wuchisan in Haixi, which is undoubtedly Alexandria in Egypt. See note 10.12 above.
          It is clear from the account given here of Da Qin that it was very large and controlled many dependencies. The Weilue adds: “At present (the Roman Empire) can be summed up as follows: the number of people and families cannot be given in detail. It is the biggest country west of the Bai Congling (‘White Pamir Mountains’). They have installed numerous minor kings so only the bigger dependencies have been noted.”
          So, I believe I am fully justified to translate Da Qin as either ‘Rome’ the city, ‘Roman territory,’ or the ‘Roman Empire,’ as the context demands. The reader should remember, however, that in each case the original Chinese text will have only Da Qin.