In a rambling recitation of CCP talking points an interview with Al-Jazeera, China’s special envoy to the Middle East Wu Sike attempted to mend fences with those in the Islamic world who might have taken umbrage to the Chinese government’s response to the riots in Xinjiang.
In true CCP-style, Wu responds to the question “What happened in Xinjiang” with that specialty of Chinese officialdom, “the half-baked historical claim.”
“Wu Sike: Chinese relations with Arabs and Muslims date back to two or three millennia.”
Either Wu needs help with his history or his math.
There is little doubt that the early civilizations in what is today China interacted with other cultures in western Asia dating back to the neolithic period. While Chinese historians aren’t fond of dwelling on the topic, items such as the domesticated horse (and its 2.0 version the chariot) likely came to China as a result of such interactions, as did other useful advances including the cultivation of wheat and the compound bow. In the same way, aspects of what would become Chinese culture, notably the use of silk, flowed west. BUT…
Western Asia is not “Arabia” and Islam first appeared on the scene only in the late 6th/early 7th centuries C.E., or about 1.5 milennia ago.
The early Caliphates did have contact with the Tang Empire, and traders from Arabia and other parts of the Islamic world were participants in the glorious cosmopolitanism of Tang-era Chang’an.
With the fall of the Tang the silk road became a less inviting trade route, but undaunted traders from the Middle East still made their way to Song Dynasty ports such as Quanzhou in Fujuan. More trade was possible when the road west reopened under Pax Mongolica, and that’s all before we get to the voyages of Zheng He in the Ming…
But Wu’s statement is the just latest example of this odd tendency by Chinese officials to exaggerate history when it’s totally unnecessary. What’s wrong with 1400 years? Do we really need to double down to make it count?
I hadn’t heard the interview but as soon as my eyes hit “two or three millennia” I was stopped dead in my tracks. It’s only 1430.
For what it’s worth the common view among Muslims is that the Tang emperor was cool with Islam and offered up a mosque to the visiting Arabs. But at that point, they were pretty much a novelty. These days most Muslims I know back home have an otherwise dismal opinion of China and its treatment of Muslims. I doubt the talking points are going to be worth much.
Yeap you are right, but no problem, as history is not what happened but what we say happened (also quite a long tradition in China official historiography)
JJ,
I’d like to know what you think about this:
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.p?ref=/interrogatory/aikman200312220001.asp
Let alone the problem that the whole idea of ‘China’ even existing before the Han dynasty is somewhat suspect. I guess once you’ve swallowed whoppers like Tibet, Taiwan and Xinjiang ‘always’ having been part of the motherland you factual probity takes bit of a back seat.
I’ve sometimes wondered if this is connected to the old-fashioned use of reign dates, rather than a continuous dating system. I’ve met a couple of people – one old and one quite young, in his 30s, who knew a lot of history (depending on how you define it) and could rattle off events and dates – Guangxu 17, Kangxi 53 – but couldn’t tell the lengths of time between two different reign eras. And badly so, I mean, they were out by centuries. I was once taught by an older guy who insisted that the unification of China was about 2000BCE, rather than 200BCE as I maintained. So it could be the math.
A great combination of wisdom, historical knowledge and humor. Thanks.