Spanning a wide geographical and chronological range, this volume has been constructed with a clear purpose in mind: to make a compelling case for comparative and interdisciplinary approaches to the study of Eurasian empires – approaches which, in the editors’ opinion, should replace outmoded studies of such empires in isolation. Not all of the book's 11 essays examine the process of “contact and exchange” mentioned in the title, but each of them works with the others to promote what the editors call a “holistic, truly Eurasian perspective”.
The first three papers focus on the interactions of different Eurasian empires. Hyun Jin Kim's article seeks to demonstrate that the Franks borrowed important aspects of their political system from the Inner Asian “quasi-feudal” model of the Huns (and, by extension, other Inner Asian polities such as the Xiongnu empire) rather than from Roman models. This enterprising thesis illustrates Kim's determination to undo the image of Inner Asian polities as politically and culturally “primitive”. Jonathan Skaff provides a detailed analysis of the Tang dynasty's horse-breeding system and its relationship to Inner Asian horse supplies. Other scholars have demonstrated the Tang empire's ability to breed significant numbers of horses when it controlled frontier lands that were suitable for pasturage; Skaff adds new factors to this analysis, looking at climate, established patterns of exchange (both peaceful and violent) between China and Inner Asian peoples, and the ethnic diversity of persons staffing Tang horse-breeding farms, all in order to establish a richer picture of his topic. Selim Adalı’s essay discusses the political and cultural impact of the Cimmerians and Scythians on the Ancient Near East, noting both the spread of new military equipment and equine technologies brought by the Inner Asians as well as the ways in which their presence promoted the emergence of new powers that changed the region's geopolitical makeup.
The next four papers examine comparative topics rather than analyses of “contact and exchange”. The first two form a diptych through which one can juxtapose the concepts of honour and shame in Rome (in Frederik Vervaet's essay) and Han China (in Mark Lewis's). Although it does not seem that the authors sought explicitly to construct their articles in ways that would allow immediate ease of comparison, such comparison is not only possible but compelling as the authors reveal significant differences in the two roughly contemporaneous cultures. In Rome, honour was associated most clearly with aristocratic rank, military success, high office, and wealth; in China, however, the pre-Han period saw the rise of philosophies that distanced honour from military success and wealth, emphasizing instead the importance of moral virtue and service to society as means of achieving honour – which was often regarded as antithetical to personal gain.
Walter Scheidel's “Slavery and forced labour in early China and the Roman world” highlights another important difference. Rome's urban economy relied heavily on slave labour that was primarily applied to the private endeavours of wealthy Roman families. In China, where the power of aristocratic families was comparatively limited, it was the state that depended on forced – convict and conscript (corvée) – labour. Scheidel's paper examines the inherent brutality of both systems while considering the reasons for and ramifications of the differences that distinguish them. Alexander Beechcroft's article on Homer and the Shi jing as “imperial texts” offers an intriguing look at the development of these canonical works over time, with no “fixed” versions for centuries. Beechcroft demonstrates how these texts ultimately became stabilized as artefacts of imperial regimes and offers specific examples to illustrate a new analytical approach that looks carefully at each text's “commentarial frame” to understand the meanings that became attached to them.
The book's last four articles return to the concept of “contact and exchange”. Samuel Lieu's examination of Manichaeism in Rome and China emphasizes recent archaeological discoveries to examine a number of issues. One of his significant contributions here is new evidence from South China that demonstrates the centrality of the Parthian language in the transmission of Manichaean texts from Iran to China. The final three papers are even more strongly focused on archaeology. “Alans in the South Caucasus?” by Antonio Sagona, Claudia Sagona, and Aleksandra Michalewicz looks at mortuary remains to see if Alanic cultural markers known north of the Caucasus can also be found to the south of the mountain range – specifically at the important cemetery of Samtavro near modern Tblisi. This richly illustrated essay notes the challenges of linking material remains to “ethnicity” and ultimately builds a fascinating if complex picture. The authors conclude that there are indeed some similarities north and south of the mountains such as skulls revealing the cranial manipulation of infants, evidence of post-mortuary tomb disturbances, and the use of intentionally broken bronze mirrors; but there are also significant differences such as Samtavro's general lack of burials with weapons and horse gear or metal cauldrons.
Osmund Bopearachchi considers the archaeological evidence for cultural interactions between Greeks, Scythians, Parthians, and Kushans in Central Asia and India in the second to fourth centuries ce. He seeks to incorporate recent findings to take a fresh look at familiar topics such as artistic influences and chronological uncertainties. The book's final essay, Michele Negus Cleary's “Enclosure sites, non-nucleated settlement strategies and political capitals in ancient Eurasia” is an absorbing study that encourages new concepts of “urbanization”. She demonstrates that walled enclosure sites of the Khorezmian oasis region (particularly Akchakhan-kala, occupied at various times from the third century bce to the second century ce) were not conventional urban settlements but “key nodes in non-nucleated, low-density, agro-pastoral settlement systems associated with mobile, agro-pastoral polities and empires”. These “nodes” served not only as dwelling sites (not used continually, but most likely seasonally or in times of special need) but also as political and ceremonial sites for elites that helped them establish and maintain their political legitimacy.
Although this book's articles cover a broad range of topics, geographical regions, and historical eras, they are effectively united in their use of new approaches, methods, and interpretations in the study of Eurasian empires. The editors and contributors have created an engaging and insightful volume that deserves the attention of a wide spectrum of scholars and will, it is to be hoped, stimulate further research.
