Abarbarian is a person or tribe of people that is perceived to be primitive,savage and warlike.^[1] Many cultures have referred to other cultures as barbarians, sometimes out of misunderstanding and sometimes out of prejudice.^{[citation needed][original research?]}

A "barbarian" may also be an individual reference to an aggressive, brutal, cruel, and insensitive person, particularly one who is also dim-witted,^[2] while cultures, customs and practices adopted by peoples and countries perceived to be primitive may be referred to as "barbaric".^[3]

The term originates from theAncient Greek:βάρβαρος (barbaros;pl.βάρβαροιbarbaroi). InAncient Greece, the Greeks used the term not only for those who did not speakGreek and follow classical Greek customs, but also for Greek populations on the fringe of the Greek world with peculiar dialects.^[4] InAncient Rome, the Romans adapted and applied the term to tribal non-Romans such as theGermanics,Celts,Iberians,Helvetii,Thracians,Illyrians, andSarmatians. In theearly modern period and sometimes later, theByzantine Greeks used it for theTurks in a clearlypejorative manner.^[5][6]

The Greek word was borrowed intoArabic as well, under the formبربر (barbar), and used as anexonym by theArab invaders to refer to theindigenous peoples of North Africa, known in English asAmazigh orBerbers, with the latter thereby being acognate of the word "barbarian".

Historically, the termbarbarian has seen widespread use in English. Many peoples have dismissed alien cultures and even rival civilizations, because they were unrecognizably strange. For instance, the nomadicTurkic peoples north of theBlack Sea, including thePechenegs and theKipchaks, were called barbarians by theByzantines.

TheAncient Greek nameβάρβαρος (bárbaros) 'barbarian' was anantonym forπολίτης (politēs) 'citizen', fromπόλις (polis) 'city'. The earliest attested form of the word is theMycenaean Greek𐀞𐀞𐀫,pa-pa-ro, written inLinear B syllabic script.^[7][8]

The Greeks used the termbarbarian for all non-Greek-speaking people, including theEgyptians,Persians,Medes andPhoenicians, emphasizing their otherness. According to Greek writers, this was because the language they spoke sounded to Greeks likegibberish represented by the sounds "bar..bar..;" the alleged root of the wordbárbaros, which is an echomimetic oronomatopoeic word. In various occasions, the term was also used by Greeks, especially theAthenians, to deride other Greek tribes and states (such asEpirotes,Eleans,Boeotians andAeolic-speakers) and also fellow Athenians in a pejorative and politically motivated manner.^{[9][10][11][12]} The term also carried a cultural dimension to its dual meaning.^[13][14] The verbβαρβαρίζω (barbarízō) inancient Greek meant to behave or talk like a barbarian, or to hold with the barbarians.^[15]

Plato (Statesman 262de) rejected the Greek–barbarian dichotomy as a logical absurdity on just such grounds: dividing the world into Greeks and non-Greeks told one nothing about the second group. Yet Plato used the term barbarian frequently in his seventh letter.^[16] InHomer's works, the term appeared only once (Iliad 2.867), in the formβαρβαρόφωνος (barbarophonos, ‘of incomprehensible speech’), used of theCarians fighting forTroy during theTrojan War. In general, the concept ofbarbaros did not figure largely in archaic literature before the 5th century BC.^[17] It has been suggested that the ‘barbarophonoi’ in theIliad signifies not those who spoke a non-Greek language but simply those who spoke Greek badly.^[18]

A change occurred in the connotations of the word after theGreco-Persian Wars in the first half of the 5th century BC. Here a hasty coalition of Greeks defeated the vastPersian Empire. Indeed, in the Greek of this period 'barbarian' is often used expressly to refer to Persians, who were enemies of the Greeks in this war.^[19]

The Romans used the termbarbarus for uncivilised people, opposite to Greek or Roman, and in fact, it became a common term to refer to all foreigners among Romans after Augustus age (as, among the Greeks, after the Persian wars, the Persians), including the Germanic peoples, Persians, Gauls, Phoenicians and Carthaginians.^[20]

The Greek termbarbaros was the etymological source for many words meaning "barbarian", including Englishbarbarian, which was first recorded in 16th centuryMiddle English.

A wordbarbara- (बर्बर) is also found in theSanskrit of ancient India, with the primary meaning of "cruel" and also "stammering" (बड़बड़), implying someone with an unfamiliar language.^[21][22][23] The Greek wordbarbaros is related to Sanskritbarbaras (stammering).^[24] This Indo-European root is also found in Latinbalbutire / balbus for "stammer / stammering" (leading to Italianbalbettare, Spanishbalbucear and Frenchbalbutier) and Czechbrblat "to stammer".^[25] The verbbaṛbaṛānā in both contemporaryHindi (बड़बड़ाना) as well asUrdu (بڑبڑانا) means 'to babble, to speak gibberish, to rave incoherently'.^[26]

In Aramaic, Old Persian and Arabic context, the root refers to "babble confusedly". It appears asbarbary or in Old Frenchbarbarie, itself derived from the ArabicBarbar,Berber, which is an ancient Arabic term for the North African inhabitants west of Egypt. The Arabic word might be ultimately from Greekbarbaria.^[27]

TheOxford English Dictionary gives five definitions of the nounbarbarian, including an obsoleteBarbary usage.

• 1.Etymologically, A foreigner, one whose language and customs differ from the speaker's.
• 2.Hist.a. One not a Greek.b. One living outside the pale of the Roman Empire and its civilization, applied especially to the northern nations that overthrew them.c. One outside the pale ofChristian civilization.d. With the Italians of the Renaissance: One of a nation outside of Italy.
• 3. A rude, wild, uncivilized person.b. Sometimes distinguished fromsavage (perh. with a glance at 2).c. Applied by the Chinese contemptuously to foreigners.
• 4. An uncultured person, or one who has no sympathy with literary culture.
• †5. A native of Barbary. [SeeBarbary Coast.]Obs. †b.Barbary pirates &A Barbary horse.Obs.^[28]

TheOEDbarbarous entry summarizes the semantic history. "The sense-development in ancient times was (with the Greeks) 'foreign, non-Hellenic,' later 'outlandish, rude, brutal'; (with the Romans) 'not Latin nor Greek,' then 'pertaining to those outside the Roman Empire'; hence 'uncivilized, uncultured,' and later 'non-Christian,' whence 'Saracen, heathen'; and generally 'savage, rude, savagely cruel, inhuman.'"

Greek attitudes towards "barbarians" developed in parallel with the growth ofchattel slavery – especially inAthens. Although the enslavement of Greeks for non-payment ofdebts continued in most Greek states, Athens banned this practice underSolon in the early 6th century BC. Under theAthenian democracy established ca. 508 BC,slavery came into use on a scale never before seen among the Greeks. Massive concentrations of slaves worked under especially brutal conditions in the silver mines atLaureion in south-eastern Attica after the discovery of a major vein of silver-bearing ore there in 483 BC, while the phenomenon of skilled slave craftsmen producing manufactured goods in small factories and workshops became increasingly common.

Furthermore, slave-ownership no longer became the preserve of the rich: all but the poorest of Athenian households came to have slaves in order to supplement the work of their free members. The slaves of Athens that had "barbarian" origins were coming especially from lands around theBlack Sea such asThrace andTaurica (Crimea), whileLydians,Phrygians andCarians came fromAsia Minor.Aristotle (Politics 1.2–7; 3.14) characterises barbarians as slaves by nature.

From this period, words likebarbarophonos, cited above from Homer, came into use not only for the sound of a foreign language but also for foreigners who spoke Greek improperly. In the Greek language, the wordlogos expressed both the notions of "language" and "reason", so Greek-speakers readily conflated speaking poorly with stupidity.

Further changes occurred in the connotations ofbarbari/barbaroi inLate Antiquity,^[29] whenbishops andcatholikoi were appointed to sees connected to cities among the "civilized"gentes barbaricae such as inArmenia orPersia, whereas bishops were appointed to supervise entire peoples among the less settled.

Eventually the term found a hidden meaning through thefolk etymology ofCassiodorus (c. 485 – c. 585). He stated that the wordbarbarian was "made up ofbarba (beard) andrus (flat land); for barbarians did not live in cities, making their abodes in the fields like wild animals".^[30]

From classical origins the Hellenic stereotype of barbarism evolved: barbarians are like children, unable to speak or reason properly, cowardly, effeminate, luxurious, cruel, unable to control their appetites and desires, politically unable to govern themselves. Writers voiced these stereotypes with much shrillness –Isocrates in the 4th century B.C., for example, called for a war of conquest againstPersia as apanacea for Greek problems.^[31]

However, the disparaging Hellenic stereotype of barbarians did not totally dominate Hellenic attitudes.Xenophon (died 354 B.C.), for example, wrote theCyropaedia, a laudatory fictionalised account ofCyrus the Great, the founder of thePersian Empire, effectively autopian text. In hisAnabasis, Xenophon's accounts of the Persians and other non-Greeks whom he knew or encountered show few traces of the stereotypes.

InPlato'sProtagoras, Prodicus of Ceos calls "barbarian" theAeolian dialect thatPittacus of Mytilene spoke.^[32]

Aristotle makes the difference between Greeks and barbarians one of the central themes of his book onPolitics, and quotesEuripides approvingly, "Tis meet that Greeks should rule barbarians".^[33]

The renownedoratorDemosthenes (384–322 B.C.) made derogatory comments in his speeches, using the word "barbarian".

In theBible'sNew Testament,St. Paul (fromTarsus) – lived about A.D. 5 to about A.D. 67) uses the wordbarbarian in its Hellenic sense to refer to non-Greeks (Romans 1:14), and he also uses it to characterise one who merely speaks a different language (1 Corinthians 14:11). In theActs of the Apostles, the people ofMalta, who were kind to Paul and his companions who had been shipwrecked off their coast, are called barbarians(Acts 28:2).

About a hundred years after Paul's time,Lucian – a native ofSamosata, in the former kingdom ofCommagene, which had been absorbed by theRoman Empire and made part of the province ofSyria – used the term "barbarian" to describe himself. Because he was a noted satirist, this could have indicated self-deprecating irony. It might also have suggested descent from Samosata's originalSemitic-speaking population – who were likely called "barbarians by later Hellenistic,Greek-speaking settlers", and might have eventually taken up this appellation themselves.^[34][35]

The term retained its standard usage in theGreek language throughout theMiddle Ages;Byzantine Greeks used it widely until the fall of theEastern Roman Empire, (later named theByzantine Empire) in the 15th century (1453 with the fall of capital cityConstantinople).

Cicero (106–43 BC) described the mountain area of innerSardinia as "a land of barbarians", with these inhabitants also known by the manifestly pejorative termlatrones mastrucati ("thieves with a rough garment in wool"). The region, still known as "Barbagia" (inSardinianBarbàgia orBarbàza), preserves this old "barbarian" designation in its name – but it no longer consciously retains "barbarian" associations: the inhabitants of the area themselves use the name naturally and unaffectedly.

The statue of theDying Galatian provides some insight into the Hellenistic perception of and attitude towards "Barbarians".Attalus I ofPergamon (ruled 241–197 BC) commissioned (220s BC) a statue to celebrate his victory (ca 232 BC) over the CelticGalatians inAnatolia (the bronze original is lost, but aRomanmarble copy was found in the 17th century).^[36] The statue depicts with remarkable realism a dying Celt warrior with a typically Celtic hairstyle and moustache. He sits on his fallen shield while a sword and other objects lie beside him. He appears to be fighting against death, refusing to accept his fate.

The statue serves both as a reminder of the Celts' defeat, thus demonstrating the might of the people who defeated them, and a memorial to their bravery as worthy adversaries. AsH. W. Janson comments, the sculpture conveys the message that "they knew how to die, barbarians that they were".^[37]

The Greeks admiredScythians andGalatians as heroic individuals – and even (as in the case ofAnacharsis) as philosophers – but they regarded their culture as barbaric. TheRomans indiscriminately characterised the variousGermanic tribes, the settledGauls, and the raidingHuns as barbarians,^{[citation needed]} and subsequent classically oriented historical narratives depicted the migrations associated with the end of theWestern Roman Empire as the "barbarian invasions".

The Romans adapted the term in order to refer to anything that was non-Roman. The German cultural historian Silvio Vietta points out that the meaning of the word "barbarous" has undergone a semantic change in modern times, afterMichel de Montaigne used it to characterize the activities of the Spaniards in the New World – representatives of the more technologically advanced, higher European culture – as "barbarous," in a satirical essay published in the year 1580.^[38] It was not the supposedly "uncivilized" Indian tribes who were "barbarous", but the conquering Spaniards. Montaigne argued that Europeans noted the barbarism of other cultures but not the crueler and more brutal actions of their own societies, particularly (in his time) during the so-calledreligious wars. In Montaigne's view, his own people – the Europeans – were the real "barbarians". In this way, the argument was turned around and applied to the European invaders. With this shift in meaning, a whole literature arose in Europe that characterized the indigenous Indian peoples as innocent, and the militarily superior Europeans as "barbarous" intruders invading a paradisical world.^[39][40]

The term "Barbarian" in traditional Chinese culture had several aspects. For one thing, Chinese has more than one historical "barbarian"exonym. Several historicalChinese characters for non-Chinese peoples weregraphic pejoratives. The character for theYao people, for instance, was changed fromyao 猺 "jackal" toyao 瑤 "precious jade" in the modern period.^[41] The originalHua–Yi distinction between Hua ("Chinese") and Yi (commonly translated as "barbarian") was based on culture and power but not on race.

Historically, the Chinese used various words for foreign ethnic groups. They include terms like 夷Yi, which is often translated as "barbarians." Despite this conventional translation, there are also other ways of translatingYi into English. Some of the examples include "foreigners,"^[42] "ordinary others,"^[43] "wild tribes,"^[44] "uncivilized tribes,"^[45] and so forth.

Chinese historical records mention what may now perhaps be termed "barbarian" peoples for over four millennia, although this considerably predates theGreek language origin of the term "barbarian", at least as is known from the thirty-four centuries of written records in the Greek language. The sinologistHerrlee Glessner Creel said, "Throughout Chinese history "the barbarians" have been a constant motif, sometimes minor, sometimes very major indeed. They figure prominently in the Shang oracle inscriptions, and the dynasty that came to an end only in 1912 was, from the Chinese point of view, barbarian."^[46]

Shang dynasty (1600–1046 BC)oracles andbronze inscriptions first recorded specific Chineseexonyms for foreigners, often in contexts of warfare or tribute. KingWu Ding (r. 1250–1192 BC), for instance, fought with theGuifang 鬼方,Di 氐, andQiang 羌 "barbarians."

During theSpring and Autumn period (771–476 BC), the meanings of four exonyms were expanded. "These included Rong, Yi, Man, and Di—all general designations referring to the barbarian tribes."^[47] TheseSiyi 四夷 "Four Barbarians", most "probably the names of ethnic groups originally,"^[48] were the Yi orDongyi 東夷 "eastern barbarians," Man orNanman 南蠻 "southern barbarians," Rong orXirong 西戎 "western barbarians," and Di orBeidi 北狄 "northern barbarians." The Russian anthropologistMikhail Kryukov concluded.

Evidently, the barbarian tribes at first had individual names, but during about the middle of the first millennium B.C., they were classified schematically according to the four cardinal points of the compass. This would, in the final analysis, mean that once again territory had become the primary criterion of the we-group, whereas the consciousness of common origin remained secondary. What continued to be important were the factors of language, the acceptance of certain forms of material culture, the adherence to certain rituals, and, above all, the economy and the way of life. Agriculture was the only appropriate way of life for theHua-Hsia.^[49]

TheChinese classics use compounds of these four generic names in localized "barbarian tribes" exonyms such as "west and north"Rongdi, "south and east"Manyi,Nanyibeidi "barbarian tribes in the south and the north," andManyirongdi "all kinds of barbarians." Creel says the Chinese evidently came to useRongdi andManyi "as generalized terms denoting 'non-Chinese,' 'foreigners,' 'barbarians'," and a statement such as "the Rong and Di are wolves" (Zuozhuan, Min 1) is "very much like the assertion that many people in many lands will make today, that 'no foreigner can be trusted'."

The Chinese had at least two reasons for vilifying and depreciating the non-Chinese groups. On the one hand, many of them harassed and pillaged the Chinese, which gave them a genuine grievance. On the other, it is quite clear that the Chinese were increasingly encroaching upon the territory of these peoples, getting the better of them by trickery, and putting many of them under subjection. By vilifying them and depicting them as somewhat less than human, the Chinese could justify their conduct and still any qualms of conscience.^[50]

This wordYi has both specific references, such as toHuaiyi 淮夷 peoples in theHuai River region, and generalized references to "barbarian; foreigner; non-Chinese."Lin Yutang's Chinese-English Dictionary of Modern Usage translatesYi as "Anc[ient] barbarian tribe on east border, any border or foreign tribe."^[51] The sinologistEdwin G. Pulleyblank says the nameYi "furnished the primary Chinese term for 'barbarian'," but "Paradoxically the Yi were considered the most civilized of the non-Chinese peoples.^[52]

Some Chinese classics romanticize or idealize barbarians, comparable to the westernnoble savage construct. For instance, the ConfucianAnalects records:

• The Master said, The [夷狄] barbarians of the East and North have retained their princes. They are not in such a state of decay as we in China.
• The Master said, The Way makes no progress. I shall get upon a raft and float out to sea.
• The Master wanted to settle among the [九夷] Nine Wild Tribes of the East. Someone said, I am afraid you would find it hard to put up with their lack of refinement. The Master said, Were a true gentleman to settle among them there would soon be no trouble about lack of refinement.^[53]

The translatorArthur Waley noted that, "A certain idealization of the 'noble savage' is to be found fairly often in early Chinese literature", citing theZuo Zhuan maxim, "When the Emperor no longer functions, learning must be sought among the 'Four Barbarians,' north, west, east, and south."^[54] Professor Creel said,

From ancient to modern times the Chinese attitude toward people not Chinese in culture—"barbarians"—has commonly been one of contempt, sometimes tinged with fear ... It must be noted that, while the Chinese have disparaged barbarians, they have been singularly hospitable both to individuals and to groups that have adopted Chinese culture. And at times they seem to have had a certain admiration, perhaps unwilling, for the rude force of these peoples or simpler customs.^[55]

In a somewhat related example,Mencius believed that Confucian practices were universal and timeless, and thus followed by both Hua and Yi, "Shun was an Eastern barbarian; he was born in Chu Feng, moved to Fu Hsia, and died in Ming T'iao.King Wen was a Western barbarian; he was born in Ch'i Chou and died in Pi Ying. Their native places were over a thousandli apart, and there were a thousand years between them. Yet when they had their way in the Central Kingdoms, their actions matched like the two halves of a tally. The standards of the two sages, one earlier and one later, were identical."^[56]

The prominent (121 CE)Shuowen Jiezi character dictionary, definesyi 夷 as "men of the east" 東方之人也. The dictionary also informs thatYi is not dissimilar from theXia 夏, which means Chinese. Elsewhere in theShuowen Jiezi, under the entry ofqiang 羌, the termyi is associated with benevolence and human longevity.Yi countries are therefore virtuous places where people live long lives. This is why Confucius wanted to go toyi countries when thedao could not be realized in the central states.^[57]

SomeChinese characters used totranscribe non-Chinese peoples were graphically pejorativeethnic slurs, in which the insult derived not from the Chinese word but from the character used to write it. For instance, theWritten Chinese transcription ofYao "theYao people", who primarily live in the mountains of southwest China and Vietnam. When 11th-centurySong dynasty authors first transcribed theexonymYao, they insultingly choseyao 猺 "jackal" from a lexical selection of over 100 characters pronouncedyao (e.g., 腰 "waist", 遙 "distant", 搖 "shake"). During a series of 20th-century Chineselanguage reforms, this graphic pejorative猺 (written with the 犭"dog/beast radical") "jackal; the Yao" was replaced twice; first with the invented characteryao傜 (亻"human radical") "the Yao", then withyao瑤 (玉 "jade radical") "precious jade; the Yao." Chineseorthography (symbols used to write a language) can provide unique opportunities to write ethnic insultslogographically that do not exist alphabetically. For the Yao ethnic group, there is a difference between the transcriptionsYao 猺 "jackal" andYao 瑤 "jade" but none between theromanizationsYao andYau.^[58]

According to the archeologist William Meacham, it was only by the time of the lateShang dynasty that one can speak of "Chinese," "Chinese culture," or "Chinese civilization." "There is a sense in which the traditional view of ancient Chinese history is correct (and perhaps it originated ultimately in the first appearance of dynastic civilization): those on the fringes and outside this esoteric event were "barbarians" in that they did not enjoy (or suffer from) the fruit of civilization until they were brought into close contact with it by an imperial expansion of the civilization itself."^[59]In a similar vein, Creel explained the significance of Confucianli "ritual; rites; propriety".

The fundamental criterion of "Chinese-ness," anciently and throughout history, has been cultural. The Chinese have had a particular way of life, a particular complex of usages, sometimes characterized asli. Groups that conformed to this way of life were, generally speaking, considered Chinese. Those that turned away from it were considered to cease to be Chinese. ... It was the process of acculturation, transforming barbarians into Chinese, that created the great bulk of the Chinese people. The barbarians of Western Chou times were, for the most part, future Chinese, or the ancestors of future Chinese. This is a fact of great importance. ... It is significant, however, that we almost never find any references in the early literature to physical differences between Chinese and barbarians. Insofar as we can tell, the distinction was purely cultural.^[48]

Dikötter says,

Thought in ancient China was oriented towards the world, ortianxia, "all under heaven." The world was perceived as one homogenous unity named "great community" (datong) The Middle Kingdom [China], dominated by the assumption of its cultural superiority, measured outgroups according to a yardstick by which those who did not follow the "Chinese ways" were considered "barbarians." A Theory of "using the Chinese ways to transform the barbarian" as strongly advocated. It was believed that the barbarian could be culturally assimilated. In the Age of Great Peace, the barbarians would flow in and be transformed: the world would be one.^[60]

According to the Pakistani academicM. Shahid Alam, "The centrality of culture, rather than race, in the Chinese world view had an important corollary. Nearly always, this translated into a civilizing mission rooted in the premise that 'the barbarians could be culturally assimilated'"; namelylaihua 來化 "come and be transformed" orHanhua 漢化 "become Chinese; be sinicized."^[61]

Two millennia before the French anthropologistClaude Lévi-Strauss wroteThe Raw and the Cooked, the Chinese differentiated "raw" and "cooked" categories of barbarian peoples who lived in China. Theshufan 熟番 "cooked [food eating] barbarians" are sometimes interpreted as Sinicized, and theshengfan 生番 "raw [food eating] barbarians" as not Sinicized.^[62]TheLiji gives this description.

The people of those five regions – the Middle states, and the [Rong], [Yi] (and other wild tribes around them) – had all their several natures, which they could not be made to alter. The tribes on the east were called [Yi]. They had their hair unbound, and tattooed their bodies. Some of them ate their food without its being cooked with fire. Those on the south were called Man. They tattooed their foreheads, and had their feet turned toward each other. Some of them ate their food without its being cooked with fire. Those on the west were called [Rong]. They had their hair unbound, and wore skins. Some of them did not eat grain-food. Those on the north were called [Di]. They wore skins of animals and birds, and dwelt in caves. Some of them did not eat grain-food.^[63]

Dikötter explains the close association betweennature and nurture. "Theshengfan, literally 'raw barbarians', were considered savage and resisting. Theshufan, or 'cooked barbarians', were tame and submissive. The consumption of raw food was regarded as an infallible sign of savagery that affected the physiological state of the barbarian."^[64]

SomeWarring States period texts record a belief that the respective natures of the Chinese and the barbarian were incompatible. Mencius, for instance, once stated: "I have heard of the Chinese converting barbarians to their ways, but not of their being converted to barbarian ways."^[65] Dikötter says, "The nature of the Chinese was regarded as impermeable to the evil influences of the barbarian; no retrogression was possible. Only the barbarian might eventually change by adopting Chinese ways."^[66]

However, different thinkers and texts convey different opinions on this issue. The prominent Tang Confucian Han Yu, for example, wrote in his essayYuan Dao the following: "When Confucius wrote theChunqiu, he said that if the feudal lords use Yi ritual, then they should be called Yi; If they use Chinese rituals, then they should be called Chinese." Han Yu went on to lament in the same essay that the Chinese of his time might all become Yi because the Tang court wanted to put Yi laws above the teachings of the former kings.^[67] Therefore, Han Yu's essay shows the possibility that the Chinese can lose their culture and become the uncivilized outsiders, and that the uncivilized outsiders have the potential to become Chinese.

After the Song dynasty, many of China's rulers in the north were of Inner Asia ethnicities, such as the Khitans, Juchens, and Mongols of the Liao, Jin and Yuan dynasties, the latter ended up ruling over the entire China. Hence, the historianJohn King Fairbank wrote, "the influence on China of the great fact of alien conquest under the Liao-Jin-Yuan dynasties is just beginning to be explored."^[68] During the Qing dynasty, the rulers of China adopted Confucian philosophy and Han Chinese institutions to show that the Manchu rulers had received the Mandate of Heaven to rule China. At the same time, they also tried to retain their own indigenous culture.^[69] Due to the Manchus' adoption of Han Chinese culture, most Han Chinese (though not all) did accept the Manchus as the legitimate rulers of China. Similarly, according to Fudan University historian Yao Dali, even the supposedly "patriotic" hero Wen Tianxiang of the late Song and early Yuan period did not believe the Mongol rule to be illegitimate. In fact, Wen was willing to live under Mongol rule as long as he was not forced to be a Yuan dynasty official, out of his loyalty to the Song dynasty. Yao explains that Wen chose to die in the end because he was forced to become a Yuan official. So, Wen chose death due to his loyalty to his dynasty, not because he viewed the Yuan court as a non-Chinese, illegitimate regime and therefore refused to live under their rule. Yao also says that many Chinese who were living in the Yuan-Ming transition period also shared Wen's beliefs of identifying with and putting loyalty towards one's dynasty above racial/ethnic differences. Many Han Chinese writers did not celebrate the collapse of the Mongols and the return of the Han Chinese rule in the form of the Ming dynasty government at that time. Many Han Chinese actually chose not to serve in the new Ming court at all due to their loyalty to the Yuan. Some Han Chinese also committed suicide on behalf of the Mongols as a proof of their loyalty.^[70] The founder of the Ming dynasty, Zhu Yuanzhang, also indicated that he was happy to be born in the Yuan period and that the Yuan did legitimately receive the Mandate of Heaven to rule over China. On a side note, one of his key advisors, Liu Ji, generally supported the idea that while the Chinese and the non-Chinese are different, they are actually equal. Liu was therefore arguing against the idea that the Chinese were and are superior to the "Yi."^[71]

These things show that many times, pre-modern Chinese did view culture (and sometimes politics) rather than race and ethnicity as the dividing line between the Chinese and the non-Chinese. In many cases, the non-Chinese could and did become the Chinese and vice versa, especially when there was a change in culture.

According to historianFrank Dikötter, "The delusive myth of a Chinese antiquity that abandoned racial standards in favour of a concept of cultural universalism in which all barbarians could ultimately participate has understandably attracted some modern scholars. Living in an unequal and often hostile world, it is tempting to project the utopian image of a racially harmonious world into a distant and obscure past."^[72]

The politician, historian, and diplomatK. C. Wu analyzes the origin of the characters for theYi,Man,Rong,Di, andXia peoples and concludes that the "ancients formed these characters with only one purpose in mind—to describe the different ways of living each of these people pursued."^[73] Despite the well-known examples of pejorative exonymic characters (such as the "dog radical" in Di), he claims there is no hidden racial bias in the meanings of the characters used to describe these different peoples, but rather the differences were "in occupation or in custom, not in race or origin."^[74] K. C. Wu says the modern character夷 designating the historical "Yi peoples", composed of the characters for 大 "big (person)" and 弓 "bow", implies a big person carrying a bow, someone to perhaps be feared or respected, but not to be despised.^[75] However, differing from K. C. Wu, the scholar Wu Qichang believes that the earliestoracle bone script foryi 夷 wasused interchangeably withshi尸 "corpse".^[76] The historian John Hill explains thatYi "was used rather loosely for non-Chinese populations of the east. It carried the connotation of people ignorant of Chinese culture and, therefore, 'barbarians'."^[77]

Christopher I. Beckwith makes the extraordinary claim that the name "barbarian" should only be used for Greek historical contexts, and is inapplicable for all other "peoples to whom it has been applied either historically or in modern times."^[78] Beckwith notes that most specialists in East Asian history, including him, have translated Chinese exonyms as English "barbarian." He believes that after academics read his published explanation of the problems, except for direct quotations of "earlier scholars who use the word, it should no longer be used as a term by any writer."^[79]

The first problem is that, "it is impossible to translate the wordbarbarian into Chinese because the concept does not exist in Chinese," meaning a single "completely generic"loanword from Greekbarbar-.^[80] "Until the Chinese borrow the wordbarbarian or one of its relatives, or make up a new word that explicitly includes the same basic ideas, they cannot express the idea of the 'barbarian' in Chinese.".^[81] The usualStandard Chinese translation of Englishbarbarian isyemanren (traditional Chinese:野蠻人;simplified Chinese:野蛮人;pinyin:yěmánrén), which Beckwith claims, "actually means 'wild man, savage'. That is very definitely not the same thing as 'barbarian'."^[81] Despite this semantic hypothesis, Chinese-English dictionaries regularly translateyemanren as "barbarian" or "barbarians."^[82] Beckwith concedes that the early Chinese "apparently disliked foreigners in general and looked down on them as having an inferior culture," and pejoratively wrote some exonyms. However, he purports, "The fact that the Chinese did notlike foreigner Y and occasionally picked a transcriptional character with negative meaning (in Chinese) to write the sound of his ethnonym, is irrelevant."^[83]

Beckwith's second problem is with linguists and lexicographers of Chinese. "If one looks up in a Chinese-English dictionary the two dozen or so partly generic words used for various foreign peoples throughout Chinese history, one will find most of them defined in English as, in effect, 'a kind of barbarian'. Even the works of well-known lexicographers such as Karlgren do this."^[84]Although Beckwith does not cite any examples, the Swedish sinologistBernhard Karlgren edited two dictionaries:Analytic Dictionary of Chinese and Sino-Japanese (1923) andGrammata Serica Recensa (1957). Compare Karlgrlen's translations of thesiyi "four barbarians":

• yi 夷 "barbarian, foreigner; destroy, raze to the ground," "barbarian (esp. tribes to the East of ancient China)"^[85]
• man 蛮 "barbarians of the South; barbarian, savage," "Southern barbarian"^[86]
• rong 戎 "weapons, armour; war, warrior; N. pr. of western tribes," "weapon; attack; war chariot; loan for tribes of the West"^[87]
• di 狄 "Northern Barbarians – "fire-dogs"," "name of a Northern tribe; low servant"^[88]

TheSino-Tibetan Etymological Dictionary and Thesaurus Project includes Karlgren'sGSR definitions. Searching theSTEDT Database finds various "a kind of" definitions for plant and animal names (e.g.,you 狖 "a kind of monkey,"^[89] but not one "a kind of barbarian" definition. Besides faulting Chinese for lacking a general "barbarian" term, Beckwith also faults English, which "has no words for the many foreign peoples referred to by one or another Classical Chinese word, such as 胡hú, 夷yí, 蠻mán, and so on."^[90]

The third problem involvesTang dynasty usages offan "foreigner" andlu "prisoner", neither of which meant "barbarian." Beckwith says Tang texts usedfan 番 or 蕃 "foreigner" (seeshengfan andshufan above) as "perhaps the only true generic at any time in Chinese literature, was practically the opposite of the wordbarbarian. It meant simply 'foreign, foreigner' without any pejorative meaning."^[91] In modern usage,fan 番 means "foreigner; barbarian; aborigine". The linguist Robert Ramsey illustrates the pejorative connotations offan.

The word "Fān" was formerly used by the Chinese almost innocently in the sense of 'aborigines' to refer to ethnic groups in South China, and Mao Zedong himself once used it in 1938 in a speech advocating equal rights for the various minority peoples. But that term has now been so systematically purged from the language that it is not to be found (at least in that meaning) even in large dictionaries, and all references to Mao's 1938 speech have excised the offending word and replaced it with a more elaborate locution, "Yao, Yi, and Yu."^[92]

Tang dynasty Chinese also had a derogatory term for foreigners,lu (traditional Chinese:虜;simplified Chinese:虏;pinyin:lǔ) "prisoner, slave, captive". Beckwith says it means something like "those miscreants who should be locked up," therefore, "The word does not even mean 'foreigner' at all, let alone 'barbarian'."^[93]

Christopher I. Beckwith's 2009 "The Barbarians" epilogue provides many references, but overlooks H. G. Creel's 1970 "The Barbarians" chapter. Creel descriptively wrote, "Who, in fact, were the barbarians? The Chinese have no single term for them. But they were all the non-Chinese, just as for the Greeks the barbarians were all the non-Greeks."^[94] Beckwith prescriptively wrote, "The Chinese, however, have still not yet borrowed Greekbarbar-. There is also no single native Chinese word for 'foreigner', no matter how pejorative," which meets his strict definition of "barbarian.".^[81]

In theTang dynasty houses of pleasure, where drinking games were common, small puppets in the aspect of Westerners, in a ridiculous state of drunkenness, were used in one popular permutation of the drinking game; so, in the form of blue-eyed, pointy nosed, and peak-capped barbarians, these puppets were manipulated in such a way as to occasionally fall down: then, whichever guest to whom the puppet pointed after falling was then obliged by honor to empty his cup ofChinese wine.^[95]

When Europeans came toJapan, they were callednanban (南蛮), literallyBarbarians from the South, because thePortuguese ships appeared to sail from the South. TheDutch, who arrived later, were also called eithernanban orkōmō (紅毛), literally meaning "Red Hair."

The nativeBerbers ofNorth Africa were among the many peoples called "Barbarian" by the early Romans. The term continued to be used by medievalArabs (seeBerber etymology) before being replaced by "Amazigh". In English, the term "Berber" continues to be used as anexonym. The geographical termBarbary orBarbary Coast, and the name of theBarbary pirates based on that coast (and who were not necessarily Berbers) were also derived from it.

The term has also been used to refer to people fromBarbary, a region encompassing most ofNorth Africa. The name of the region,Barbary, comes from the Arabic wordBarbar, possibly from the Latin wordbarbaricum, meaning "land of the barbarians".

Many languages define the "Other" as those who do not speak one's language; Greekbarbaroi was paralleled byArabicajam "non-Arabic speakers; non-Arabs; (especially)Persians."^[96]

In the ancient Indian epicMahabharata, the Sanskrit onomatopoeic wordbarbara- referred to the incomprehensible, unfamiliar speech (perceived as "babbling", "incoherent stammering") of non-Vedic peoples ("wretch, foreigner, sinful people, low and barbarous".)^[97]

In Mesoamerica theAztec civilization used the word "Chichimeca" to denominate a group of nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes that lived on the outskirts of theTriple Alliance's Empire, in the north of Modern Mexico, and whom the Aztec people saw as primitive and uncivilized. One of the meanings attributed to the word "Chichimeca" is "dog people".

TheIncas of South America used the term "purum awqa" for all peoples living outside the rule of their empire (seePromaucaes).

European and European American colonists frequently referred toNative Americans as "savages".^[98]

The entry of "barbarians" intomercenary service in a metropole repeatedly occurred in history as a standard way in which peripheral peoples from and beyondfrontier regions interact with imperial powers as part of a (semi-)foreign militarised proletariat.^[99]Examples include:

• nomadic frontier tribes serving inpre-modern China^[100]
• mainlyGermanic soldiery in thearmies of the decliningRoman Empire^[101]
• VikingVarangian guards in imperialByzantium^[102]
• Turkic mercenaries in theAbbasid Caliphate^[103][104]
• Widespread use of ethnic mercenary forces in pre-historicMesoamerica^[105]
• Cossack units in the armies of (for example)Poland-Lithuania and ofpre-Soviet Russia^[106]
• Gurkhas in thecolonial andpostcolonial Indian military^[107]

Italians in theRenaissance often called anyone who lived outside of their country a barbarian. As an example, there is the last chapter ofThe Prince byNiccolò Machiavelli, "Exhortatio ad Capesendam Italiam in Libertatemque a Barbaris Vinsicandam" (in English: Exhortation to take Italy and free her from the barbarians) in which he appeals toLorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino to unite Italy and stop the "barbarian invasions" led by other European rulers, such asCharles VIII andLouis XII, both of France, andFerdinand II of Aragon.

Spanish sea captainFrancisco de Cuellar, who sailed with theSpanish Armada in 1588, used the term 'savage' ('salvaje') to describe theIrish people.^[108]

The romantic reaction against reason and civilisation preceded some attempts to rehabilitatebarbarianism in the 20th century.^[109] TheGerman Empireglorified the Germans' Teutonic barbarian past. KaiserWilhelm II offeredthe Huns as an example to his troops,Russian symbolist poets such asBlok invoked an Asiatic nomad heritage of theScyths and theMongols, andNazi Germany cultivated apre-civilised nationalism to justify/promote enslaving and murdering Jews and Slavs. TheGoth sub-culture continued the tradition, echoing the name and reputation of the barbarian outsider early-medievalGoths.^[110]

In her 1916 anti-war pamphletThe Crisis of German Social Democracy, theMarxist theoristRosa Luxemburg writes:

Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to Socialism or regression into Barbarism.^[111]

Luxemburg attributed her statement toFriedrich Engels, but as was shown byMichael Löwy, Engels had used not the term "Barbarism" but a less resounding formulation: "If the whole of modern society is not to perish, a revolution in the mode of production and distribution must take place."^[112] The case has been made that Luxemburg had remembered a passage from the "Erfurt Program", written in 1892 byKarl Kautsky, and mistakenly attributed it to Engels:

As things stand today capitalist civilization cannot continue; we must either move forward into socialism or fall back into barbarism.^[113]

Luxemburg went on to explain what she meant by "regression into Barbarism":

A look around us at this moment [i.e., 1916 Europe] shows what the regression of bourgeois society into Barbarism means. This World War is a regression into Barbarism. The triumph of Imperialism leads to the annihilation of civilization. At first, this happens sporadically for the duration of a modern war, but then when the period of unlimited wars begins it progresses toward its inevitable consequences. Today, we face the choice exactly as Friedrich Engels foresaw it a generation ago: either the triumph of Imperialism and the collapse of all civilization as in ancient Rome, depopulation, desolation, degeneration – a great cemetery. Or the victory of Socialism, that means the conscious active struggle of the InternationalProletariat againstImperialism and its method of war.

Modern popular culture contains such fantasy barbarians asConan the Barbarian.^[114] In such fantasy, the negative connotations traditionally associated with "Barbarian" are often inverted. For example, "The Phoenix on the Sword" (1932), the first ofRobert E. Howard's "Conan" series, is set soon after the "Barbarian" protagonist had forcibly seized the turbulent kingdom ofAquilonia from King Numedides, whom he strangled upon his throne. The story is clearly slanted to imply that the kingdom greatly benefited from power passing from a decadent and tyrannical hereditary monarch to a strong and vigorous Barbarian usurper.

• Mixobarbaroi
• Berserker
• Chichimeca
• Civilizing mission
• Ethnocentrism
• Hannibal
• Ethnography
• Ethnology
• Mleccha
• Mongoloid
• Nanban
• Nemets
• Philistine
• Skræling
• Stateless societies
• Makwerekwere
• White man’s burden

Notes

Bibliography

• Beckwith, Christopher I. (2009):Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the Present. Princeton: Princeton University Press.ISBN 978-0-691-13589-2.
• Fiskesjö, Magnus "The animal other: Re-naming the barbarians in 20th-century China," Social Text 29.4 (2011) (No. 109, Special Issue, "China and the Human"), pp. 57–79. See:http://socialtext.dukejournals.org/content/29/4_109/57.abstract
• Schafer, Edward H.The Golden Peaches of Samarkand. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985.ISBN 978-0-520-05462-2.
• Wu, K. C. (1982).The Chinese Heritage. New York: Crown Publishers.ISBN 0-517-54475-X.

• Milosavljević, Monika (2014)."And now, what's going to happen to us without barbarians?".Studia Academica Šumenensia: The Empire and Barbarians in South-Eastern Europe in Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages. Retrieved25 June 2019.
• Hall, E. (1989).Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy. Oxford, NY: Clarendon.
• Losemann, V. (2006). "Barbarians" (H. Cancik & H. Schneider, Eds.; C. F. Salazar, Trans.). Retrieved July 18, 2020, from Brill's New Pauly.doi:10.1163/1574-9347_bnp_e212470 9789004122598, 20110510

• "Barbarian" .Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 3 (11th ed.). 1911.