Xirong (Chinese: 西戎; pinyin: Xīróng; Wade–Giles: Hsi-jung; lit. 'Western warlike people') or Rong were various people who lived primarily in and around the western extremities of ancient China (in modern Gansu and Qinghai). They were known as early as the Shang dynasty (1765–1122 BCE),[1] as one of the Four Barbarians that frequently (and often violently) interacted with the siniticHuaxia civilization. They typically resided to the west of Guanzhong Plains from the Zhou dynasty (1046–221 BCE) onwards.[2][3] They were mentioned in some ancient Chinese texts as perhaps genetically and linguistically related to the people of the Chinese civilization.[4]
The historian Li Feng says that during the Western Zhou period, since the term Rong "warlike foreigners" was "often used in bronze inscriptions to mean 'warfare', it is likely that when a people was called 'Rong', the Zhou considered them as political and military adversaries rather than as cultural and ethnic 'others'."[6] Paul R. Goldin also proposes that Rong was a "pseudo-ethnonym" meaning "bellicose".[7]
The Xirong together with the eastern Dongyi, northern Beidi, and southern Nanman were collectively called the Sìyí (四夷; 'Four Barbarians'). The Liji "Record of Rites" details ancient stereotypes about them.
The people of those five regions – the Middle states, and the [Rong], [Yi], (and other wild tribes round 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. Those on the south were called Man. They tattooed their foreheads, and had their feet turned in towards each other. Some of them (also) ate their food without its being cooked. 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 also did not eat grain-food. The people of the Middle states, and of those [Yi], Man, [Rong], and [Di], all had their dwellings, where they lived at ease; their flavours which they preferred; the clothes suitable for them; their proper implements for use; and their vessels which they prepared in abundance. In those five regions, the languages of the people were not mutually intelligible, and their likings and desires were different. To make what was in their minds apprehended, and to communicate their likings and desires, (there were officers) – in the east, called transmitters; in the south, representationists; in the west, [Di-dis]; and in the north, interpreters.[11] [The term 狄鞮 didi (ti-ti) is identified as: "(anc.) Interpreter of the Di, barbarians of the west."[12] Translated and adapted from the French.]
According to Nicola Di Cosmo,[16] 'Rong' was a vague term for warlike foreigner. He places them from the upper Wei River valley and along the Fen River to the Taiyuan basin as far as the Taihang Mountains. This would be the northwestern edge of what was then China and also the transition zone between agricultural and steppe ways of life.
c. 964 BCE: King Mu of Zhou defeated the Quanrong and the following year attacked the Western Rong and Xurong.
827–782 BCE: King Xuan of Zhou sends the State of Qin to attack Western Rong who submit and cede territory, sends the State of Jin against the Northern Rong (probably 788); following year destroys the RongJiang clan.
During the Western Zhou various Rong groups are interspersed among the cities of the North China Plain. It seems that the Beidi were pressing the Rong from the north.
714 BCE: Northern (Bei) or Mountain (Shan) Rong attack the State of Zheng.
650 BCE: Beirong attacked by the States of Qi and Xu.
after 650 BCE the Rong are rarely mentioned. They seem to have been mostly absorbed by the States of Qi and Jin.[17]
314 BCE: Qin defeated the last hostile Rong tribe.[18] Threats from unified nomadic incursions would eventually reappear under the Xiongnu identity during the subsequent Qin and Han dynasties.[19]
7th-century scholar Yan Shigu made these remarks about the Wusuns, one group included to the "western barbarians": "Among the barbarians (戎; Róng) in the Western Regions, the look of the Wusun is the most unusual. The present barbarians (胡人; húrén) who have green eyes and red hair, and look like macaque monkeys, are the offspring of this people";[23][24][25] the exonym 胡人Húrén "foreigners, barbarians",[23] was used from the 6th century to denote Iranian peoples, especially Sogdians, in Central Asia, besides other non-Chinese peoples.[26]
Genetic data on ancient Qiang remains associated with the Xirong were determined to display high genetic affinity with contemporary Sino-Tibetan peoples as well as with ancient 'Yellow River farmers' of the Yangshao culture.[27][28]
^Nicola Di Cosmo, Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History ,Cambridge University Press, 2004 pp. 108-112.
^"灵台白草坡 西周墓葬里的青铜王国". www.kaogu.net.cn. The Institute of Archaeology (CASS Chinese Academy of Social Sciences). There is research on the ethnic image of the northern nomadic people of the Altaic language family. It may be that this is the image of the Xianyun tribe that once posed a serious military threat to the northern border of the Zhou Dynasty was called "Ghost people" because it looked different from the Chinese. 有考证系阿尔泰语系的北方游牧民族人种形象。可能是曾经对周朝北方边境构成严重军事威胁的猃狁部族,因相貌异于华夏,被称作"鬼方"。
^Goldin, Paul R. "Steppe Nomads as a Philosophical Problem in Classical China" in Mapping Mongolia: Situating Mongolia in the World from Geologic Time to the Present. Penn Museum International Research Conferences, vol. 2. Ed. Paula L.W. Sabloff. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. 2011. p. 235
^Baxter, William H. and Laurent Sagart. 2014. Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford University Press, ISBN978-0-19-994537-5.
^Jaroslav Průšek. Chinese Statelets and the Northern Barbarians in the period 1400-300 BC. New York, 1971. p.38
^Di Cosmo, Nicola (1999). "The northern frontier in pre-imperial China". In Loewe, Michael; Shaughnessy, Edward L. (eds.). The Cambridge History of Ancient China. Cambridge University Press. p. 908 of pp. 885–966.
^Cambridge History of Ancient China (1999) Chapter 13
^Nicola Di Cosmo in Cambridge History of Ancient China, page 924
^Mark Edward Lewis in Cambridge History of Ancient China, page 635
^MenciusLi lou II. text: "孟子曰:「舜生於諸馮,遷於負夏,卒於鳴條,東夷之人也。文王生於岐周,卒於畢郢,西夷之人也。" D.C.Lau (1970:128)'s translation: "Mencius said, '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."
(in Chinese) Ming Dynasty Record of 1574. Zhonghua Publishing. 1993. ISBN7-101-00607-8.
Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise. 7 volumes. Instituts Ricci (Paris – Taipei). Desclée de Brouwer. 2001. Vol. III, p. 555.
A Hypothesis about the Source of the Sai Tribes. Taishan Yu. Sino-Platonic Papers No. 106. September, 2000. Dept. of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, University of Pennsylvania.