The Tang Dynasty in Global Context

The Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) is often celebrated as a zenith of Chinese civilization—a period of unparalleled cultural flourishing, military might, and cosmopolitan openness. Yet to fully grasp its place in world history, we must step beyond Chinese chronicles and examine how foreign contemporaries perceived this empire. From Japan’s humbling defeat at Baekgang to Arab merchants’ awe at Tang urbanism, these external accounts reveal a complex tapestry of admiration, rivalry, and cultural exchange.

Japan’s Humble Apprenticeship

### The Battle of Baekgang and Its Aftermath
In 663 CE, a pivotal naval clash unfolded at the mouth of the Baekgang River (modern-day Korea), where Tang forces annihilated a Japanese fleet sent to aid their Baekje allies. The Nihon Shoki (Japan’s oldest chronicle) dedicates extensive passages to this catastrophe, lamenting the loss of 400 ships and 10,000 men. Yet Tang records dismiss the victory in just three lines—a stark contrast highlighting the asymmetry in power. To the Tang, this was merely a minor frontier skirmish; to Japan, it was a traumatic awakening to China’s supremacy.

### Cultural Borrowing: From Kyoto’s Grid to Legal Codes
Determined to modernize, Japan launched the kentōshi (embassies to Tang China), importing everything from urban planning to bureaucratic systems. The capitals of Heijō-kyō (Nara) and Heian-kyō (Kyoto) meticulously replicated Chang’an’s grid layout, down to naming their central avenue Suzaku Ōji (朱雀大路), mirroring Tang Chang’an’s Vermilion Bird Street. Even Japan’s earliest legal codes, like the Taihō Ritsuryō (701 CE), were direct adaptations of Tang statutes—a fact Japanese scholars proudly noted by calling Tang a “Ritsuryō State.”

The “Luoyang Illusion”
Curiously, Kyoto later became poetically known as “Luoyang” in Japanese texts. Historian Wang Zhongshu attributes this to Emperor Saga’s 9th-century nostalgia for Luoyang’s cultural prestige. Though Kyoto physically mimicked Chang’an, its place names increasingly referenced Luoyang—a symbolic rebranding revealing Japan’s selective cultural digestion.

The Steppe Perspective: Türks and the “Two-Faced” Monuments

### The Orkhon Inscriptions: A Bilingual Paradox
The 8th-century Kül Tigin碑 (erected by Tang envoys in modern Mongolia) presents a fascinating duality. Its Chinese face extols Türk-Tang friendship in elegant prose, while the Old Turkic side delivers a scathing warning:
> “The Chinese sweeten words with silk, then smother the gullible. Stay in the Ötüken Mountains—trade from afar, but never trust them.”

This dissonance likely arose because Tang artisans, unable to read Turkic, mechanically carved the text provided by Türk elites—unwittingly preserving a critique of their own empire.

Arab Chronicles: Trade, Conflict, and Toilet Paper

### Guangzhou’s Cosmopolitan Chaos
Arab geographers like Ibn Khordadbeh marveled at Tang China’s wealth, dubbing it the “head of the world’s bird” in their cosmological maps. Guangzhou’s bustling ports hosted thousands of Arab traders, overseen by Tang Shibosi (市舶使)—officials blending customs agents and royal shoppers.

Yet friction simmered. The Akhbār al-Ṣīn wa’l-Hind recounts an Iraqi merchant’s 2,000-km journey to Chang’an to protest corrupt officials—a quest rewarded with the offending eunuch’s exile. Less fortunate was Governor Lu Yuanrui, murdered in 684 by enraged Southeast Asian merchants after his staff extorted their goods.

### Unexpected Discoveries: Medicine and Hygiene
Arab writers preserved details absent in Tang records:
– Public health: Stone stelae at crossroads listed herbal remedies, with paupers receiving free medicine—an early state healthcare system.
– Toilet paper: “They use paper instead of water after defecation” marks the world’s first documented use of tissue, contrasting with the bamboo cè chóu (厕筹) scraps found in Han-era latrines.

Conclusion: The Plurality of History

These foreign accounts remind us that empires are kaleidoscopes—their image fracturing into countless reflections depending on the viewer’s vantage point. The Tang’s brilliance shines no less brightly for being flecked with critiques; rather, its humanity emerges through these layered narratives. In an age of resurgent nationalism, such multivocal history offers an antidote to monolithic mythmaking—proving that even the mightiest dynasties were seen, loved, and resisted in ways they could scarcely imagine.