The year 2018-2019 has been a continuation of our work on the relationship to the other or to others in this China of the first centralized Han empire, which we have seen is readily represented or projected in textual sources as a strongly centered and hierarchical space, as a centrality that radiates or irradiates civilization to the four orients without there being any limits to the periphery. This centrality is confirmed and reinforced in the often hostile confrontation with the immediate " other ", notably the Xiongnu on the margins of Chinese space.
However, the foundations of this representation are beginning to be shaken by the knowledge and awareness of the existence of other possible centers of civilization, beyond the nearby " other " considered to be " savages ". We have noted a fairly clear demarcation between the unflattering denominations of populations on the immediate periphery of Chinese space and the idealizing designations of kingdoms further away, described as " great " such as Da Qin (the Roman East) or " celestial " such as Tianzhu (the Indian world). Sources from the end of the Han and the beginning of the period of disunity that followed bear witness to a great ambivalence towards what was being said about this kingdom beyond the Himalayas, which was described as " célesleste " while continuing to say it was populated by Hu " barbarians of the West ", in the same way that Buddhist teachings aroused curiosity, while being " " as being comparable to the wisdoms known in the Chinese world, or even as being a simple " avatar " of these wisdoms.