Yu (1998) believes Daxia [dat-hea] stands for the Tochari (pp. Hirth, and many other scholars who followed him, have taken Da Qin to refer to the ‘Roman Orient.’ I think that the term is often clearly used in a broader sense than this to mean the Roman Empire, or any territory subservient to Rome.
It is true that all the dependencies mentioned in the Weilue are probably found in the ‘Roman Orient,’ but it specifically mentions that it only lists a few of the dependencies of Da Qin, presumably the ones visited by the Chinese, or those reported on to the Chinese, because of their importance for east-west trade.
Therefore I have translated Da Qin as either ‘Rome’ the city, ‘Roman territory,’ or the ‘Roman Empire,’ as the context demands. on the southwest  corner of the Caspian Sea; and that, surprisingly, it is Tiaozhi that is a good transcription of Seleukia.
This folk etymology, charming as it is, does little to really explain the origin of the rather surprising name, Da Qin.
It is reminiscent of the rather similar names for Ferghana – Dayuan = ‘Great Yuan,’ and for Bactria – Daxia = ‘Great Xia’? 199-200 says:“For Hirth and the initial interpreters of the HHS and WL accounts, the country designated as Ta-ch’in (“Greater Ch’in”) was to be identified with the Roman East.
These are, quite naturally, territories in the ‘Roman Orient.’ Sometimes, the name is used more specifically: the Weilue gives directions across a ‘Great Sea’ (the Mediterranean) to “that country” (i.e.
Da Qin) from Wuzhisan in Haixi, which is undoubtedly Alexandria in Egypt – see notes 11.5, 11.7 and Appendix C.
All three forms of li show similar reconstructed pronunciations. Since the King of Parthia obviously esteemed highly the Emperor of China, he naturally sent the best jugglers he could secure.
Several scholars have suggested that it must have been originally derived from ‘Alexandria’ or ‘Alexander.’ See, for example: Dubs (1957), pp. When these persons were asked whence they came, they of course replied “from Alexandria,” which word the Chinese who disliked polysyllables and initial vowels and could not pronounce certain Greek sounds, shortened into “Li-jien.”.
This is contradicted by Aristobulus, says Strabo, who tells that the merchants travelled by raft to Babylonia. C., quotes Artemidorus, of the previous century, as saying: “By the incense trade . C., with the intention of conquering Gerrha; but he was persuaded by large presents of silver and precious stones, to leave the city unharmed.
There was thus little doubt that in the first, second, and third centuries B. Gerrha was an exceedingly wealthy city, trading overland and by sea in aromatics, presumably the frankincense of the Hadramaut. The city is about 200 stadia” – about 60 miles [actually only about 37 km – as 1 Greek stadium = 185 metres] – “distant from the sea.” And you sail “onward,” he says, from Gerrha to Tylos and Arados, which are the Bahrain islands. Müller to deduce the Semitic origin of the Greek name ‘Gerrha’ has important implications for the solution to the problem of the site’s location.
This is rather similar to the situation today when it is commonly said that one is “entering China,” when one enters territory inhabited by other people, but controlled by the Chinese, such as Tibet, or Chinese Turkestan (Sinjiang).
Similarly, ‘Mexico’ may be used to refer to either the city or the country.
they present a fictitious religious world, not a real one.