On June 20–21, the symposium “Ethnic Interactions, Exchanges, and Integration in Chinese History and the Prominent Inclusiveness of Chinese Civilization” was held in Yinchuan, capital city of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region in northwest China. More than 80 scholars from over 40 research institutions and universities nationwide explored key topics such as the historical development of ethnic interaction and integration, the formation of the Chinese nation as a pluralistic yet unified entity, and the prominent features of Chinese civilization.

How should we understand the relationship between prehistoric tribal groups and the community for the Chinese nation? How should we define the temporal and spatial scope of ethnic interaction and integration in China? How should we make sense of the connections between different historical ethnic groups and the community for the Chinese nation? And how should we interpret the relationship between ethnic identity and national identity? Li Hongbin, a professor from the School of History and Culture at Minzu University of China, believes that providing thorough explanations to these questions would deepen our understanding of the significance of compiling a comprehensive history of ethnic interaction, exchanges, and integration.

The period spanning the Liao (916–1125), Song (960–1279), Western Xia (1038–1227), and Jin (1115–1234) dynasties constituted a major era of ethnic integration in Chinese history, noted Du Jianlu, dean of the School of Ethnology and Historiography at Ningxia University (NXU). This period witnessed the coexistence of multiple ethnic regimes, such as the Liao, Northern Song (960–1127), and Western Xia dynasties in the early stage, and the Southern Song (1127–1276), Jin, and Western Xia in the later stage. Additionally, surrounding regimes such as the Uyghurs, Western Liao, Tibetans, and Dali Kingdom were present in the periphery.

A shared reverence for the Huaxia culture, or Chinese civilization, was the most distinctive characteristic of ethnic integration during this period, Du said, adding that Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism were commonly venerated by all ethnic groups, with Confucianism in particular serving as a vital cultural bond uniting diverse communities.

Zhao Xianhai, director of the Department of General Ancient History at the Institute of Ancient History under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), refuted several influential but erroneous theories put forth by Western scholars in modern times, such as the “Alien Rule over China” thesis, the “Conquest Dynasties” framework, and the “New Qing History.” He criticized these theories for falsely treating the Great Wall as a rigid boundary separating China from the northern ethnic groups. In reality, the Great Wall played a pivotal role in shaping the political order of the northern borderlands, promoted economic development, and facilitated ethnic integration, becoming a significant driving force in China’s continuous unification. The Great Wall during the Sui (581–618) and Tang (618–907) eras, in particular, exemplifies this historic role.

Zhang Junmin, a research fellow from Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, emphasized the importance of the Xuanquanzhi site in Dunhuang—so far the only Silk Road relay station to have undergone formal archaeological excavation and produced a large cache of written records. The site offers unparalleled insights into the postal system of the Han Dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE), the Silk Road, and even the broader patterns of transportation between China and the West.

Owing to its strategic location, Xuanquanzhi served as a vital hub of East-West exchanges and a key platform for multiethnic interaction, Zhang explained. The site’s daily operations and administration were exemplary in Sino-Western transportation history and ethnic integration. These insights have been refined through studies of the Han-Dynasty bamboo slips unearthed from Xuanquanzhi, which hold immense academic value for research on Sino-Western transportation history as well as ethnic exchanges and integration.

Zheng Renzhao, head of the Department of Ancient Intellectual History at the Institute of Ancient History under CASS, interpreted the ancient ideal of “da yitong” (“great unity”) as encompassing far more than mere political and territorial unification. At its core, he argued, this concept demands ethnic harmony and people’s wellbeing.

Throughout Chinese history, Zheng highlighted, unity has consistently been the dominant trend. Over millennia, central authority steadily strengthened, ethnic integration deepened, and the foundations of national unity grew ever more stable and enduring. The thought on great unity and the effective governance practices of ancient unified states, he stated, provide profound insights for safeguarding and consolidating China’s unity today as a multi-ethnic nation and advancing the great cause of national reunification.

“In the early Western Zhou Dynasty (1046–771 BCE), the rulers demonstrated a consciousness of ethnic inclusiveness, with their political philosophy and governance measures stressing ethnic relations management,” observed Wang Xiaopeng, a professor from the School of History at Shandong University. The distinctive ethnic inclusiveness characteristic of Western Zhou political philosophy and governance measures was inseparable from the Zhou people’s ideological emphasis on the rule of “virtue” and on “harmony.” Moreover, ethnic inclusiveness and its features represented a concrete manifestation of “virtue” and “harmony,” Wang added.

The conference was co-hosted by the Institute of Ancient History at CASS and the NXU.