Editing Marcus Aurelius (section)

====Trade with Han China and outbreak of plague====
{{main|Sino-Roman relations|Antonine Plague}}
A possible contact with the Chinese [[Han dynasty]] (202&nbsp;BC{{snd}}220&nbsp;AD) occurred in 166 when a [[Sino-Roman relations|Roman traveller visited the Han court]], claiming to be an ambassador representing "Andun" ({{zh|c=安敦}}), ruler of [[Daqin]], who can be identified either with Marcus or his predecessor Antoninus.<ref>Pulleyblank, Leslie and Gardiner, pp. 71–79.</ref><ref>Yü, pp. 460–461.</ref><ref>De Crespigny, p. 600.</ref> In addition to [[Roman Republic|Republican]]-era [[Roman glass]]wares found at [[Guangzhou]] along the [[South China Sea]],<ref>An, 83.</ref> Roman golden medallions made during the reign of Antoninus and perhaps even Marcus have been found at [[Óc Eo]], Vietnam, then part of the [[Kingdom of Funan]] near the Chinese province of [[Jiaozhi]] (in northern Vietnam). This may have been the port city of [[Kattigara]], described by [[Ptolemy]] (c. 150) as being visited by a Greek sailor named Alexander and lying beyond the [[Golden Chersonese]] (i.e. [[Malay Peninsula]]).<ref name='young 2001 pp. 29-30'>Young, pp. 29–30.</ref><ref group=note>For further information on [[Óc Eo]], see Osborne, Milton. [https://books.google.com/books?id=uxF2kH04WKgC ''The Mekong: Turbulent Past, Uncertain Future'']. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2006, revised edition, first published in 2000. pp. 24–25. {{ISBN|978-1741148930}}.</ref> Roman coins from the reigns of Tiberius to [[Aurelian]] have been found in [[Xi'an]],  the site of the Han capital [[Chang'an]], although the far greater amount of [[Indo-Roman trade relations|Roman coins in India]] suggests the Roman maritime trade for [[History of silk|purchasing Chinese silk]] was centred there, not in China or even the overland [[Silk Road]] running through Persia.<ref name='ball 2016 p154'>Ball, p. 154.</ref>

The [[Antonine Plague]] started in [[Mesopotamia]] in 165 or 166 at the end of Lucius's campaign against the Parthians. It may have continued into the reign of [[Commodus]]. [[Galen]], who was in Rome when the plague spread to the city in 166,<ref name="auto1">Haas, pp. 1093–1098.</ref> mentioned that "fever, diarrhoea, and inflammation of the pharynx, along with dry or pustular eruptions of the skin after nine days" were among the symptoms.<ref name=murphy>Murphy, Verity. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4381924.stm 'Past pandemics that ravaged Europe'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171007210210/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4381924.stm |date=7 October 2017 }}. BBC News, 7 November 2005.</ref> It is believed that the plague was [[smallpox]].<ref name="auto1"/> In the view of historian [[Rafe de Crespigny]], the plagues afflicting the [[Eastern Han]] empire of China during the reigns of [[Emperor Huan of Han]] (r. 146–168) and [[Emperor Ling of Han]] (r. 168–189), which struck in 151, 161, 171, 173, 179, 182, and 185, were perhaps connected to the plague in Rome.<ref>De Crespigny, p. 514.</ref> Raoul McLaughlin writes that the travel of Roman subjects to the Han court in 166 may have started a new era of Roman–Far East trade. However, it was also a "harbinger of something much more ominous". According to McLaughlin, the disease caused "irreparable" damage to the Roman maritime trade in the Indian Ocean as proven by the archaeological record spanning from [[Roman Egypt|Egypt]] to [[Indo-Roman relations|India]], as well as significantly decreased [[Roman commerce|Roman commercial]] activity in Southeast Asia.<ref name='mclaughlin 2010 p59-60'>McLaughlin, pp. 59–60.</ref>