The previous chapter demonstrated the continuity of classicizing ethnographic discourse in the Wars and the Jin shu 晉書, paying particular attention to the presence and function of the “barbarian” antithesis in the two works, the dichotomous division of humanity into a civilized center and a barbarian periphery. This chapter will further explore the intersection of traditional concepts of barbarian alterity and the political discourse of sixth-century Constantinople and seventh-century Chang’an, as historians in either capital included accounts of individual barbarian political figures in their works. It will seek to determine the degree to which ethnic labels, and the connotations associated with them (whether vague as in the case of “barbarian” – in Chinese Rong 戎, Yi 夷, Di 狄, Hu 胡, or combinations of these – or specific as in the case of Goth, Vandal, Xiongnu 匈奴, Särbi-Xianbei 鮮卑, etc.), condition the representation of barbarian political figures who had risen above the status of generals, allies, or federates to become leaders of their own independent states.