Jump to content

Cao Cao Mausoleum: Difference between revisions

Coordinates: 36°14′27″N 114°15′35″E / 36.24083°N 114.25972°E / 36.24083; 114.25972
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverted edits by 61.6.236.8 (talk) (HG) (3.1.21)
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 1 as dead. #IABot (v1.2.7.1)
Line 35: Line 35:
In August 2010, 23 experts and scholars presented evidence at the National High-Level Forum on Culture of the Three Kingdoms Period held in [[Suzhou]], [[Jiangsu]] to argue that the findings and the artefacts of the tomb are fake.<ref>{{cite web|last=Jiang|first=Wanjuan|title=Cao Cao's tomb: Experts reveal that findings and artifacts are fake|url=http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90782/90873/7114984.html|publisher=Global Times|accessdate=26 June 2013|date=24 August 2010}}</ref>
In August 2010, 23 experts and scholars presented evidence at the National High-Level Forum on Culture of the Three Kingdoms Period held in [[Suzhou]], [[Jiangsu]] to argue that the findings and the artefacts of the tomb are fake.<ref>{{cite web|last=Jiang|first=Wanjuan|title=Cao Cao's tomb: Experts reveal that findings and artifacts are fake|url=http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90782/90873/7114984.html|publisher=Global Times|accessdate=26 June 2013|date=24 August 2010}}</ref>


During the forum, Lin Kuicheng, a historian and member of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles, pointed out that Cao Cao should not be referred to as "King Wu of Wei" before 220 CE. After Cao Cao died in March 220 CE, his [[vassal]] king title – "King of Wei" – was inherited by his son, [[Cao Pi]], who continued to hold the title until around December when he forced [[Emperor Xian of Han|Emperor Xian]], the last emperor of the [[Han dynasty]], to abdicate in his favour. Since Cao Cao was buried about one month after his death and his funeral was most likely presided over by Cao Pi, it would be [[taboo]] to refer to Cao Cao as "King Wu of Wei" because the "King of Wei" (Cao Pi) was still living then. Furthermore, when Emperor Xian relinquished his throne to Cao Pi, he referred to Cao Pi and Cao Cao as "King of Wei" and "King Wu" respectively in his official abdication edict; Cao Cao was never referred to as "King Wu of Wei" in the edict.<ref>(咨爾魏王：昔者帝堯禪位于虞舜，舜亦以命禹，天命不于常，惟歸有德。漢道陵遲，世失其序，降及朕躬，大亂茲昏，羣兇肆逆，宇內顛覆。賴武王神武，拯茲難于四方，惟清區夏，以保綏我宗廟，豈予一人獲乂，俾九服實受其賜。今王欽承前緒，光于乃德，恢文武之大業，昭爾考之弘烈。皇靈降瑞，人神告徵，誕惟亮采，師錫朕命，僉曰爾度克恊于虞舜，用率我唐典，敬遜爾位。於戲！天之歷數在爾躬，允執其中，天祿永終；君其祗順大禮，饗茲萬國，以肅承天命。) ''Sanguozhi'' vol. 2.</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=林奎成：曹丕稱帝前曹操並未被稱為"魏武王" [Lin Kuicheng: Before Cao Pi became emperor, Cao Cao was never referred to as 'King Wu of Wei'.]|url=http://big5.ifeng.com/gate/big5/news.ifeng.com/history/special/caocaomuzang/detail_2010_08/21/2047924_0.shtml|publisher=ifeng.com|accessdate=26 June 2013|language=Chinese|date=21 August 2010}}</ref>
During the forum, Lin Kuicheng, a historian and member of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles, pointed out that Cao Cao should not be referred to as "King Wu of Wei" before 220 CE. After Cao Cao died in March 220 CE, his [[vassal]] king title – "King of Wei" – was inherited by his son, [[Cao Pi]], who continued to hold the title until around December when he forced [[Emperor Xian of Han|Emperor Xian]], the last emperor of the [[Han dynasty]], to abdicate in his favour. Since Cao Cao was buried about one month after his death and his funeral was most likely presided over by Cao Pi, it would be [[taboo]] to refer to Cao Cao as "King Wu of Wei" because the "King of Wei" (Cao Pi) was still living then. Furthermore, when Emperor Xian relinquished his throne to Cao Pi, he referred to Cao Pi and Cao Cao as "King of Wei" and "King Wu" respectively in his official abdication edict; Cao Cao was never referred to as "King Wu of Wei" in the edict.<ref>(咨爾魏王：昔者帝堯禪位于虞舜，舜亦以命禹，天命不于常，惟歸有德。漢道陵遲，世失其序，降及朕躬，大亂茲昏，羣兇肆逆，宇內顛覆。賴武王神武，拯茲難于四方，惟清區夏，以保綏我宗廟，豈予一人獲乂，俾九服實受其賜。今王欽承前緒，光于乃德，恢文武之大業，昭爾考之弘烈。皇靈降瑞，人神告徵，誕惟亮采，師錫朕命，僉曰爾度克恊于虞舜，用率我唐典，敬遜爾位。於戲！天之歷數在爾躬，允執其中，天祿永終；君其祗順大禮，饗茲萬國，以肅承天命。) ''Sanguozhi'' vol. 2.</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=林奎成：曹丕稱帝前曹操並未被稱為"魏武王" [Lin Kuicheng: Before Cao Pi became emperor, Cao Cao was never referred to as 'King Wu of Wei'.] |url=http://big5.ifeng.com/gate/big5/news.ifeng.com/history/special/caocaomuzang/detail_2010_08/21/2047924_0.shtml |publisher=ifeng.com |accessdate=26 June 2013 |language=Chinese |date=21 August 2010 }}{{dead link|date=November 2016 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>


===Cao Huan and Cao Yu===
===Cao Huan and Cao Yu===
Line 43: Line 43:


==="Yan Peidong"===
==="Yan Peidong"===
In 2010, Yan Peidong, a self-proclaimed scholar on the [[Three Kingdoms]] period, claimed on his microblog that he had seized irrefutable evidence that the tomb is a fake, causing a sensation on the internet in China. However, he failed to provide proof when reporters challenged him to do so. In December 2011, the public security bureau in [[Xingtai|Xingtai City]], [[Hebei|Hebei Province]] announced that "Yan Peidong" is actually Hu Zejun, a fugitive who has been on the run for more than six years for his involvement in numerous scams.<ref>{{cite web|title=曹操墓"打假先鋒"閆沛東竟是網上逃犯 [Yan Peidong, who plays the "vanguard" in arguing the case that the Cao Cao Tomb is a fake, is revealed to be actually a fugitive.]|url=http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2011-12/05/c_122378838.htm|publisher=Xinhua News|accessdate=26 June 2013|author1=Wang, Nan |author2=Zhu, Zhihua |language=Chinese|date=5 December 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Mystery scholar in Cao Cao tomb case unmasked as fraud|url=http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20111207000008&cid=1103|publisher=Want China Times|accessdate=26 June 2013|date=7 December 2011}}</ref>
In 2010, Yan Peidong, a self-proclaimed scholar on the [[Three Kingdoms]] period, claimed on his microblog that he had seized irrefutable evidence that the tomb is a fake, causing a sensation on the internet in China. However, he failed to provide proof when reporters challenged him to do so. In December 2011, the public security bureau in [[Xingtai|Xingtai City]], [[Hebei|Hebei Province]] announced that "Yan Peidong" is actually Hu Zejun, a fugitive who has been on the run for more than six years for his involvement in numerous scams.<ref>{{cite web|title=曹操墓"打假先鋒"閆沛東竟是網上逃犯 [Yan Peidong, who plays the "vanguard" in arguing the case that the Cao Cao Tomb is a fake, is revealed to be actually a fugitive.]|url=http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2011-12/05/c_122378838.htm|publisher=Xinhua News|accessdate=26 June 2013|author1=Wang, Nan |author2=Zhu, Zhihua |language=Chinese|date=5 December 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Mystery scholar in Cao Cao tomb case unmasked as fraud |url=http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20111207000008&cid=1103 |publisher=Want China Times |accessdate=26 June 2013 |date=7 December 2011 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131230234552/http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20111207000008&cid=1103 |archivedate=30 December 2013 |df= }}</ref>


==Current status==
==Current status==

Revision as of 12:11, 14 November 2016

36°14′27″N 114°15′35″E / 36.24083°N 114.25972°E / 36.24083; 114.25972

Excavated entrance to the Xigaoxue Tomb No. 2.
Cao Cao Mausoleum
Traditional Chinese曹操高陵
Simplified Chinese曹操高陵
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu PinyinCáo Cāo Gāolíng
Wei Mausoleum
Traditional Chinese魏高陵
Simplified Chinese魏高陵
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu PinyinWèi Gāolíng
Xigaoxue Tomb No. 2
Traditional Chinese西高穴2號墓
Simplified Chinese西高穴2号墓
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu PinyinXīgāoxuè Èrhào Mù

The Cao Cao Mausoleum, also known as the Gaoling Mausoleum of Wei and the Xigaoxue Tomb No. 2, is a tomb in Xigaoxue Village, Anfeng Township, Anyang County, Anyang City, Henan Province, China. It is purported to be the burial site of Cao Cao (155–220 CE), a prominent warlord who lived in the late Eastern Han dynasty. The discovery of the tomb was reported on 27 December 2009 by the Henan Provincial Cultural Heritage Bureau.[1] In 2013, the tomb became part of the seventh batch of Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level in China.[2]

Historical background

Cao Cao (155–220 CE) was a warlord and politician who rose to prominence towards the end of the Han dynasty (c. 184–220 CE) and became the de facto head of government in China during that period. In 216 CE, he was conferred the title of a vassal king – King of Wei (魏王) – by Emperor Xian, the figurehead Han emperor whom he controlled. Through his military conquests, he laid the foundation for what was to become the state of Cao Wei (220–265 CE), which was established by his son and successor, Cao Pi. Cao Cao died in 220 CE in Luoyang at the age of 65 and was posthumously honoured as "King Wu" (武王; lit. "martial king") by Emperor Xian.[3]

The location of Cao Cao's tomb has been a mystery over the centuries. According to his official biography in the Records of the Three Kingdoms (Sanguozhi), he was interred in the Gaoling (高陵; literally "high mausoleum") about one month after his death.[4] However, he was also believed to be buried elsewhere. Other purported burial sites of Cao Cao include: Xu (許; present-day Xuchang, Henan), the capital of the Han dynasty at the time; beneath the Zhang River; below the Bronze Sparrow Platform (銅雀臺), a terrace in Ye (鄴; in present-day Handan, Hebei), the capital of Cao Cao's vassal kingdom.

Another legend, which originated in the Northern Song dynasty (960–1127) and was popularised by the works of Luo Guanzhong, Pu Songling and others in later periods, says that Cao Cao had 72 tombs constructed to serve as decoys and protection against grave robbers.[1][5] The Northern Dynasty Tombs in Ci County, Handan, Hebei were initially believed to be the 72 tombs, but archaeologists later confirmed that they belonged to the imperial families of the Eastern Wei and Northern Qi dynasties and have nothing to do with Cao Cao.[6]

Discovery

The tomb was discovered in December 2008 when workers at a nearby kiln were digging for mud to make bricks. Its discovery was initially not reported. The local authorities found out only after they seized a stone tablet bearing the inscription 'King Wu of Wei' – Cao Cao's posthumous title – from grave robbers who claimed to have stolen it from the tomb. Over the following year, archaeologists recovered more than 250 relics from the tomb, including stone paintings depicting social life in Cao Cao's time, stone tablets bearing inscriptions of sacrificial objects, and several items labelled as "personal belongings" frequently used by Cao Cao, including weapons and stone pillows. The bones of three persons were also unearthed and identified to be those of a man in his 60s, a woman in her 50s and another woman in her 20s.[1][5][7]

The tomb, made of bricks, faced east and formed a shape resembling the Chinese character jia (甲; jiǎ) when viewed from above. It covered an area of roughly 740 square metres and its deepest point was about 15 metres below the ground. The underground tomb has two main chambers (front and back), four side chambers and connecting passages. An inclined passage 39.5 metres long and 9.8 metres wide leads to the underground chambers.[1][8]

The discovery of the tomb was confirmed by archaeological officials on 27 December 2009.[1]

Controversy

Since the tomb was discovered, many sceptics and experts have pointed out problems with it and raised doubts about its authenticity. Yuan Jixi, a vice dean of the Renmin University of China's School of Chinese Classics, suggested that the items in the tomb cannot be guaranteed as authentic because the tomb had been greatly disturbed by grave robbers. Yuan also noted that the most important pieces of evidence – namely the artefacts bearing the inscription 'King Wu of Wei' – may have been deliberately placed in the tomb for deceptive purposes.[9]

31 December 2009 seminar

On 31 December 2009, the Henan Provincial Institute of Archaeology invited experts from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences's Institute of Archaeology, Zhengzhou University, and Henan University to join its researchers in a seminar to discuss the findings from the tomb and respond to queries from the press. The most popular topics discussed at the seminar include:

  • Whether the tomb was a decoy (one of the 72 tombs mentioned in legend): The experts said that the legend of the 72 tombs is not reliable as compared to information from historical sources, and that the legend should not be regarded seriously. They cited the case of the Northern Dynasty Tombs in Ci County, Handan, Hebei, which were previously mistakenly believed to be the 72 tombs.[6]
  • Whether to believe the tomb robbers or archaeologists: One of the eight stone tablets bearing the inscription 'King Wu of Wei' was retrieved by the authorities from tomb robbers, while the other seven were unearthed directly from the tomb by professionals.[6] The authenticity of the tablets remain in question.
  • Whether DNA testing can confirm the identity of the male: According to the experts, the use of ancient DNA technology in archaeological research has yet to be fully developed so there may be technical difficulties. Besides, the male skeleton was not well preserved so the DNA extraction procedure may be very complicated. Even if the technology is fully functional, scientists still require DNA samples from a verified living descendant of Cao Cao to confirm the results. It is very difficult to find a living descendant of Cao Cao and verify that he/she is really a descendant of Cao Cao.[6]
  • The identities of the two females: Researchers believe that the older female is Lady Bian, who, according to her historical biography in the Sanguozhi, was buried in the Gaoling (高陵; lit. "high mausoleum") – the same place as Cao Cao.[10] The younger one is believed to be a servant.[6]
  • Whether the adjacent tomb, called the "Xigaoxue Tomb No. 1", was Cao Cao's tomb: The experts said that the first tomb is unlikely to be Cao Cao's tomb because its dimensions are smaller than the second tomb.[6]

Endorsement by the SACH

In early January 2010, in light of the controversy over the authenticity of the tomb, Han Fuzheng, a lawyer from Cangzhou, made a freedom of information (FOI) request to the State Administration of Cultural Heritage (SACH) for the disclosure of the information and assessment standards used in confirming the tomb. On 28 January, the SACH stated that the procedures associated with the excavation process, archaeological research and verification, publishing of results, etc., were all in accordance with the rules of archaeological work. This statement by the SACH effectively served as a legal endorsement of the results from the research conducted throughout 2009 which suggest that the tomb was Cao Cao's.[11]

August 2010 forum

In August 2010, 23 experts and scholars presented evidence at the National High-Level Forum on Culture of the Three Kingdoms Period held in Suzhou, Jiangsu to argue that the findings and the artefacts of the tomb are fake.[12]

During the forum, Lin Kuicheng, a historian and member of the China Federation of Literary and Art Circles, pointed out that Cao Cao should not be referred to as "King Wu of Wei" before 220 CE. After Cao Cao died in March 220 CE, his vassal king title – "King of Wei" – was inherited by his son, Cao Pi, who continued to hold the title until around December when he forced Emperor Xian, the last emperor of the Han dynasty, to abdicate in his favour. Since Cao Cao was buried about one month after his death and his funeral was most likely presided over by Cao Pi, it would be taboo to refer to Cao Cao as "King Wu of Wei" because the "King of Wei" (Cao Pi) was still living then. Furthermore, when Emperor Xian relinquished his throne to Cao Pi, he referred to Cao Pi and Cao Cao as "King of Wei" and "King Wu" respectively in his official abdication edict; Cao Cao was never referred to as "King Wu of Wei" in the edict.[13][14]

Cao Huan and Cao Yu

On 12 September 2010, the Henan Provincial Institute of Archaeology and Cultural Heritage and the Anyang County Cultural Centre published an article in the journal Kaogu (Archaeology) about the tomb. In the article, they claimed that the tomb and the adjacent one (the Xigaoxue Tomb No. 1) actually belonged to Cao Huan (the fifth and last Wei emperor) and his father Cao Yu (a son of Cao Cao) respectively. The defining piece of evidence was a seal that was initially thought to be a simple official seal, but was later discovered to be actually a seal bearing the tomb owner's name. When the seal was first revealed after it was excavated from the tomb, it was presented upside-down so the Chinese character inscribed on it in seal script did not make any sense. After the error was corrected, archaeologists recognised that the Chinese character on the seal is huan (奐; huàn), hence they deduced that the tomb was Cao Huan's. When compared with the Chinese characters inscribed on a bronze seal belonging to Cao Xiu (whose tomb's discovery was announced and confirmed in May 2010),[15] archaeologists noticed that the Chinese character on the seal from the Xigaoxue tomb bore some slight resemblance to the Chinese character cao (曹; cáo). According to the Wei Shipu (魏世譜; Genealogy of Wei), Cao Huan died at the age of 57, which was rather close to the age at which the man in the tomb died.[16][17]

Fang Beichen, a Sichuan University history professor who specialises in the Three Kingdoms period, published an essay on his personal blog about the findings from the Xigaoxue tomb and the pieces of evidence which point out that the tombs are actually the mausoleums of Cao Huan and Cao Yu.[18]

"Yan Peidong"

In 2010, Yan Peidong, a self-proclaimed scholar on the Three Kingdoms period, claimed on his microblog that he had seized irrefutable evidence that the tomb is a fake, causing a sensation on the internet in China. However, he failed to provide proof when reporters challenged him to do so. In December 2011, the public security bureau in Xingtai City, Hebei Province announced that "Yan Peidong" is actually Hu Zejun, a fugitive who has been on the run for more than six years for his involvement in numerous scams.[19][20]

Current status

In 2010, the tomb became part of the fifth batch of Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level in China.[2]

The excavation of the two tombs was completed by the end of 2010, with over 400 artefacts unearthed and 100 damaged relics restored by the provincial archaeologist team. To enhance the protection of the tomb, the local government in Anyang has established a special committee to oversee and manage the tomb. As of March 2011, the tomb is not open to the public yet even though preparatory works for its opening are underway. The government has also built a temporary exhibition hall and a supporting ring corridor.[21]

As of December 2011, it has been announced that the government is constructing a museum on the original site of the tomb which will be named 'Cao Cao Mausoleum Museum' (曹操高陵博物馆).[22][23] On 12 November 2012, a private museum in Zhengzhou donated a stele to the Cao Cao Mausoleum.[24]

References

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Xigaoxue tomb no 2.
  1. ^ a b c d e Lin, Shujuan (28 December 2009). "Tomb of legendary ruler unearthed". China Daily. Retrieved 20 June 2013.
  2. ^ a b Yang, Yuguo (3 May 2013). "河南曹操高陵少林寺入选全国重点文物保护单位 [Henan's Cao Cao Mausoleum and Shaolin Monastery are selected to be Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level]" (in Chinese). CRI online. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  3. ^ (庚子，王崩于洛陽，年六十六。 ... 謚曰武王。) Sanguozhi vol. 1.
  4. ^ (二月丁卯，葬高陵。) Sanguozhi vol. 1.
  5. ^ a b "曹操墓惊现安阳 千古之谜被破解 [Cao Cao tomb appears in Anyang, a centuries-old mystery is resolved]" (in Chinese). dahe.cn. 27 December 2009. Retrieved 20 June 2013.
  6. ^ a b c d e f Zhang, Tiyi (1 January 2010). "曹操高陵说明会:8件"魏武王"石牌7件为专家挖出 [Seminar on the Cao Cao Mausoleum: 7 out of 8 stone tablets (bearing the inscription) "King Wu of Wei" were unearthed by professionals]" (in Chinese). Dahe Daily. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  7. ^ Zhang, Shuzhuo (27 December 2009). "河南安阳考古确认曹操高陵 可能藏其遗骨(图) [Archaeologists in Anyang, Henan confirm Cao Cao's mausoleum. Remains might be found there. (pictured)]" (in Chinese). Tengxun News. Retrieved 20 June 2013.
  8. ^ "河南文物局提出确认曹操墓葬六大依据 [Henan Cultural Heritage Bureau lists out six pieces of evidence confirming Cao Cao's tomb]" (in Chinese). www.people.com.cn. 28 December 2009. Retrieved 20 June 2013.
  9. ^ Zhang, Zhongjiang (29 December 2009). "学者称曹操墓葬确认在河南安阳证据不足 [Experts say there is insufficient evidence to confirm that Cao Cao's tomb is in Anyang, Henan]" (in Chinese). Tengxun News. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  10. ^ ([太和四年] ... 其年五月，后崩。七月，合葬高陵。) Sanguozhi vol. 5.
  11. ^ Wang, Yun (29 January 2010). "国家文物局认定河南安阳东汉大墓墓主为曹操 [SACH confirms that the Eastern Han tomb in Anyang, Henan belonged to Cao Cao]" (in Chinese). Tengxun News. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  12. ^ Jiang, Wanjuan (24 August 2010). "Cao Cao's tomb: Experts reveal that findings and artifacts are fake". Global Times. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  13. ^ (咨爾魏王：昔者帝堯禪位于虞舜，舜亦以命禹，天命不于常，惟歸有德。漢道陵遲，世失其序，降及朕躬，大亂茲昏，羣兇肆逆，宇內顛覆。賴武王神武，拯茲難于四方，惟清區夏，以保綏我宗廟，豈予一人獲乂，俾九服實受其賜。今王欽承前緒，光于乃德，恢文武之大業，昭爾考之弘烈。皇靈降瑞，人神告徵，誕惟亮采，師錫朕命，僉曰爾度克恊于虞舜，用率我唐典，敬遜爾位。於戲！天之歷數在爾躬，允執其中，天祿永終；君其祗順大禮，饗茲萬國，以肅承天命。) Sanguozhi vol. 2.
  14. ^ "林奎成：曹丕稱帝前曹操並未被稱為"魏武王" [Lin Kuicheng: Before Cao Pi became emperor, Cao Cao was never referred to as 'King Wu of Wei'.]" (in Chinese). ifeng.com. 21 August 2010. Retrieved 26 June 2013.[permanent dead link]
  15. ^ "Ancient general Cao Xiu's tomb discovered in Luoyang". People's Daily Online. 18 May 2010. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  16. ^ (魏世譜曰：封帝為陳留王。年五十八，大安元年崩，謚曰元皇帝。) Wei Shipu annotation in Sanguozhi vol. 4.
  17. ^ "安阳西高穴应为曹奂墓，"曹操墓"尴尬收场（图） [The Xigaoxue tomb in Anyang should be that of Cao Huan. "Cao Cao Tomb" comes to an awkward end. (pictured)]" (in Chinese). 360doc.com. 13 September 2010. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  18. ^ Fang, Beichen (25 August 2010). "曹操墓应为曹宇、曹奂父子王原陵（之七） [The Cao Cao Tomb is actually the mausoleum of Cao Yu and Cao Huan (Part 7)]" (in Chinese). Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  19. ^ Wang, Nan; Zhu, Zhihua (5 December 2011). "曹操墓"打假先鋒"閆沛東竟是網上逃犯 [Yan Peidong, who plays the "vanguard" in arguing the case that the Cao Cao Tomb is a fake, is revealed to be actually a fugitive.]" (in Chinese). Xinhua News. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  20. ^ "Mystery scholar in Cao Cao tomb case unmasked as fraud". Want China Times. 7 December 2011. Archived from the original on 30 December 2013. Retrieved 26 June 2013. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)
  21. ^ "Preparation for Cao Cao's tomb opening ongoing, no timetable set". People's Daily Online. 29 March 2011. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  22. ^ "曹操高陵开启新的篇章 安阳将原址建博物馆 [A new chapter opens for the Cao Cao Mausoleum. Anyang government will build a museum on the original site.]" (in Chinese). chinahuanqiu.com. 28 December 2009. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  23. ^ "曹操高陵考古建设未受争议干扰 安阳筹建博物馆 [Archaeological research on Cao Cao Mausoleum not affected by criticism. Anyang government considers building a museum.]" (in Chinese). China News. 6 December 2011. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  24. ^ "民办博物馆向曹操高陵捐赠石碑 盼更多藏家行动 [Private museum donates stele to Cao Cao Mausoleum. It is hoped that more collectors would follow suit.]" (in Chinese). China News. 13 November 2012. Retrieved 26 June 2013.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cao_Cao_Mausoleum&oldid=749451835"