Cao Cao Mausoleum



The Cao Cao Mausoleum, also known as the Wei Mausoleum and the Xigaoxue Tomb No. 2, is a tomb situated in Xigaoxue Village, Anfeng Township, Anyang County, Anyang, Henan, China. 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. In 2010, the tomb became part of the fifth batch of Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level in China.

Historical background
Cao Cao (155–220) was a warlord and politician who rose to prominence towards the end of the Han Dynasty (c. 184–220) and became the de facto head of government in China during that period. In 216, 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), established by his son and successor Cao Pi during the Three Kingdoms period (220–280). Cao Cao died in 220 in Luoyang at the age of 65 and was posthumously honoured as "King Wu" (武王; lit. "martial king") by Emperor Xian.

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; lit. "high mausoleum") about one month after his death. However, there were others who believed that he was buried elsewhere: near Xu (許; present-day Xuchang, Henan), the Han capital 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 his vassal kingdom.

Another legend, which originated during 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. The Northern Dynasty Tombs in Ci County, Handan, Hebei were initially thought 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.

Discovery
The tomb was discovered in December 2008 when workers at a nearby kiln were digging for mud to make bricks. Its discovery was not reported and the local authorities knew of it only when they seized a stone tablet carrying 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 featuring social life in Cao Cao's time; stone tablets bearing inscriptions of sacrificial objects; 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 were identified to be those of a man in his 60s, a woman in her 50s and another woman in her 20s.

The tomb, made of bricks, faced east and formed a shape resembling the Chinese character jia (甲) 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 basically comprises two main chambers (front and back), four side chambers and connecting passages. An inclined passage 39.5 metres long and 9.8 metres wide led to the underground chambers.

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

Controversy
Since the discovery of the tomb, there have been many skeptics and experts who pointed out problems with it and raised doubts about its authenticity. Yuan Jixi, a vice dean from the School of Chinese Classics in the Renmin University of China, suggested that the items in the tomb cannot be guaranteed as original because the tomb had been greatly disturbed by grave robbers, and that the most important pieces of evidence — the artefacts bearing the inscription 'King Wu of Wei' — may have been deliberately placed in the tomb (for deceptive purposes).

31 December 2009 seminar
On 31 December 2009, the Henan Provincial Institute of Archaeology invited experts from the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Zhengzhou University and Henan University to join its researchers in a seminar to discuss about 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 it 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.
 * 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. 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 this complicates the DNA extraction procedure. Another problem is that even if the technology is completely functional, scientists still require DNA samples from a verified living descendant of Cao Cao to confirm the results and it is difficult to find and verify one.
 * 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. The younger one is believed to be a servant.
 * 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.

Endorsement by the SACH
In early January 2010, in the light of the controversy over the authenticity of the tomb, Han Fuzheng (a lawyer from Cangzhou, Hebei) 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.

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 were fake.

During the forum, Lin Kuicheng, a historian and a 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 his son Cao Pi ended the Eastern Han Dynasty and founded the state of Cao Wei. After Cao Cao died in March 220, his vassal king title — "King of Wei" — was inherited by Cao Pi, who continued to hold the title until around December when he forced the last Han ruler, Emperor Xian, to abdicate in his favour. Since Cao Cao was buried about one month after his death and his funeral was presumably presided over by Cao Pi, to refer to him as "King Wu of Wei" would be considered taboo because the King of Wei (Cao Pi) was still living then. Besides, 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 statement; Cao Cao was never referred to as "King Wu of Wei" in the statement.

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 magazine Kaogu (考古; Archaeology) about the tomb, in which they claimed that the tomb and the adjacent one (the Xigaoxue Tomb No. 1) actually belonged to Cao Huan (the fifth and last ruler of Cao Wei) 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 name of the owner of the tomb. 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 reads huan (奐), hence they deduced that the tomb owner was Cao Huan. 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), archaeologists noticed that the Chinese character on the seal from the Xigaoxue tomb bore some slight resemblance to the Chinese character for cao (曹). 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.

Fang Beichen, a Sichuan University history professor who specialises in the Three Kingdoms period, published on his personal blog an essay 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.

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.

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. , 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.

, 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). On 12 November 2012, a private museum in Zhengzhou donated a stele to the Cao Cao Mausoleum.

"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, Hebei 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.