After the news of the discovery and confirmation of Cao Cao’s tomb came out, it aroused a lot of doubts among professionals and ordinary people. The discovery and confirmation of Cao Cao's tomb were the actions of official and professional archaeological institutions, and their authority is unquestionable. Most of the people who raised questions were experts with profound knowledge in various industries such as history, paleography, archaeology, and ancient literature. The basis for the doubts was also It is very true that even ordinary people often raise some logical and insightful questions. Looking at the doubts from all parties, the vast majority of people agree that the age of the Xigaoxue Tomb is located at the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty or the Cao Wei period. It is relatively large in scale. In addition, the owner of the tomb should be closely related to the ancient Ye City. The above three points are not controversial. However, more than 80% of the doubters do not agree that the tomb owner is Cao Cao. The disputes mainly focus on the following aspects.
Professional disputes Zhang Guoan, a doctor of Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties history at Beijing Normal University, believes that archaeologists do not have the responsibility to determine the owner of the tomb. For archaeological materials, they get the first-come-first-served, but this cannot be the case. Replace the study of history. For example, the word "King Wu of Wei" involves complex rituals, context and many other issues. How to interpret it is a historical issue. Determining the owner of the tomb is not an archaeological issue. Archaeologists should publish all materials as soon as possible for academic research. Don’t jump to conclusions yourself. Other experts in various disciplines such as ancient literature, paleography, and epigraphy have expressed their doubts about the professional direction of my research. Pan Weibin, captain of the Cao Cao Gaoling Archaeological Team, and Liu Qingzhu, former director of the Institute of Archeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and member of the Academy of Social Sciences, believe that the questioning of non-archaeological professionals lacks professionalism, with laymen pretending to be experts and academic issues turning into entertainment.
Regional dispute
1. People in Henan believe that the current Xigaoxue Tomb is undoubtedly the tomb of Cao Cao;
2. Hebei Handan City Historical Society Chairman Liu Xinchang and others said that there is insufficient evidence to convince the public that the Xigaoxue Tomb is Cao Cao's tomb, and the location does not conform to the tradition of imperial tombs. The real Cao Cao tomb should be in Hebei, not far from the current Xigaoxue Tomb (to the west on the other side of the Zhang River) in the northern mountains). This opinion belongs to the mainstream opinion in Hebei.
3. Zhang Guoan, a Ph.D. in the history of the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties from Beijing Normal University, believes that Cao Cao’s tomb may be in the area of ??Liangmagang Village (ancient name Yema Gang) southeast of Xigaoxue Village.
4. Zhang Ligang, a folk scholar in Handan, Hebei (whose online name is "Shan Jianzi") believes that Cao Cao's tomb is in Suojing Village, Ci County, Handan, Hebei. He also proposed that Cao Cao's tomb should be composed of Cao Cao's tomb, accompanying tombs, etc. Large tombs form a group of tombs. For details, please see the "Cao Cao Xiling Research" blog in the reference materials. This opinion is relatively unconventional and has relatively few supporters. The outstanding point is that if Cao Cao's tomb is really here, then its "feng shui" location is ideal.
5. In addition, Bozhou, Anhui Province believes that Bozhou has a recognized tomb of Cao Cao’s family, and has successfully excavated the tombs of Cao Cao’s daughter Cao Xian, Cao Cao’s father, grandfather and other clan members. From this, it is judged that Cao Cao’s tomb may also be in the Bozhou, Anhui. Debate over evidence Yuan Jixi, deputy dean of the School of Chinese Studies at Renmin University of China who studies literature from the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties, said, "I don't think any of these evidences are first-hand evidence, nor are they very strong proofs." However, archaeological expert Sun Xinmin pointed out that eight of the same kind Seven of the stone tablets engraved with the inscription "King Wu of Wei" were unearthed by scientific excavations, and only one was recovered from tomb robbers.
Location dispute
1. It is currently determined that the Xigaoxue Tomb is the tomb of Cao Cao. The literature records are consistent with the Ximen Leopard Temple in Yecheng, the Tongque Terrace and the later discovered epitaph of Lu Qian. Relative position is an important basis. However, the locations of Yecheng and Ximen Leopard Temple have changed many times in history. Ximen Leopard Temple even has more than ten locations. Lu Qian’s epitaph was not taken from the tomb, and the exact source cannot be determined. Therefore, it seems that it is based on this to determine Cao Cao’s tomb. insufficient. In addition, assuming that Cao Cao's tomb can be found at the relative position marked by Lu Qian's epitaph, in turn, Lu Qian's tomb should also be found based on the Gaoling (Cao Cao's Tomb) Atlas of Cao Cao's Tomb, but so far Lu Qian's tomb has not been found at the corresponding location.
2. Archaeological excavations have proven that there are only two tombs in the same cemetery. The central axis is between the two tombs. The two tombs are symmetrically distributed in the south and north, 30 meters apart, and facing the same west direction. East. "Three Kingdoms" Volume 1 "Wudi Ji" records that in June of the 23rd year of Jian'an (AD 218), Cao Cao issued the following instructions regarding the planning and construction of his cemetery: Those buried in ancient times must live in barren land.
On the west plain of the Ximen Leopard Temple is the Shouling Mausoleum. Because of its high base, it cannot be sealed or planted. "The Rites of Zhou": "The tomb man is in charge of the cemetery. All the princes are in front of the left and right, and the ministers and officials are in the back." The Han system is also called accompanying the tomb. His ministers, ministers, and generals who have made meritorious deeds should accompany Shouling; their vast area is Zhao territory, so that they can be compatible. It can be seen from this that as far as Cao Cao personally arranged his own cemetery plan, he himself occupied the main position where the late king was, and his position was at the most respected top. There could be no other tombs on the left and right sides with him; The princes and ministers are arranged in order on the left and right in front of them according to their meritorious status. The left is the honorable position and the right is the humble position. Obviously, the current archaeological excavation results are very different from Cao Cao's own regulations and the etiquette at that time. In addition, Cao Cao required the princes and ministers to be buried near his mausoleum, which means that Cao Cao's tomb is a large group of tombs. However, after detailed inspection, there are only two tombs in the mausoleum.
3. The historical tradition of the location of the capital and the mausoleum area does not exist in the southwest of the capital. This is true for the imperial mausoleums of the Han Dynasty, the known mausoleums of the Wei Dynasty, and the imperial mausoleums of the Western Jin Dynasty. The Zen mausoleum of Emperor Xian of the Han Dynasty is also in Shanyang City. The northwest is considered the northeast according to the direction of Luoyang, without exception. Southwest belongs to the Kun position in Bagua, and is often the direction for building toilets in construction. Tomb No. 2 in the Xigao Cave is oriented east-west to south, not northeast as imagined, and receives ritual worship on the Bronze Bird Platform. Therefore, this tomb is identified as the tomb of Cao Cao, and this is also a hurdle that cannot be bypassed.
4. Documents related to Cao Cao's descendants, such as Cao Pi, have repeatedly shown that Cao Cao's tomb is located in the words "A" and "Gang", which are closely related to "Mountain". However, the Xigaoxiao Tomb is on a plain with no mountains nearby.
The dispute over the owner of the tomb
1. Pan Weibin, the captain of the Cao Cao Gaoling Archaeological Team, Liu Qingzhu, the former director of the Institute of Archeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and a member of the Academy of Social Sciences, and others believe that the Xigaoxue Tomb The owner of the tomb is Cao Cao.
2. Xu Pingfang (late), a famous archaeologist and member of the expert group of the State Administration of Cultural Heritage: The Xigaoxue Tomb can never be Cao Cao’s tomb, because the shape of Tomb No. 2 in Xigaoxue is similar to that of Cao Xiu’s tomb It is of the same level, that is, the level of Hou, not the level of king or emperor. The Xigaoxue Tomb is certainly of archaeological value, but it should be classified as a tomb from the late Eastern Han Dynasty. The reason why Cao Cao's tomb is questioned is not because of the layman's theory, but because the evidence is unreliable.
3. Yuan Jixi, an expert on Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties literature and deputy dean of the School of Chinese Studies at Renmin University of China: The evidence that "Cao Cao's tomb is in Anyang" announced by relevant parties is not first-hand material, and it is not very strong proof. Releasing relevant information without direct evidence goes against the serious spirit of academic research. It cannot be denied that there are other possibilities for the identification of the owner of the Xigao Cave Tomb.
4. Fang Beichen, a professor at the School of History and Culture of Sichuan University and a famous expert on the culture of the Three Kingdoms, believes that the Xigaoxue Tomb is not Cao Cao’s tomb based on the study of etiquette, and based on the burial objects, the shape, orientation, and specifications of the tomb As well as the analysis of the age of the skeleton of the tomb owner, the owner of tomb No. 2 in the Xigaoxiao Tomb is Cao Yu (the son of Cao Cao and Mrs. Huan, and the same father and mother as Cao Chong), and the owner of tomb No. 1 is Cao Huan (Cao Yu). His son was not buried in an empty tomb).
5. Zhang Guoan, a Ph.D. in the history of the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties from Beijing Normal University, believes that judging from the location, burial objects, and shape of the tomb combined with historical records, the owner of the Xigaoxue Tomb is Cao Huan.
6. Ni Fangliu, a researcher on the history of tomb robbing in China and a member of the Jiangsu Provincial Archaeological Society: Everything that can identify the tomb owner has a unique direction, which is the so-called "ironclad evidence." None of the things unearthed in the Xigaoxue tombs are "unique", and they can all have completely opposite interpretations. For example, "King Wu of Wei often used a big halberd to carry tigers." This is the key thing to identify the owner of the tomb as Cao Cao, but it is precisely this thing that reveals that the owner of the tomb must not be "King Wu of Wei" himself. Generally speaking, "King Wu of Wei" would not write his name on his belongings and then bury them with them. Cao Cao would not do it, he was afraid that others would find his tomb. 7. In addition, Hu Juezhao, a history professor at the Xi'an Municipal Party School and an expert on the history of the Three Kingdoms, believes that the "Cao Cao Tomb" in Anyang is actually the tomb of Yao Xiang, a warlord during the Five Hus and Sixteen Kingdoms period.
8. Liu Xinchang, president of the Handan Historical Society who has been engaged in historical research for more than 30 years and authored the monograph "Study on Cao Cao's Tomb" said: "Cao Cao's tomb is not an isolated tomb but a group of tombs. If this tomb is If it cannot be confirmed that it is Cao Cao's tomb, but it is a companion tomb, it is most likely the tomb of Xiahou Dun, Cao Cao's most trusted general.
”
9. Qian Yuzhi, a well-known scholar in the field of ancient culture research in Sichuan, believes that the tomb owner of the Xigaoxue Tomb may be the tomb of Chang Lin, a famous official in the Cao Wei period.
10 Mr. Xu Guangji, a famous Chinese archaeologist and former executive deputy director of the Institute of Archeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, deputy director of the Academic Committee, and secretary-general of the Chinese Archaeological Society, believes that this tomb is likely to be a companion tomb of Cao Cao's tomb.
11. Historical scholar and writer Liu Bingguang believes that the owner of the tomb is Shi Hu, the third emperor of the Later Zhao Dynasty during the Five Hus and Sixteen Kingdoms period.
Debate on the title
Except for Cao Cao in history. In addition, during the Sixteen Kingdoms period, Ran Min, Yao Xiang, etc. also had the title of "King Wu of Wei". However, the archaeological unit only pointed to Cao Cao on the eight stone tablets with the inscription "King Wu of Wei". This approach was also questioned by some people. ; Some scholars suspect that Cao Cao's funeral was presided over by Cao Pi. When Cao Pi succeeded him as King of Wei, he should not have called his father "King Wu of Wei" directly, but only "King Wu"; even if he wanted to use his full name, he should have used "Han Wei" "King Wu" rather than "King Wu of Wei"; scholars use this to judge that the tomb discovered is not Cao Cao's tomb.
Confusion about the Remains The excavation site in Henan did not contain the remains of Empress Bian, Cao Cao's wife who lived to be 70 years old. It proves that this tomb is not Cao Cao's tomb. Queen Bian died in the fourth year of Taihe and was buried with Cao Cao in Gaoling. Queen Bian married Cao Cao when she was 20 years old and was Cao Pi's biological mother. Cao Pi lived forty years, and Queen Bian was already over sixty years old at this time. Later, he died in the fourth year of Taihe at the age of seventy. Other documents record that Cao Chong's remains were moved from Cao Cao's tomb, but the actual archaeological findings are inconsistent with this. In addition, some scholars have suggested that the remains of emperors of the same period were not consistent with this. If the tomb of Queen Bian is not found near the southeast of Cao Cao's tomb, it is definitely not Cao Cao's tomb.
The suspicion of the seal is based on " "Jin Shu·Li Zhi", Cao Pi built a stone chamber in the tomb passage of Cao Cao's tomb and placed a golden seal. Not only did the Henan excavation site not have a golden seal, there was not even a stone chamber containing the seal, which proves that this tomb is not Cao Cao's tomb. "Er, pearls, jade, copper and iron are not allowed to be given away." Cao Pi did not even dare to put the golden seal into the tomb. However, gold, silver, pearls and jade were unearthed at the Henan excavation site, proving that this tomb is not Cao Cao's tomb. In addition, according to the published archaeological report of this tomb, A copper seal was found in the tomb. The seal script on it was verified by ancient calligraphy scholars to be the character "Huan". The texture of the seal and the text on it were inconsistent with Cao Cao's identity.
Yan Peidong, a scholar suspected of forgery, reported to the media. It was clearly pointed out that the leader of the archaeological team of Cao Cao's tomb was involved in the fraud, because after the archaeological team received 2.3 million yuan in excavation funds from Anyang, it was difficult to report the empty tomb to the other party. Pan Weibin, the leader of the archaeological team of Cao Cao's tomb and an associate researcher at the Henan Provincial Institute of Archeology, accepted this. During the interview, he said that he would wait until Yan Peidong released the evidence before making any reply. However, Yan Peidong was confirmed as a fugitive by the Hebei police in December 2011, and his real name was Hu Zejun.