Talk:Terracotta Army

standing guard?

I heard à university lecture by Eugene Wang saying that the soldiers were not standing guard nor ready for combat, since not wearing helmets.

Wiki Education assignment: Archaeology and Human Diversity, Anthro 1101

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2025 and 18 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rkstg9090 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rkstg9090 (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2025

Proposed addition: 1985 Pasadena exhibition

Proposed addition: Pasadena exhibition (1985)

I propose adding the following subsection under the "Exhibitions" section, after the mention of the 1982 Melbourne exhibition, to document an early U.S. display of Terracotta Army artifacts.

Pasadena exhibition (1985)

The Terracotta Army has been exhibited in numerous locations worldwide, helping to promote international awareness of Qin dynasty art and funerary practices. In November 1985, an exhibition of artifacts related to the Terracotta Army was presented at Ambassador College in Pasadena, California. Organized by the Ambassador Foundation in cooperation with the Cultural Relics Preservation Department of Shaanxi Province, the display included life-sized warrior figures and smaller replicas representing soldiers, horses, and chariots from the mausoleum of Qin Shi Huang. The exhibition sought to promote cultural understanding between China and the United States and was among the earlier displays of Terracotta Army figures in North America.

Source: David H. Evans, "Pasadena AC Campus Displays Chinese 'Secret Army' Artifacts," The Worldwide News, vol. XIII, no. 21 (November 18, 1985), p. 1. Pmpca7 (talk) 03:20, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Worldwide News appears to be the internal newspaper of the Armstrongist Worldwide Church of God. We need a much better source for this than the newspaper of a controversial fundamentalist Christian church. Day Creature (talk) 04:28, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

References

Making Exhibitions into a table

I would like to propose making the exhibitions section into a table, and keeping only the paragraphs on the most noteable ones. It would allow for more clarity, especially regarding the movements in the 2010's. If people like the idea I'm obviously happy to implement it. Proposed formatting below, very happy for edit suggestions. I am unsure of the editing convention of citations within tables, so happy for that to move as well.

List of Terracotta Warrior Exhibitions outside of China

Museum	Dates	Exhibition title	Notes	Reference
Western Australian Museum	June 2025 - February 2026	Terracotta Warriors. Legacy of the First Emperor

Loiszon (talk) 00:57, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm doubtful if it's necessary in this article. My opinion is that there is too much information in that section already, and some of that seem unimportant. It's just looking like an indiscriminate collection of information, and we don't really need a laundry lists of exhibitions in this article. It would be preferable to remove a lot of the content in that section. If you think the exhibitions are notable by themselves, then maybe consider a separate article like Exhibitions of artifacts from the tomb of Tutankhamun (and you can add the exhibition at Mausoleum Site Museum itself) so that you can remove most of what's in that section and just give a short summary here. Hzh (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

References

Since the emperor’s tomb itself is mentioned…

Damage to any uncovered artifacts isn’t the only concern with excavations in and around the mausoleum. The tomb itself is claimed to be heavily contaminated with mercury by the Records of the Grand Historian in their description. It’s also been discovered the land in the region has elevated levels of environmental mercury contamination from millennia of cinnabar mining. Any new excavations have careful consideration to the risks of mercury contamination in the soil, groundwater, dust, and potentially the uncovered artifacts given Huang’s obsession with immortality and the role the element played in his later years and death. https://archaeologymag.com/2025/01/source-of-mercury-mausoleum-of-first-emperor/

Not directly relevant to mainland China, but the US government’s guidelines for mercury exposure would probably prevent opening the tomb itself entirely. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10851382/

If the Grand Historian is to be believed, the sealed tomb is a veritable lake of elemental mercury making opening it an environmental disaster waiting to happen. Sometimes the risks associated with archaeological activity far outweigh the benefits. ~2026-19475-42 (talk) 02:59, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Precedents and legacy

Poorly explained, see this. Cwdysg (talk) 11:26, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Personal analysis is irrelevant here, only valid sourced content is acceptable. Hzh (talk) 15:09, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Historical research is always influenced by people's positionalities, which can never be avoided. The English-speaking community is also no exception. So I don't intend to edit the article itself, I only explain why it's not objective. Cwdysg (talk) 23:57, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

It's just your opinion, and your opinion is not objective, and what you wrote did not show that the article is not objective. It's just uninteresting bits of randomly cobbled together "facts" that don't illuminate the issue. It belongs to a forum, and Wikipedia talk page is WP:NOTFORUM. Hzh (talk) 08:20, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Everything I said is straightforward and factual. Which part don't you understand? It shows why the sources referenced in this section should be replaced--it's not that "only very few figurines" are known before Qin, not that the style was “dramatically new” to the Chinese. In fact, the molds used for making metal artifacts are exactly terracotta artifacts, so undoubtedly those figurines could be considered important the precedents of the Terracotta Army. Also, the mention of the Taerpo horseman is misleading, even the descriptions are illogical and wrong. Cwdysg (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

What sources? You only gave one source from Quora, and Quora is not considered reliable per Wikipedia:Quora and not allowed except under special circumstances. That source is basically rubbish, it doesn't even understand the issue or objects it shows. The issue is about large life-size naturalistic figures in China, and those weren't large naturalistic life-size figures. It gives a figure from Sanxingdui as an example from China, but Sanxingdui wasn't part of China (Shu was only conquered by Qin hundreds of years later). Sanxingdui figures are not known for their naturalism, they are always stylized (you just have to look at the outsized hands and hairdo). It says "China used terracotta figurines as a funeral art since Shang dynasty", but it gives bronze figures. It's typical junk from forums, the author doesn't even know what they are writing (Bactria is even given as Bacteria, i.e. germs, I'm not sure if this person is real). Don't use rubbish site as source. The article could be written better, but what you gave is just junk. Hzh (talk) 07:46, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not usually blunt but what follows is common sense. History (or archaeology, whatever) has a pretty low barrier to entry. Anyone who can read and write can do it. Historians are bad at logic, which is why they love to casually build narratives out of historical figures and events, kind of like writing fanfiction. Their studies are also known for being heavily influenced by nationalism or reverse nationalism, which hurts their credibility and makes the field of history look unscholarly, especially on certain topics. Moreover, most of them are not Chinese. I've seen many cases over the years where they drew conclusions that make Chinese people laugh because of the lack of common knowledge about China. Ironically, they can easily pass so‑called peer review, because their peers are essentially no different from themselves. Thus, that they majored in history while I majored in computer science does not mean they are inherently more correct than me, and when they make logical mistakes that are evident, I, or say anyone, even a child, is qualified to point them out.

You still haven't answered me: how can they identify the ethnicities based on the appearance of sculptures that are not 100% naturalistic, even just cherry‑picking some of the features? Why can the theme of an artifact determine its technique origin? Why do they believe terracotta artifacts were so unique and advanced that their precedents must have been made of terracotta too? Why do they "happen to" keep ignoring those important figurines?

You judge the reliability of that Quora answer by typos and formatting. You can't distinguish between the Chinese state and Chinese culture. When it comes to ancient culture, we focus on cultural spheres, or macro-cultural spheres composed of several adjacent cultural spheres. Given the long history of close interaction between Southwestern cultures (like Sanxingdui) and the Central Plains, what's the point of excluding them from the "Chinese culture" in the broad sense? Anyway, your argument is representative, because it's exactly the kind of boring word games that historians love to do. You will see a historian write a 500‑page book to make it seemingly professional, but actually it's full of nonsense. Victor H. Mair and Christopher I. Beckwith are two examples of them.

Don't reply me anymore. Just like the field of history, Wikipedia has been helpful but never reliable, and I've never expected to make it reliable. Cwdysg (talk) 04:15, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM. You have no interest in editing the article to improve it, you just want to complain about that article, using an unusable source to attack it. I'm not here to answer for that article, simply to point out that we don't edit based on personal opinions, but reliable sources. That that source is junk is pretty clear (it's clearly not a typo because it was repeated suggesting the author did think the country is spelt like germs), there is therefore nothing to discuss. You can go to another forum and complain, this is not the place. Hzh (talk) 07:28, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

LIDAR & GPR

This (https://www.ganjingworld.com/video/1ingja6a87q2RTiWnXdftG5mt1q31c) tells of Albert Lin's (apparently the AL explorer listed in Wikipedia) use of lidar and GPR to study of underneath the warriors: a mass burial with a central burial of possibly a prince. Other popular articles also tell of this research, e.g., https://newsusstareverydays.com/thaohtv/albert-10m/, https://aishorty.com › articles › a9d9800f-88d4-4d99-9304-d1379518831d . Kdammers (talk) 00:43, 2 August 2026 (UTC)