Terracotta Army

The Terracotta Army is a group of life-sized clay sculptures of soldiers, horses, and chariots buried in pits near Xi'an, Shaanxi, as part of the mausoleum complex of Qin Shi Huang, who unified China in 221 BCE and became its first emperor. Its figures are usually dated to the late 3rd century BCE, and they are often described as one of the most important archaeological finds of the 20th century. The site was inscribed on the World Heritage List by UNESCO in 1987, and it remains one of the best-known sources of evidence for the military, craft production, and burial customs of the Qin dynasty and the wider history of China.

The entry first sets out the historical background of the Qin unification and the construction of the emperor's tomb, then follows the 1974 discovery and the layout of the pits. It goes on to describe how the figures were made, the individual variation among them, their original painted colours, and the other structures and grave goods found in the mausoleum area. It then covers the debates over the purpose of the army, the damage to the site, the research and conservation history, and the Han-era and later artistic traditions that followed.

Qin unification and the emperor's tomb

The burial project was tied to the political rise of Qin Shi Huang. By 221 BCE, the king had unified a group of warring kingdoms and taken the name Qin Shi Huang Di, the First Emperor of Qin. The tomb's design reflected this new order. The layout of the mausoleum is modeled on the layout of Xianyang, the capital of the Qin dynasty, which was divided into inner and outer cities. Because the tomb reproduced the capital, it can be read as an extension of imperial administration into the afterlife, not only as a private grave.

The chronology is also tied to the king's accession. Sources place the start of work in 246 BCE, when the future emperor was still a boy. Work on the mausoleum began in 246 BCE, soon after Emperor Qin (then aged 13) succeeded his father as King of Qin. This means construction began while he was alive and still ruling only one of several competing states. Some accounts separate the two phases: the early work came first, and its full-scale construction only started after he had conquered the six other major states and unified China in 221 BCE. The phase that followed was much larger, and it was tied to the new empire's resources.

The traditional account of the labour force is large. Sima Qian reports that the project eventually involved 700,000 conscripted workers. Other accounts describe the workers as convicts. One source states that a reported 700,000 convicts laboured during the last thirteen years of construction. Modern historians question the size of this figure. One estimate proposed by historian John Man revised this down to more likely around 16,000. Another suggestion is that the 700,000 figure probably includes the broader construction force across all Qin megaprojects, not solely the tomb. Archaeological evidence of mass production is often used to support a large workforce, even when the exact number is uncertain.

The construction period is usually given as roughly four decades. The mausoleum was constructed over 38 years from 246 to 208 BC. The emperor died in 210 BCE, which means that work continued for years after his death. The sources also disagree on the completion date and some accounts place it in 208 BCE, around 39 years after work started.

The main textual source is the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji), compiled by Sima Qian during the Han dynasty. Sima wrote approximately 100 years after the emperor's death in 210 BCE, so his account is separated from the events by a long interval. His description of the tomb is general rather than detailed. It mentions palaces and picturesque towers for a hundred officials, as well as countless rare artifacts and valuables. It also describes the rivers of the empire being replicated in the tomb using mercury, and a ceiling with celestial stars. Notably, Sima Qian also made no mention of the now world-famous Terracotta Army. The army therefore has to be understood through archaeology rather than through the historical text.

The 1974 discovery and early excavation

The find came during a drought. In spring 1974, Shaanxi was suffering from severe dryness, and a farmer named Yang Zhifa, along with five of his brothers and a neighbor, decided to dig a new well in a wasteland near Mount Li. The diggers were working near Xi'an when Yang Zhifa's hoe struck a hard object, and he first took it for an iron block before he uncovered what resembled a pottery figure. Within days the news had reached the local museum, and the museum promptly captured the attention of archaeologists.

The curator, Zhao Kangmin, was the figure who turned the fragments into a scientific find. Under his guidance, the initial restoration of the fragments began in April, and about two months later two life-sized figures wearing armour and belts had been restored. The discovery site lay approximately 1.5 kilometers (0.9 miles) east of the Qin Shi Huang Mausoleum mound, which showed that the pits were connected to the emperor's burial complex. Official recognition of Zhao as the discoverer came later, in 1990.

Zhao had reportedly tried to keep the find confidential, but the news moved up the chain of command. The news reached the top of the Chinese leadership, which did not order the warriors' destruction as Zhao had feared. Instead, a formal excavation was organized and more than 500 warriors were unearthed within months. A joint team drawn from provincial and county bodies entered the pit site in mid-July 1974, and a large-scale archaeological excavation was officially launched that summer. The first pit found, which is now the largest, was the one the early digging had struck.

The early work quickly showed that the site was much larger than the first pit. In 1976, two additional pits of soldiers were uncovered, and the excavators identified further features. Modern surveys have shown the scale of the wider necropolis: ground-penetrating radar and core sampling have measured the area to be approximately 98 square kilometres (38 sq mi). The mausoleum area as a whole has been described in terms of more than six hundred pits over a 22 square mile (56 square kilometer) area, although the figures vary between sources and the excavation of many pits remains incomplete. Among the pits, the fourth was found empty, which excavators have linked to the project's interruption.

The site was opened to the public while work continued. On October 1, 1979, the Terracotta Warriors and Horses Museum was established at the original site of Pit 1 and officially opened to the public. Estimates of the number of figures differ: one 2007 estimate put the three pits containing the Terracotta Army hold more than 8,000 soldiers, 130 chariots with 520 horses, and 150 cavalry horses, while the figures for Pit 1 alone are usually given as over six thousand. Today the find is widely regarded as one of the most significant archaeological discoveries of the 20th century, and it quickly became known worldwide after its discovery.

Layout of the four pits

In the relic site, there are total 4 underground pits found and named Pit 1, Pit 2, Pit 3 and Pit 4 according to the unearthed sequence. Each pit has a distinct plan and content, and the differences between them are the main evidence for how the army was organized in the Qin period.

Pit 1: the battle line

Pit 1 is the largest of the four, and its footprint is usually given as about 230 metres long by 62 metres wide. Eleven corridors, divided by ten earth-rammed partition walls, are paved with pottery bricks on which the terracotta figures were placed. The roof was built from heavy timbers, covered with layers of fiber mats on which fine soil was filled. The figures are arranged as a formation rather than as a single block. At the front stands a vanguard of three rows of crossbowmen, followed by the main infantry force organized into 38 columns. Almost all of the figures face east. Scholars read this orientation as a sign that the pit represented the right flank of the army, positioned to face east—the direction from which threats to the Qin state historically emerged. The pit holds most of the roughly 6,000 figures recorded in the first excavations.

Pit 2: the mixed force

Pit 2 lies about 20 metres north of Pit 1, and its plan is irregular, with an "L" shape. Its contents differ sharply from those of Pit 1. Pit 2 consists of mixed military forces in four arrays, archers, war chariots, cavalrymen and infantrymen. The four arrays appear to have functioned on their own, but they could be combined into one complete battle formation. The four arrays seemed to exist independently, but could be assembled immediately to constitute a complete battle formation during the war times. For this reason, Pit 2 is often treated as evidence of how different branches of the Qin army worked together. It is also generally interpreted as a guard formation. Pit 2 has cavalry and infantry units as well as war chariots and is thought to represent a military guard.

Pit 3: the command post

Pit 3 is the smallest pit and the most unusual in form. Its plan is U-shaped, it houses 22 armored infantrymen in its north wing, and 42 in the south wing. Unlike the other pits, its soldiers do not face a common direction. While the military formations in the others face east, as if in preparation to be deployed away from the mound, the soldiers here face each other, as if expecting a commander to enter from the central chamber. The pit's contents include a war chariot and officers, and it is the command post, with high-ranking officers and a war chariot. Its area is about 524 square metres, which makes it much smaller than the other pits.

Pit 4: the empty pit

Pit 4 is the only one of the four that contains no figures. Its plan is also different from the other pits. Its size is roughly 75 meters (246 feet) long from north to south and 48 meters (157.5 feet) wide from east to west, covering a total area of 3,600 square meters. Its emptiness has prompted several interpretations.

The most common explanation is that the project was left unfinished. A fourth pit remained empty, suggesting that the burial pit was left unfinished at the time the emperor died. A related view holds that the work stopped because of the upheavals that followed the emperor's death. Pit Four was discovered but found empty, leading archaeologists to conclude that construction was interrupted by the political chaos following Qin Shi Huang's death and the subsequent fall of the Qin Dynasty. Because the pit's position sits between Pit 2 and Pit 3, some scholars expected it to hold the central division of the army. Archaeologist Yuan Zhongyi, the first curator of the Terracotta Army Museum, proposed that armies were typically organized into three divisions in ancient China, including the left army, right army, and central army.

A minority view challenges the idea that the pit was intended for figures at all. Some historians argue that Pit 4 served only as a soil extraction trench for the other pits' construction, rather than being intended for housing terracotta warriors and horses. This interpretation is supported by the fact that unlike other terracotta army pits, Pit 4 lacks the characteristic sloping entrance ramps. The question remains open, and the interpretation of Pit 4 bears on the wider question of whether the underground army was completed as planned.

Manufacture of the figures

Modular construction and moulds

The figures were not carved from a single block of clay. Each one was built from separately formed parts, and different parts such as the head, torso, arms, and legs were created separately and then joined together. This approach allowed bodies to be produced in bulk while the heads retained individual character. Hollow and solid sections were built differently: the body and arms of warriors are hollow, but the legs and feet are solid, and the hollow lower legs were formed either by rolling a flat slab of clay into a cylindrical shape or by coiling strips of clay on top of each other.

How many moulds the workshops used remains an open question. One commonly cited estimate suggests that eight face moulds were most likely used, and then clay was added to provide individual facial features. Such figures should be treated cautiously, because the number depends on how researchers distinguish between mould-made and hand-modelled faces. What is clearer is that warrior heads are made using molds, with individual features added after casting. Craftsmen add mouths, ears, eyebrows, facial hair, and headgear (varying based on rank).

Raw materials and temper

The main material appears to have been local clay. Experts have confirmed that the main material used for molding the terracotta warriors and horses was local "yellow clay" taken from the northern foothills of Mount Li, a material that has strong viscosity and good plasticity, providing basic conditions for the shaping of the terracotta figures. To reduce cracking as the clay dried and was fired, a certain amount of grit containing quartz, mica, and feldspar was mixed into the clay.

Organisation of production

The most significant evidence concerns how the clay was prepared and shared out. A 2017 study in the journal Antiquity compared microscopic analysis of the life-sized statues with other ceramic artefacts from the mausoleum. It concluded that clay was processed centrally before being distributed to different local workshops in a highly organised system of labour and craft specialisation. The researchers also reported that a portion of those workers gathered clay from nearby deposits and prepared it in at least three forms, and that on-site or nearby workshops used different signature clay recipes for terra-cotta warriors, parts of mostly bronze waterfowl figures and paving bricks. Accountability was built into the system: each workshop was required to inscribe its name on items produced to ensure quality control. This mark allowed later historians to trace which workshops had made which objects, including tiles and other utilitarian items that were redirected to the project.

Height and rank

Height was a deliberate marker of status. The figures vary in height according to their rank, the tallest being the generals. Typical measurements given in general references are 184-197cm (6ft-6ft 5in) according to rank, with Generals being the tallest. Ordinary soldiers in the infantry ranks are usually described as somewhat shorter; one popular account gives a range of 1.7 meters (5 feet 7 inches) to 1.9 meters (6 feet 3 inches) for standard soldiers, archers and infantrymen. The commanders are the most striking case, and their total height, including headdresses and bases, can reach up to 2.5 meters (8.2 feet) tall. Since the average Qin man has been estimated at roughly 1.66 meters (5 feet 5 inches), the army was meant to look larger than life, although how far the stature of the figures reflects real height differences is debated.

Individual variation and military rank

Individuality is the feature of the army that has drawn the most scholarly attention. A 2022 study that measured high-resolution 3D scans of warriors' heads reported that their facial features highly resemble those of contemporary Chinese people, and its authors read this as evidence that the sculptors worked from real portraits. Whether particular living men served as models, or whether the makers relied on generalized types, remains debated. Production methods suggest a middle course. Basic shapes came from moulds, and individual details like facial features, beards, and hair were carved by hand. One account says that about eight basic face moulds were the starting point for the variations, which were then built up with added clay on cheekbones, jaws, ears and noses (see also the eight-shape classification). Archaeologists have sorted the facial structures into eight types, each named after a Chinese character shape such as 目, 国, or 田, and researchers note that the number of recognizable face types is larger than eight once finer variants are counted.

Hairstyles, armour, weapons and posture also vary from figure to figure, and these differences are used to identify military roles. Armour, hairstyles and headdresses are individually modelled, which allows the ranks and roles of soldiers to be told apart, from archers to infantrymen to charioteers. Hair is a useful marker: common soldiers typically wore their hair in a bun on the right side, while high-ranking officers and specialised troops such as charioteers wore topknots under cloth caps. Stance also tracks function. In one group of newly excavated figures, most were sculpted either clutching pole weapons with the right arm bent and fist partly closed, or carrying bows with the right arm hanging at ease, and their placement in the pit followed their assigned tasks. Details on their armour and clothing point to rank. Height follows the same logic. The figures are about 1.8 to 2 meters tall, with generals and officers being taller, possibly reflecting actual height differences or symbolic status.

The hierarchy of ranks is not only inferred from style but has also been confirmed by excavation. The 2019 announcement reported more than 220 new warriors with five different official titles, including senior military ranks, and new officers' insignia were found, which may require a review of the current understanding of the army's structure. Later finds have continued the pattern. In one announcement, a general and a mid-level officer were among the figures unearthed, offering an opportunity to learn more about military composition during the reign of the emperor. A figure identified as a high-ranking officer was described as only the tenth of its kind ever excavated, which shows how rare the top ranks are in the surviving record.

Taken together, these details allow scholars to reconstruct a graded command structure, from ordinary infantry and archers up to charioteers, officers and generals, with units arranged by function within each pit. This matters for early imperial military history because no surviving written source describes the army's organization in detail. The figures are idealized sculptures rather than administrative records, however, and their apparent individuality was produced partly through standardized methods. Interpretations of rank and unit structure therefore depend on careful comparison of style, position and excavated context.

Original pigments and conservation of colour

Today the figures look grey, but they were originally brightly decorated. Museum researchers at the Mausoleum Site Museum say nearly every warrior and horse was painted, and the pigments began to change within seconds of excavation Practically every warrior and horse was painted, but having been buried for more than 2,200 years the pigments were so old they began to change just 15 seconds after they were unearthed. The colour did not sit directly on the clay. The figures were originally coated with an East Asian lacquer, so-called qi lacquer. The artists then placed layers of paint on top of the lacquer. Egg was used as the binding agent.

Palette and Han purple

The main colours were blue, green, red, violet, pink and white, with black and ochre used less often. The colour base is made using inorganic pigments: malachite, azurite, vermilion, red and yellow ferrous oxide, white lead and bone black. The violet is the most distinctive element. It is a synthetic pigment, the basic pigment is synthetic barium copper silicate, not found in nature. Its chemical structure is understood, but the exact production method is still uncertain. Although the chemical structure has been established, the exact manufacturing process used remains unknown to this day. Analyses have suggested that lead was added to lower the melting point of the barium component, a step not used in making Egyptian blue, which points to a technique developed within Chinese workshops rather than one imported along trade routes. Related blue and purple pigments of the same family were later used on Han-period objects, and the violet is accordingly known as Han purple in the Han dynasty context.

Why the paint is lost

The colour layers suffered in two stages. Over more than two millennia of burial, the soil stayed humid, and the paint was slowly altered by groundwater. After the 1974 discovery, rapid oxidation and drying followed as the pits were exposed to air. The lacquer is the most vulnerable component. One study showed that once exposed, the lacquer underneath the paint begins to curl after 15 seconds and flake off in just four minutes. Excavators in the 1970s therefore saw paint come away from figures in minutes, a loss that stemmed partly from how the figures were made. Ceramics for practical use were painted and then fired, but the terracotta army was made just for burial and not for use. Because the lacquer was applied over the clay and then painted, the layers were never fused into a durable surface, and the colour could not be secured by simply lifting the figures from the ground. The chemical fragility of some pigments, particularly the man-made purple, has also been cited as a reason for rapid fading once air and light reach the surface.

Slowing excavation for conservation

Early work was hasty, and experts criticised it. The dig was described as a "potato harvest," and the hastily reassembled statues looked like "cement men," they complained. Authorities then halted digging to devise a plan for preservation. Given the unique value of the site, China's leaders decided to halt excavations until archaeologists had put together a plan to better preserve the site. Work recommenced several years later, but ever since the emphasis has been on protecting the relics at all costs. The trade-off is clear: archaeologists often wait for suitable techniques before lifting each figure, which slows the pace of discovery. Failing to apply the right techniques can be costly: The paintwork on the statues often begins to fade and crumble within seconds of being removed from the ground.

A joint program between Chinese and German specialists was set up to address the problem. Since 1988, a team of Chinese and German conservators and scientists have been trying to stabilize the warriors' paint layer, which, without conservation, is lost very quickly after excavation. Two main approaches have been pursued: consolidating the paint with polyethylene glycol (PEG), and polymerising methacrylate monomers under electron beams. The dense, blackened lacquer on many fragments makes some common UV-cured consolidants unsuitable, so PEG spraying became an alternative. In recent digs, workers have applied the solution as soon as a painted object emerges. The moment a painted artifact was unearthed, workers sprayed any bit of exposed color with the solution, then wrapped it in plastic to keep in the protective moisture. More recent practice has moved toward developing on-site conservation protocols to temporarily consolidate excavated material on site, which can then be removed for long term treatment in the laboratory. The best-preserved colour has come from areas where ground conditions protected the paint: the best-preserved specimens were found at the bottom of the pit, where a layer of mud created by flooding acted as a sort of 2,000-year-long spa treatment.

Other structures and grave goods in the mausoleum area

The mound and the unexcavated core

The burial mound at the centre of the enclosure has never been opened, and most of what is known about the tomb's interior comes from non-invasive work. A 2006 study combined gravity, magnetic, electrical resistivity, radon and ground-penetrating radar surveys to examine the underground palace of China's first Emperor, Qin Shi Huang, his Mausoleum, and its appurtenant structures (i.e., pits and tombs). Remote sensing has also been applied to the air above the mound. A laser-radar study found concentrations up to 27 ng/m³ were observed, significantly higher than the typical general pollutant level in the area which was found to be around 5–10 ng/m³. This matches a long-standing textual report of mercury in the tomb, considered as an elixir of life at the time. The results are suggestive, but they do not show the chamber's contents directly, and the excavation of the mound itself remains undecided.

The Acrobats pit (K9901)

Pit K9901 lies apart from the main military pits. It was discovered in 1999 between the inner and outer city walls southeast of the mausoleum. Its area is around 700 square meters (840 square yards), and excavations have yielded two bronze tripods and over 30 terracotta figures. The figures are not soldiers. They are life-sized, bare-chested, and wear short skirts, showing a variety of body types from muscular strength-type performers to slender skill-type acrobats. A comprehensive excavation took place from 2011 to 2013. The pit's floor plan is T-shaped with a protruding central section, and the excavators found that it had been destroyed by fire. Scholars generally read the scene as terracotta acrobats, symbolizing the court entertainment and acrobatics of the Qin Dynasty, which supports the idea that the underground realm copied the emperor's household as well as his army.

Official and bird pits

Further pits were opened around the same time. In 2000, archaeologists uncovered Pit K0006, which held 12 civil official figures, and Pit K0007, which yielded 46 finely crafted bronze aquatic birds. The official figures extend the court theme seen in the Acrobats pit, while the bronze birds show that the grave goods were not limited to human figures.

Palace, offices, and service buildings

Surveys of the ground between the figure pits and the mound have revealed a dense set of features. Archaeologists have been investigating the ground between their location and the Emperor's tomb itself, and have uncovered a network of different sites, containing everything from miniature offices, towers and walls with gates to gardens, lakes, animals, entertainers and ornaments. Excavated remains of palace halls, offices, storehouses and stables are generally read as a model of the emperor's living and administrative world. Cemeteries of the labourers who built the complex have also been excavated nearby, and they help show how the project was staffed.

Bronze chariots, horses, and a princely tomb

Bronze chariots and buried horses, with their fittings, were found in and around the pits. The chariots and horses are usually understood as ceremonial vehicles, not working equipment, and their scale and fittings reflect the rank expected of the emperor's underground entourage. A deep-shaft tomb of a noble has also been excavated within the wider complex. Some scholars link it to one of the emperor's sons, but this identification remains a hypothesis rather than a confirmed attribution. These structures, together with the pits, make clear that the mausoleum was a complex of many interrelated elements rather than a single army pit.

Purpose and interpretation

The most common explanation is that the figures were meant to guard the emperor in the afterlife. The purpose of the Terracotta Army was to protect the emperor in the afterlife. This reading rests on the broader belief that the dead needed the same protection and provisions they had enjoyed in life, and that for an emperor the scale of that need was correspondingly large. It is a plausible reading of the cultural context, but it is an inference. No surviving text from the Qin court states it.

A second interpretation treats the underground complex less as a fighting force than as a replica of the state. The tomb's plan follows the capital, Xianyang, which was divided into inner and outer cities. On this view the pits restage imperial authority in a more permanent form. The figures show power as disciplined, ranked, and permanent. The ranks, officers and command posts in the pits can thus be read as a model of the military hierarchy that the living government relied on. Scholars differ on how literally this model was meant to work.

Written sources do not explain the army directly. The Shiji gives the general layout and history of the mausoleum but does not describe the figures. Interpretations therefore depend on archaeological evidence and on comparison with other burials, and several purposes may have overlapped. Protection, display of status, and continuity of rule are all compatible with the same evidence.

The bronze chariots raise a narrower question. Two half-size bronze chariots were excavated about 20 metres west of the mound, and they are most likely for the Emperor's afterlife journeys. Other sources describe them as ceremonial vehicles for Emperor Qin Shi Huang's inspection tours in his afterlife. The 2025 excavation in Pit 2 complicated this picture. Archaeologists noted that the vehicles were buried without their wheels, and the project leader, Zhu Sihong, concluded that these chariots likely served a symbolic rather than a functional role. The argument is that a chariot without wheels could not have been used to travel, so its presence stood for military power rather than served as working equipment. Other interpreters still read the vehicles as functional objects, and the question is not settled.

The relationship between the army and older burial practice is the most contested issue. The Shiji records that after the emperor died, his son Huhai ordered that all [his father's] concubines who had never given birth be executed and buried. Ritual accompanying burial, known as xunzang, was much older, and at the late Shang royal cemetery at Houjiazhuang, researchers found 164 skeletons in the burial pits, probably killed to keep the dead kings company in the afterlife. Against this background, the figures are usually seen as a substitute. The Terracotta Army was assembled as a grand imperial version of the figures long placed in tombs, which replaced actual sacrifices in earlier periods. Some scholars argue that the Qin combined this substitution with the older practice of human death, so the figures and the killings belonged to one funerary system. How far the Han-era burials that followed continued the logic of sacrifice, and how many people were actually killed, remain open questions for historians and archaeologists.

Collapse, looting, and the textual record

Physical evidence shows that the pits were damaged in antiquity. Archaeologists discovered that these pits had later suffered large-scale burning and looting. At the main pit, excavators reported large quantities of red clay and charcoal along with holes for robbing, which the excavation leader described as evidence of arson and looting. The figures themselves show the same history. Many of the original weapons that the soldiers once held are missing: most of the spears, swords and crossbows had disappeared by the time of excavation. Some figures were discoloured by heat, and the excavators concluded that they had first been broken and only then partly burned, since some parts were their original blue colour, while others were a red colour, caused by burning. Fire damage is also visible in the structure. Some of the figures in Pits 1 and 2 show fire damage, while remains of burnt ceiling rafters have also been found.

The textual tradition attributes this damage to a specific actor. According to later accounts, after Xiang Yu entered Xianyang, he was said to have looted the tomb. A more colourful version of the story holds that a herder later started the fire by accident. He is said to have entered the dug pit of the mausoleum, which Xiang Yu had excavated, carrying a torch while looking for his sheep, and a fire began that burned the tomb structures. Archaeologists treat this story with caution. No solid evidence of the tomb's destruction has been found, although fire damage has been found in the pits housing the Terracotta Army. Some scholars think that the mausoleum did not suffer any large-scale destruction. Scholars have also questioned the reliability of the historian's account itself, and there are indications that the tomb itself may not have been plundered. The distinction matters: the pits show damage, while the burial mound's condition remains an open question.

The collapse of Qin authority supplies the historical setting for this damage. The dynasty did not last long after its founder's death. The Qin dynasty he founded collapsed just four years later under the weight of brutal taxation and forced labour. The uprising that brought down the dynasty began in 209 BCE, when Chen Sheng and Wu Guang launched the peasant uprising in Daze County, and Xiang Yu later emerged as its dominant military figure. The chronology allows for rebel armies to have reached the mausoleum while the state was still breaking apart, although no contemporary text describes the act directly. The physical damage also explains the present condition of the figures. Archaeologists think that the burning of the site, which is thought to have caused the roof to collapse and crush the army figures below, and the collapse of the wooden and earthen ceiling is linked to the fragmentation of most figures excavated from the pits.

The unexcavated interior of the mausoleum is less well understood. The burial chamber appears to be a hermetically sealed space roughly the size of a football pitch, and the tomb remains unopened, possibly due to concerns over preservation of its artifacts. The historical description of the tomb's contents, which includes rivers of liquid mercury, has been treated as a possible guide to the interior. Soil sampling reported high contents of mercury, and a magnetic survey detected a large amount of coins scattered around the unopened inner tomb. These results remain preliminary, and they do not establish whether the chamber was finished as described. The emptiness of Pit 4 is often taken as a sign of unfinished work, but it cannot settle the question for the burial chamber itself.

Research history, protection, and public display

Excavation phases after 1974

Systematic work at the site continued well beyond the initial 1974 finds. Late in 1998, the Shaanxi Province Archaeological Research Institute and the Qin Shi Huang Terracotta Army Museum jointly formed a team that drilled test boreholes both inside and outside the mausoleum precinct conducting well-selected exploration drilling inside and outside the Mausoleum area. Duan Qingbo was appointed to direct the excavation team in 1998 and oversaw some of the most spectacular discoveries at the site since the initial find of the terracotta warriors in 1974 over the following decade.

Much of this work went to the satellite pits rather than the main army pits. Pit K9801, dug between July 1998 and January 1999, yielded stone armour and helmets, and In 1999, Pit K9901 was discovered, containing over 30 lively and diverse acrobatics figures. In 2000, archaeologists uncovered Pit K0006, which held 12 civil official figures, and Pit K0007, which yielded 46 finely crafted bronze aquatic birds. Duan's team also identified the ruins of China's three oldest and largest que towers, the mausoleum's large-scale underground dam and drainage system, and a large double-ramped noble tomb. Sources differ on the publication record: one account states that he oversaw the publication of three excavation reports, in 1999, 2000, and 2002. Another describes three major excavation volumes (2000, 2006, 2007; see bibliography), later synthesized in a monograph.

Preservation challenges

Preservation has been a constant concern since the figures were exposed. A 1999 report described mold growth on the figures, caused by raised temperatures and humidity in the building which houses the soldiers, and the breath of tourists. The surfaces also oxidized: the figures have oxidized and become gray from being exposed to air. The paint is the most fragile element. Its lacquer layer is reported to curl in fifteen seconds once exposed to Xi'an's dry air and can flake off in just four minutes. Because of this, modern excavation is slow. Modern excavation now proceeds slowly, with consolidants and humidity control developed specifically to hold the fragile lacquer in place long enough to record and stabilise it. Conservation teams have also worked on the pigments; conservators from the Technische Universität München spent over ten years analyzing and conserving the paint layers. The museum has also set up an on-site laboratory, and the aim is to hold each newly exposed figure in a constant temperature and humidity environment from the moment it is uncovered.

Tourism adds further pressure. Millions of visitors now file along the walkways above Pit 1, looking down on the same eastward-facing ranks. The site was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1987, recognised as a UNESCO property for its artistry, its battle formation, and its link to the first unification of China.

The 2019 announcement

In late December 2019, Xinhua reported the results of a campaign in Pit 1 that had run from 2009 to 2019. The finds included more than 200 warriors, 12 clay horses, 2 chariots, and a number of bronze weapons—all uncovered within a roughly 4,300-square-foot entrenchment. The excavation was led by Shen Maosheng, who said that most of the newly discovered warriors were sculpted into one of two positions: either clutching pole weapons, with their right arms bent and fists partially clenched, or carrying bows. The figures were arranged according to five different military ranks, one of which (a lower-level status) was previously unknown to experts. Archaeologists have noted that the new figures include a general and a mid-level officer, which offers further evidence about the army's structure offering an opportunity to learn more about military composition during emperor Qin's reign.

Only a fraction of the site has been opened. While 2,000 warriors have been excavated since the site's discovery in 1974, scientists believe the mausoleum contains around 8,000 statues, and large areas are being left for future work. Excavation of the figures is ongoing and far from complete, promising the future discovery of more diverse and lifelike terracotta warrior figures.

Public display and loans

The site has been open to visitors since the museum was built over the pits. Three of the pits are easily accessible being enclosed in the Museum of the Terracotta Army which was built around the site where the soldiers were discovered and opened in 1979. Authentic figures have also travelled abroad since the 1980s. Since the 1980s, these figures have been featured in international exhibitions across countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France. Loans are strictly limited because of the fragility of the objects. For a 2019 exhibition at the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne, only ten pieces are allowed to leave the country at a time. The gallery had hosted the figures earlier, as NGV was the first international gallery to host the terracotta warriors back in 1982.

Later traditions and related sites

The Terracotta Army was not the last attempt to furnish an elite grave with soldiers. Under the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE), rulers and aristocrats continued to bury armies, attendants and animals with the dead, but the scale and tone changed. The Yangjiawan figures, found a few kilometres north of Xi'an, are linked to auxiliary burials near the mausoleum of the Han founder, Emperor Gaozu, who ruled from 202 to 195 BCE. The figures are only about 50 to 70 centimetres tall. Their cavalrymen wear kneepads and riding boots, and their saddles and harnesses were once picked out in bright paint. Sources disagree on how many figures the site holds: one reports nearly 3,000 figurines, including 583 mounted soldiers, while another gives more than 500 figures around the tomb of a general. Some scholars read the lighter, almost playful modelling of the Yangjiawan group as a deliberate contrast to the grim martial character of the Qin army, perhaps reflecting Han views of Qin Shi Huang as a harsh ruler.

The Han tradition moved further from the military model at the tomb of Emperor Jing, the Yangling Mausoleum. Its underground exhibition pits contain more than 50,000 miniature figures of eunuchs, servants, tools and domestic animals, which convey the daily life of the court rather than its army. These figures were originally dressed in real textiles that have since decayed, leaving the bare clay.

Both groups belong to a wider category of objects called mingqi, or "spirit articles." Mingqi are replicas made for burial rather than for use in life, and they are typically distinguished from real objects by changes in material, size, colour or function. Their development was closely tied to ethical debates about burial. Human sacrifice had been common among elites in earlier periods, and Confucian thinkers favoured substitutes. Mingqi thus allowed the dead to keep servants, musicians, horses and property without anyone being killed for the purpose. In Han tombs, ceramic figures of servants, soldiers, musicians, dancers and livestock are common, along with models of granaries, ovens, towers and other buildings. Although most of these were mass-produced in moulds, many are strikingly animated. Earlier examples used wood, and the tomb of Lady Dai at Mawangdui included carved wooden servant figures. Lacquer, silk and jade appeared among the more costly materials.

The logic of substitution became more expansive over time. A single clay servant could represent many servants, and a model granary could signify the abundance a family wished the deceased to enjoy. Mingqi continued to be produced through the Tang dynasty, which added richly glazed sancai wares and new types such as human-headed guardian animals (zhenmushou) and increasing numbers of military figures. The practice did not end with the imperial period. Paper goods and papier-mâché offerings burned at modern funerals in China are commonly understood as descendants of the same idea that the dead need spirit copies of everyday things.

The Terracotta Army therefore sits at the start of a long tradition in which clay and other materials stood in for living people and worldly goods. Its scale and its realism made it an unusually influential reference point, and it has become one of the most widely recognised images of early Chinese history. Its presence in museum exhibitions and popular media shapes how audiences outside specialist circles picture both the Qin state and the wider world of Chinese funerary art.

References

1. About Emperor Qin's Terra Cotta Armynationalgeographic.com
2. Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huangen.wikipedia.org
3. Terracotta Armyen.wikipedia.org
4. Smarthistorysmarthistory.org
5. Why China's first emperor’s tomb has remained sealed for 2,200 yearsinterestingengineering.com
6. The Unopened Tomb: What Lies Beneath the Terracotta Armyatlasanatolia.com
7. The Forgotten Tomb of The First Chinese Emperor Remains An Unopened Ancient Treasurethearchaeologist.org
8. The Terracotta Warriors (article)khanacademy.org
9. Construction of the Qin Tombebsco.com
10. The Discovery of the Terracotta Army: A Farmer’s Chance Encounterthearchaeologist.org
11. Who Discovered Terracotta Warriors? - Local Famer Yang Zhifatravelchinaguide.com
12. Terracotta Army History: Construction, Discovery, Excavationtravelchinaguide.com
13. Discovery of Terracotta Army in 1974travelchinaguide.com
14. Zhao Kangminen.wikipedia.org
15. Who & How were Terracotta Warriors Discovered?terracottawarriorsmuseum.com
16. How to see the Terracotta Warriors at Xi'an - Horizon Guideshorizonguides.com
17. Terracotta Armyebsco.com
18. Excavation - Terracotta Warriorsterracottawarriors4b.weebly.com
19. Terracotta Army, Terracotta Warriors and Horses Museumtravelchinaguide.com
20. Terracotta Army: Legacy of the First Emperor of China - Virginia Museum of Fine Artsvmfa.museum
21. The Terracotta Army: Found by Farmers Digging a Wellconfinity.com
22. Terracotta Warrior Army of Emperor Qin Shi Huang Diglobalmountainsummit.org
23. The Famous 'Terracotta Army' Was Discovered By Farmers Digging a Wellthevintagenews.com
24. Terracotta Warriors, Terracotta Army China, Xian Terracotta Warriors Tours, Terra cotta Soldiders, Terracotta Warriors Photos, Pictures, Reviews of Terracotta Warriors Tourchinatourguide.com
25. The Terracotta Army: Qin Shi Huang Eternal Guardhistcn.com
26. The Terracotta Warriorssmarthistory.org
27. Pit 4 of Terracotta Army: Central Army or Trench to Collect Soil?travelchinaguide.com
28. 5 Things You May Not Know About the Terracotta Armyhistory.com
29. The Terracotta Army: Pit 1scalar.usc.edu
30. What to See in Terracotta Warriors Museum?terracottawarriorsmuseum.com
31. The First Emperor: China’s Terracotta Army - Warfare History Networkwarfarehistorynetwork.com
32. HOW WERE THE TERRACOTTA WARRIORS MADEdev.mrarch.com
33. How the Terracotta Warriors Were Made? - From Clay to Masterpiecechinatravel.com
34. How the Terracotta Warriors Were Made - 7 Steps to Make a Warriortravelchinaguide.com
35. Terracotta Armysimple.wikipedia.org
36. How were Terracotta Army Made? Production Steps to Maketerracottawarriorsmuseum.com
37. www.cambridge.orgcambridge.org
38. Some secrets of China’s terra-cotta army are baked in the claysciencenews.org
39. The Terra Cotta Army Near Xi'an, China, an Early Example of Assembly Line Production : History of Informationhistoryofinformation.com
40. Chinese Terracotta Army: History, Description, Photosvisual-arts-cork.com
41. Ithy - How Tall are the Terracotta Warriors?ithy.com
42. Clay reveals secrets of China’s mysterious terra-cotta armysnexplores.org
43. How tall are the Terracotta Warriors?terracottawarriorsmuseum.com
44. Measurement and analysis of facial features of terracotta warriors based on high-precision 3D point cloudsnature.com
45. 8 Cool Facts You May Not Know about the Terracotta Armytravelchinaguide.com
46. Terracotta Army Faces: Why No Two Warriors Are Identicaltriviabreak.net
47. The Terracotta Army of China: History, Facts & How to Visitchinajourneyguide.com
48. Archaeologists Excavate 200 More Chinese Terracotta Warriorssmithsonianmag.com
49. Terracotta Army ‘reinforced’ with discovery of over 220 soldierstime24.news
50. The terracotta army just added 20 soldiers, a reminder that large parts of the site are unexcavatedscmp.com
51. Archaeologists Discover Rare Clay Commander Among Thousands of Life-Size Terra-Cotta Soldiers in Chinasmithsonianmag.com
52. The Original Colors of the Terracotta Armychinahighlights.com
53. Conservators preserve the paint layers of the Terracotta Army - TUMtum.de
54. A Lost Purple Pigment, Where Quantum Physics and the Terracotta Warriors Collidehyperallergic.com
55. Terra-Cotta Warriors in Colornationalgeographic.com
56. Raiders of the lost pigmentschemistryworld.com
57. Why Terracotta Warriors are Found No Colors?terracottawarriorsmuseum.com
58. The Terra-Cotta Army’s Secret Weaponsixthtone.com
59. Unearthing a Mystery China's Terra-Cotta Warriors - Sherwin-Williamssherwin-williams.com
60. Is is possible that mercury in the soil in the location of the Tomb of Qin helped preserve the colour of the terracotta soldiers when they were buriedresearchgate.net
61. An Integrated Geophysical and Archaeological Investigation of the Emperor Qin Shi Huang Mausoleum - ADSui.adsabs.harvard.edu
62. Mercury as a Geophysical Tracer Gas - Emissions from the Emperor Qin Tomb in Xi´an Studied by Laser Radarncbi.nlm.nih.gov
63. Terracotta Army Accessory Pits, Qin Shi Huang Mausoleum, Xi'antravelchinaguide.com
64. Pit K9901: Acrobatics Figures Pit of Terracotta Armytravelchinaguide.com
65. Terracotta Acrobats Pit of the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor_Baiduwikibaike.baidu.com
66. What’s Inside Qin Shi Huang’s Tomb? - The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life by Bettany Hughes - Video Previewheritage-key.com
67. The Afterlife in contextpressbooks.claremont.edu
68. Xunzang: The Dark History of Chinese Sacrificial Burialbrewminate.com
69. The Qin terracotta warriors: a stunning discoveryliverpoolmuseums.org.uk
70. Bronze Chariots and Horses Xian, Qinshihuang's After-life Vehicletravelchinaguide.com
71. The Terracotta Army: Ancient Wonders, Modern Challenges - Cosmo Sciencecosmoscience.in
72. The Surprisingly Long History of Human Funeral Sacrifice in Ancient Chinatheworldofchinese.com
73. Chinese sculptureen.wikipedia.org
74. Ancient war chariots, weapons unearthed in latest Terracotta Army dig - Global Timesglobaltimes.cn
75. The dark history behind the record-breaking Terracotta Armyguinnessworldrecords.com
76. Experts: terra cotta army was looted and burned - China.org.cnchina.org.cn
77. Terracotta Army - La Casa de la Arquitecturalacasadelaarquitectura.es
78. Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor: Terracotta Army &ancienttravel.org
79. Who set fire to the Terracotta Warriorswindhorsetour.com
80. 1 The Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huang Periodical Monitoring Report on thewhc.unesco.org
81. RESEARCH ARTICLE Sino-Western Cultural Exchange as Seen throughcambridge.org
82. Duan Qingboen.wikipedia.org
83. Terracotta Army - New World Encyclopedianewworldencyclopedia.org
84. Archaeologists Discover 200 New Terra-Cotta Warriors in Chinaafar.com
85. Guarded by 7,000 Warriors - Tomb of Qin Shihuangdiwarhistoryonline.com
86. 15 Little-Known Facts About the Terracotta Army; Figurestravelchinaguide.com
87. China’s Terracotta Army to Hit the NGV in 2019broadsheet.com.au
88. 200 New Warriors Found at Site of China's Massive Terracotta Armythevintagenews.com
89. China, two hundred more warriors from the famous terracotta army of Emperor Qin discoveredfinestresullarte.info
90. There Are 8,000 Known Terracotta Warriors. But Archaeologists in China Just Found More Than 200 Othersnews.artnet.com
91. 220 More Terracotta Warriors Found in Chinese Emperor’s Tombancient-origins.net
92. What preservation efforts are in place for the Terracotta Warriors?visitterracottawarriors.com
93. Archeological excavation of Terracotta Warriors delivers fruitful, illuminating outcomesen.qstheory.cn
94. Yangjiawan terracotta armyen.wikipedia.org
95. Yangling Mausoleum of Hanen.wikipedia.org
96. A journey through the Han Dynasty in ten objectsliverpoolmuseums.org.uk
97. The “Other” Terracotta Army - HistoryExposehistoryexpose.com
98. Smarthistorysmarthistory.org
99. Mingqi, A Type of Tomb Offeringunm.edu
100. The Vibrant Role of Mingqi in Early Chinese Burials - The Metropolitan Museum of Artmetmuseum.org
101. Han terracotta figurine - Plaisir d'Estheteplaisirdesthete.com
102. Han Dynasty Art - World History Eduworldhistoryedu.com