Is it Cao Cao's tomb?

[Terranigma Freak]

So I think we all remember that a few years ago, it was announced that they MIGHT have found Cao Cao's tomb, but with news always changing and discoveries being made, I thought maybe we can have a thread discussing if there's news that either support or refute those claims. I was under the impression that the tomb was fake, or at least not Cao Cao's tomb, but someone's tomb whereas some locals created a fake stone tablet to make the claim that it was Cao Cao's tomb.

Today, my friend sent me a video he found on Reddit claiming that there's proof that it really is Cao Cao's tomb.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhAhV8kE0P4

Is this conclusive? If not, it would be cool to have a thread discussing new news and finding about this issue. The Ding Feng's tomb thread reminded me of this.

[TigerTally]

The question of whether that is Cao Cao's tomb or not is no "news" anymore. The archeological report has been published, and there is plentiful evidence supporting so.

If you want real "news", there has actually been one last week - new discocvery reveals that the tomb had a guarding household till Northern Song Dynasty.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202302/1284586.shtml

[Zhou Dadudu]

The question of whether that is Cao Cao's tomb or not is no "news" anymore. The archeological report has been published, and there is plentiful evidence supporting so.

There were (and still are maybe?) some thinking otherwise, and while some of their arguments were a little fluffy, there were some legitimate points as well. It's just that the debate has sort of died down since the original discovery (about 10 years ago?) and the general consensus nowadays is that the most plausible tomb owner is Cao Cao.

[TigerTally]

It was 2009, about one and a half decade ago. Time flies!

Several external reasons for the popular opposition or skepticism existed back then.

1) People would have except a large amount of fantastic findings from the tomb of such a well-known figure, but there really is not much.

2) There had been other cities/places with claims about them (potentially) being the location of Cao Cao's tomb before its discovery. Tourist spots and businesses were already made on these, so it is understandable that they would not be happy about the real tomb.

3) Another team of scholars that is not directly related to the archeologist team raised the issue of DNA . They attempted to find Cao Cao's DNA by testing modern Cao clan members, most of whom simply have insufficient or self-proclaimed evidence about their connection with the medieval warlord.

Of course I am not saying this topic is not worth looking into, but right now I just cannot think of anything for meaningful discussion.

[DragonAtma]

There's one thing you're missing, though: they found DNA matches between a tooth from Cao Cao's uncle Cao Ding and multiple claimed descendants. Yes, Cao Song was adopted, but back then adoptions were usually from nearby relatives (e.g. Yuan Shao being adopted by his childless uncle, much to Yuan Shu's dismay).

https://www.dnainthenews.com/human-history/cao-cao-2/

...I should also add that Cao Ding's tooth and Cao Cao's supposed ancestor Cao Shen (Liu Bang's friend and chancellor) did NOT match. Of course, he may Cao Shen's non-patrilineal descendant.

[TigerTally]

There's one thing you're missing, though: they found DNA matches between a tooth from Cao Cao's uncle Cao Ding and multiple claimed descendants. Yes, Cao Song was adopted, but back then adoptions were usually from nearby relatives (e.g. Yuan Shao being adopted by his childless uncle, much to Yuan Shu's dismay).

https://www.dnainthenews.com/human-history/cao-cao-2/

...I should also add that Cao Ding's tooth and Cao Cao's supposed ancestor Cao Shen (Liu Bang's friend and chancellor) did NOT match. Of course, he may Cao Shen's non-patrilineal descendant.

I ommitted them because these two points combined actually made its discovery, strictly speaking, no longer directly related to Cao Cao

[InquilineKea]

Didn't they say it might be Cao Huan's? (b/c there was insignia that could only come in well after the formation of the Kingdom of Wei on there?)

Tomb Raider: Three Kingdoms
Tomb Raider: Cao Cao

[TigerTally]

"Kingdom" depends on how you translate 王國 and 帝國. The phrase 魏武王 (not 魏武皇/帝) is by all means logical to appear in Cao Cao's tomb. SGZ explicitly recorded the posthumous title wasgiven to Cao Cao right before his burial.

Cao Huan may also be too young to be that corpse discovered inside, which should be dead at 60+.

Furthermore, the latest discovery of Northern Song remnants potentially serves as the strongest counterevidence, because guarding households were arranged for Cao Cao's tomb but not Cao Huan's.

[Terranigma Freak]

There's one thing you're missing, though: they found DNA matches between a tooth from Cao Cao's uncle Cao Ding and multiple claimed descendants. Yes, Cao Song was adopted, but back then adoptions were usually from nearby relatives (e.g. Yuan Shao being adopted by his childless uncle, much to Yuan Shu's dismay).

https://www.dnainthenews.com/human-history/cao-cao-2/

...I should also add that Cao Ding's tooth and Cao Cao's supposed ancestor Cao Shen (Liu Bang's friend and chancellor) did NOT match. Of course, he may Cao Shen's non-patrilineal descendant.

Interesting! I didn't see the DNA stuff. I didn't know we had his Uncle's grave.

[TigerTally]

Interesting! I didn't see the DNA stuff. I didn't know we had his Uncle's grave.

A potential Cao Ding's tomb was excavated in 1970s, but it is not 100% certain. Even the tooth discovered inside the tomb could not be confirmed as coming from who was buried.

http://www.ivpp.cas.cn/cbw/rlxxb/xbwzxz ... 823034.pdf

On the other hand, we had the confirmed tomb of Cao Cao's third son, Cao Zhi, as well. That was found in 1950s, but they lost his corpse during the Cultural Revolution. If it was kept well, then all these DNA stuffs would have made much more sense.