There is an interesting detail about a cultural relic that is worth studying. The armor of Qin Liangyu, exhibited by a well-known museum, has become a key exhibit, but it has recently been discovered that there are some obvious issues regarding its authentication.
According to relevant academic materials published in 1987, the relics of Qin Liangyu were recorded as being housed in the Chongqing Museum, and most of these cultural relics have now been transferred to the Chongqing Three Gorges Museum. Comparing the images of the artifacts from the two periods, especially the helmet parts, they all exhibit the characteristics of a second-rank official's headgear, featuring "red coral crown + double-eye flower feathers."
An interesting question arises here: does the combination of the fabric armor from the late Ming Dynasty with this type of high-ranking headgear ornament align with historical records and craftsmanship traditions? This involves the authentication of cultural relics, the characteristics of craftsmanship from different dynasties, and even the historical details of official clothing systems during the Ming and Qing Dynasties. For the certification standards of exhibits in professional museums, such subtle details often best reflect the rigor of cultural relic research.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
LeekCutter
· 6h ago
Haha, this is outrageous. The museum's "treasure of the museum" can raise such questions.
Qin Liangyu's armor paired with a second-class crown? Where are the promised historical details?
It seems we need to find an expert to reassess it.
The museum's credibility is definitely in question.
These details are indeed amazing; how many people believe what's written on the display board?
If you ask me, they should have verified the "key exhibits" across the country a long time ago.
View OriginalReply0
ShitcoinConnoisseur
· 6h ago
This SAFEMARS configuration is a bit strange, a cloth armor matching with a second-class crown? It feels like a trap has been used that shouldn't be, professionals should be able to tell.
View OriginalReply0
LonelyAnchorman
· 6h ago
This armor and headdress situation is really absurd. The Ming Dynasty's equipment is forcibly matching the Qing Dynasty's rank markings? The museum's work is impressive.
View OriginalReply0
WagmiAnon
· 6h ago
Wow, this detail is indeed amazing... Is the museum just messing around here?
View OriginalReply0
ChainPoet
· 7h ago
Wow, can there really be loopholes in museum items? Isn't this a paradise for history buffs? The combination of red coral tops and face armor is really outrageous.
There is an interesting detail about a cultural relic that is worth studying. The armor of Qin Liangyu, exhibited by a well-known museum, has become a key exhibit, but it has recently been discovered that there are some obvious issues regarding its authentication.
According to relevant academic materials published in 1987, the relics of Qin Liangyu were recorded as being housed in the Chongqing Museum, and most of these cultural relics have now been transferred to the Chongqing Three Gorges Museum. Comparing the images of the artifacts from the two periods, especially the helmet parts, they all exhibit the characteristics of a second-rank official's headgear, featuring "red coral crown + double-eye flower feathers."
An interesting question arises here: does the combination of the fabric armor from the late Ming Dynasty with this type of high-ranking headgear ornament align with historical records and craftsmanship traditions? This involves the authentication of cultural relics, the characteristics of craftsmanship from different dynasties, and even the historical details of official clothing systems during the Ming and Qing Dynasties. For the certification standards of exhibits in professional museums, such subtle details often best reflect the rigor of cultural relic research.