Qin and ears

[Duncan Head]

Recently, in a project known as Imperial Logistics: The Making of the Terracotta Army, a team of archaeologists from University College London (UCL) in Britain and from Emperor Qin Shi Huang's Mausoleum Site Museum in Lintong, China, have been using the latest imaging technology and other advanced methods to deduce the design process behind the warriors. The British-Chinese team took detailed measurements of the statues' facial features, focusing especially on the ears. Forensic research shows that ear shapes are so variable among humans that they can be used to identify individuals.

from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/11/141114-terra-cotta-warriors-qin-shi-huang-tomb-china-archaeology/

The paper, with pictures of ears: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440314001927

[Imperial Dave]

Fascinating article Duncan, thanks for the link. So it appears that although its not conclusive that human subjects were used to model some/most/all of the warriors, the statistical analysis says that there isnt a link between ear shape and artist/artistical grouping

The next question might be if they were modelled on real humans, were they the real warriors or just "passers by" so to speak 

[Duncan Head]

It amused me that the NatGeo article says "For the initial sample, team members picked 30 terra-cotta warriors and photographed the left side of their heads from a safe distance". Yes, we've all see the terracotta warriors come alive in horror movies - you need to be safely out of weapon range.

I presume this comes form the original article's "we took photographs of the faces of 30 warriors from one side, deliberately avoiding too many ear close-ups".

The 3-D animation video on the NatGeo site is good in that it shows the variety of clothing colours that archaeologists now envisage. Back in the early days of the investigation when only a few figures had been published in any detail, it looked as if there might have been uniform clothing - there were reconstructions published with all the advance guard unarmoured infantry in red, for instance. As they looked at more figures over the years we started to get references to more colour combinations, and now it appears that there was very little uniformity at all.

[Imperial Dave]

That had me chuckling re the "safe distance" bit Duncan!

Interesting comments re the uniformity (or lack thereof) of clothing. This could be copy-pasted onto other discussions re clothing/uniform colours ie how much true uniformity was there for units in ancient armies (thinking more 'regular' troops here). My painting heart would lean towards as much uniformity as possible whereas my observational head would say diversity!

[Patrick Waterson]

One wonders if the 'diversity' here may be deliberate: each region presumably had its fashionable colour(s) and perhaps styles, not to mention facial hair arrangements.  The armoured troops seem to have more uniformity of appearance and colour, and may represent the permanent core of the army, while the unarmoured robed types (who incidentally differentiate into right-wrapping and left-wrapping robes) would seem to be more along the lines of local contingents - and it is these who in the video have the greatest diversity of colour.

Interesting comments re the uniformity (or lack thereof) of clothing. This could be copy-pasted onto other discussions re clothing/uniform colours ie how much true uniformity was there for units in ancient armies (thinking more 'regular' troops here).

It may be worth remembering that this is technically an empire and not a kingdom - the communities contributing the troops would have been diverse and heterogenous (albeit overlaid with - to our eyes - similar culture) and this may have been the closest thing to uniformity the Qin were able to achieve!

[Duncan Head]

One wonders if the 'diversity' here may be deliberate: each region presumably had its fashionable colour(s) and perhaps styles, not to mention facial hair arrangements.  The armoured troops seem to have more uniformity of appearance and colour, and may represent the permanent core of the army, while the unarmoured robed types (who incidentally differentiate into right-wrapping and left-wrapping robes) would seem to be more along the lines of local contingents - and it is these who in the video have the greatest diversity of colour.

The usual interpretation is that the whole force, unarmoured men included, represent a specific capital or palace guards unit. The unarmoured men are simply the light infantry component of that force. But without any inscription or similar from the site it is hard to be sure. Both armoured and unarmoured men have a range of clothing colours, and if there is a bit more variety among the unarmoured ones I think the difference may seem greater than it is, both because there's much less diversity in the armour colour and because the unarmoured men are in the front so more easily seen. And note that the armoured chariot crew have always been known to have quite a range of non-uniform clothing colours, and they are certainly part of the "permanent core".

Besides, I would be cautious about putting too much statistical stress on this video. Have they really analysed the coat-colours of every one of the hundreds of armoured men who are visible in it? I suspect not; I think there's probably a certain amount of extrapolation going on.

As for local contingents, it was suggested long ago that some of the warriors' faces reflect specific ethnic or regional types. This may be sheer wishful thinking, but I wonder if such regional faces might correspond to clothing colours, or indeed ear shape.

[Imperial Dave]

As for local contingents, it was suggested long ago that some of the warriors' faces reflect specific ethnic or regional types. This may be sheer wishful thinking, but I wonder if such regional faces might correspond to clothing colours, or indeed ear shape.

Now that would be taking artistic representation to a presumably well recognisable definition for the audience it was intended to be made for. Saying "here is your empire and these are your subjects from all corners".....etc

[Patrick Waterson]

As for local contingents, it was suggested long ago that some of the warriors' faces reflect specific ethnic or regional types. This may be sheer wishful thinking, but I wonder if such regional faces might correspond to clothing colours, or indeed ear shape.

This would certainly give statisticians something else to do, and might even add to our understanding, or at least knowledge, of the period.

Incidentally, I commend members for avoiding making "lend me your ears" jokes ... thank you.

[Imperial Dave]

As for local contingents, it was suggested long ago that some of the warriors' faces reflect specific ethnic or regional types. This may be sheer wishful thinking, but I wonder if such regional faces might correspond to clothing colours, or indeed ear shape.

This would certainly give statisticians something else to do, and might even add to our understanding, or at least knowledge, of the period.

Incidentally, I commend members for avoiding making "lend me your ears" jokes ... thank you.

'ere we go again 

[Justin Swanton]

As for local contingents, it was suggested long ago that some of the warriors' faces reflect specific ethnic or regional types. This may be sheer wishful thinking, but I wonder if such regional faces might correspond to clothing colours, or indeed ear shape.

This would certainly give statisticians something else to do, and might even add to our understanding, or at least knowledge, of the period.

Incidentally, I commend members for avoiding making "lend me your ears" jokes ... thank you.

'ere we go again 

'ear, 'ear!

[Patrick Waterson]

In any event, this ear analysis (sorry!) does favour the idea that the terracotta figures were personalised and individualised.  Clothing for each arm of service seems to be - at least as far as I can judge from a rapidly-moving video - identical in cut (apart from the left-overlap and right-overlap coats) but disparate in colour.  This would presumably be compatible with the individual supplying the vestments while the state provided, or at least ordered, the weaponry and possibly the armour.

The similar cut might - this is conjectural - be the result of the retinue coming from the same (Qin) culture; I do not see a Qin emperor trusting any non-Qin subjects being that close to him with a weapon in hand.

[Justin Swanton]

In any event the experts had better not dawdle over their research. You know what they say about statues made of clay - 'ere today and gone tomorrow.

(last one, promise)