Qin Shi Huangdi's Terracotta Army: Symbolism and Realism
This paper examines the Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huangdi, discovered in 1974 in China's Shaanxi province, with particular focus on the famous terracotta warrior figures. Drawing on art historian Ladislav Kesner's 1995 article in The Art Bulletin and a general overview from Planetware, the paper explores the central scholarly debate: were the terracotta warriors mass-produced, stereotyped figures, or intentional portraits of real soldiers from the First Emperor's army? The paper situates Kesner's argument within the New Historicism of the 1990s, considers the mortuary and religious functions of the figures, and ultimately concludes that while Kesner's thesis is philosophically intriguing, the preponderance of evidence favors the more conventional view of standardized, workshop production.
- Discovery and Overview of the Mausoleum: 1974 discovery of Qin Shi Huangdi's burial site
- The Terracotta Army and Scholarly Debate: Kesner's argument for individualized warrior portraiture
- Kesner's New Historicist Approach: New Historicism and contextualized art interpretation
- Mortuary Practice and the Purpose of the Figures: Confucian objections and the replica world concept
- Realism Versus Stereotyping in the Warrior Figures: Formal analysis of posture, faces, and individuation
- The Mausoleum's Scale and the Emperor's Vision: Sima Qian's account of the tomb's elaborate design
- Evaluating Kesner Against Broader Evidence: Weighing Kesner's thesis against standardization evidence
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper compares two sources — a peer-reviewed art history article and a general overview — to frame the scholarly debate, giving the argument concrete grounding in real texts.
- The author appropriately contextualizes Kesner's argument within the intellectual movement of New Historicism, demonstrating awareness of historiographical method rather than treating the claim in isolation.
- The conclusion is evaluative and confident: rather than simply summarizing both sides, the paper takes a clear position on which source is more persuasive and explains why.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper models source comparison as an analytical strategy. By juxtaposing Kesner's close formal analysis of individual statues against the Planetware article's broader, more recent survey — and noting how each author's choice of accompanying images reflects their argument — the writer shows that how scholars present evidence is itself meaningful and subject to critique.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with discovery context and a brief introduction of its two primary sources, then moves through Kesner's argument in detail — covering his theoretical framework, his reading of mortuary practice, and his formal analysis of the figures. The middle sections use specific quotations from Kesner to build and test his thesis. The final section introduces contradicting evidence from the more recent Planetware account and delivers a clear evaluative conclusion. The structure follows the sources' logic before stepping back to judge them.
Discovery and Overview of the Mausoleum
In 1974, one of the greatest archaeological finds in the field of Chinese history was discovered in the Shaanxi province of Lintong. The structure was that of the burial chamber of the first Chinese emperor, Qin Shi Huangdi (r. 246–210 B.C.). The tomb was massive and sprawling, and according to a 2009 article on Planetware, uncovering its many treasures remains a work in progress ("Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huangdi: Terracotta Army," 2009). Ironically, the Mausoleum would never have been discovered at all had not some local peasants been digging for water — much like the Dead Sea Scrolls, it was also discovered entirely by chance.
The relatively recent nature of the discovery and the fact that the archaeological site is still under excavation may be one reason there is comparatively limited research on the topic. Some authors, such as the anonymous scholar on Planetware — a site devoted to discussing archaeological finds — take a strictly factual approach, while scholar Ladislav Kesner's 1995 article "Likeness of No One: (Re)presenting the First Emperor's Army," published in The Art Bulletin, attempts to contextualize what the work's symbolic and religious meaning would have meant to Chinese society during the time of the Mausoleum's construction.
The Terracotta Army and Scholarly Debate
Specifically, the figures known as the "terracotta army" — a series of warrior figures enclosed in the structure along with the dead emperor — fascinate Kesner. He argues that rather than being stereotyped and strictly symbolic figures, as they initially appear, the terracotta warriors are in fact meant to be realistic depictions of individual figures from the Chinese army of the time.
"Close to the tumulus which, according to historical accounts, should contain the tomb of the First Emperor itself, the terracotta army, situated in three subterranean pits, is the most conspicuous part of the entire burial compound, which also includes remains of a funerary precinct with auxiliary burials, sacrificial pits, and many other structures. According to the commonly accepted explanation, the underground army was created as a replica of the Qin army: clay soldiers and horses represent Qin Shi Huang's army and stand in place of the real soldiers who could not have been actually buried" with their master (Kesner 1995, p. 115). The symbolic function of these soldiers, some scholars believe, was to guard the corpse of the Emperor, much as the actual dead bodies of servants and attendants were interred with Egyptian pharaohs.
However, according to Kesner, questions and controversies still rage as to the nature of the figures' realistic depiction of the "real" Chinese army. Kesner notes that the majority of scholars point out "that the clay warriors' faces conform to a certain number of stereotypes" and are "unwilling to regard them as representations of individuals or to consider the Qin terracotta figures as portraiture" (Kesner 1995, p. 115). Kesner disagrees with this majority view and believes that the figures were likely intentional representations of real individuals. He contends that historical evidence suggests "that the figures were modeled after living soldiers, that they were actual portraits of individual warriors" (Kesner 1995, p. 115).
Works Cited
Ladislav, Kesner. "Likeness of No One: (Re)presenting the First Emperor's Army." The Art Bulletin. 77.1 (Mar., 1995), pp. 115–132.
Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huangdi. Planetware. 2009. July 2, 2009.
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.