I really need to add that the golden crown is a REPLICA and NOT A RESTORATION of the archaeological artifact. It would be, from an object conservation point of view, extremely, criminally unethical to try to restore an archaeological artifact such as this to its original appearance. In addition, the original crown is too deteriorated to even attempt that level of restoration.
For those who are curious about the making of the replica, here’s a documentary about it (in Mandarin with Chinese subtitles). It is actually fascinating! Because so many components of the original artifact were so delicate and unable to support its own weight if fully cleaned, the conservators decided not to remove the mud in strategic locations. So then, how did they deduce the original shape and appearance of the crown? Tons of x-rays, 3-D scanning, and materials analysis. Some of the conservation scientists were looking at fluorescence spectra, which are graphs used for determining the elemental composition of materials generated through analytical instruments such as X-ray fluorescence spectrometers.
Another cool thing they discovered in the same tomb were twelve hollow-constructed metal hairpins, one of which retained a small clump of cotton. Apparently, cotton didn’t become prevalent until the Song (960-1279 CE) and Yuan (1271-1368 CE) Dynasties. So Sui Dynasty (581-618 CE) cotton is quite an interesting find and may be evidence for previously little-known trade connections or agricultural industries. It’s also quite difficult to find intact textiles or organic fibers in archaeological contexts so it’s really cool that this has survived the centuries. 
jimmyeatworldofficial
prguitarman
kianamaiart
gracieabrams
titsay
2087
dailybridgerton
