First of all, it depends on how to define cultural relics. Cultural relics can be understood from the perspective of economic value and academic value.

Cultural relics from an economic perspective follow the laws of market and commodity value. Simply put, things are scarce and expensive, and the price is high, or how high is the ratio of supply and demand.

According to this standard, obviously, it is not a cultural relic. What is valuable today is valuable when it was first produced. It was worthless then and today. An ordinary igneous rock, with a history of hundreds of millions of years, is valuable? Obviously not.

But from an academic point of view, it is another matter. Many people think that the things in the museum must be priceless, but this is not necessarily true. Many collections, which have low economic value and are not sought after by the market, have unique history, culture or folk customs. In short, they have academic value and entered the museum.

A piece of perishable and difficult-to-preserve human excrement has been completely preserved for two thousand years, and its academic value can be imagined. I'm afraid the living habits, daily food, physique, literature and first-hand information of people in the Han Dynasty can't compare with it.

When Kissinger visited China, he wanted nothing more. It is for this reason that he proposed to use the Apollo program to bring back the lunar soil and replace it with the soil unearthed from the Han tomb in Changsha. It's not a cultural relic. Who is it?