How brilliant is Kong Ming historically(SGZ)?

[shen long]

in the novel he is almost a godly character,a man with no peers(Sima Yi is close but certainly not in his league).Other than the blunder of using Ma Su he is probably the perfect strategist in the novel.so how good is he historically and did he invent the kong ming lanterns?

[Zhuge Liang]

Read his SGZ bio. Chinese versions are available online. English translated one is available at www.threekingdoms.net in the forum.

[zhaozilong44]

in the novel he is almost a godly character,a man with no peers(Sima Yi is close but certainly not in his league).Other than the blunder of using Ma Su he is probably the perfect strategist in the novel.so how good is he historically and did he invent the kong ming lanterns?

A lot of the "amazing" feats he did were either done by someone else and acdredited to him or they didn't happen at all.

He didn't summoned the winds that caused the destruction of Cao Cao's fleet. It was some fisherman from Wu of a Wu officer who predicted the winds.

The "borrowing of arrows" event never took place either.

Also, it was him who seeked out Liu Bei on 3 occasions and not the other way around.

Zhuge Liang, historically speaking, really wasn't much to brag about. Compared with the most outstanding character of the 3 Kingdoms era Cao Cao, he's not that godly.

LGZ obviously had a bias towards Shu if you read the book. Many of the accomplishments performed by others were accredited to Shu because of this.
GY never killed Hua Xiong or Wen Chou. There are many other examples, but I can't think of them right now.

What really pissed me off was when LGZ made Wei Yan to be branded a trader just cause of Wei's conflict with Yang Yi, another Shu officer. Wei Yan was one of the greatest generals in Shu's history and deserves better. What I can say, however, is that ROTK is still a great great novel dispite of all the bias towards Shu.

[Zhuge Liang]

Wei Yan attacked his own troops out of personal dispute & his own hissy fit, endangering the whole army.

The novel made it a bit worse by having him desire to take over Shu.

In ZL's SGZ bio it says Liu Bei did indeed seek him out 3 times. Why do you say otherwise?

[Lady Zhuge]

Also, it was him who seeked out Liu Bei on 3 occasions and not the other way around.

No, historically, Liu Bei was the one who sought Kongming on 3 occasions so I don't know where you're getting this "other way around" claim from.

Zhuge Liang, historically speaking, really wasn't much to brag about. Compared with the most outstanding character of the 3 Kingdoms era Cao Cao, he's not that godly.

That's a matter of opinion. Just because he didn't do everything that an author conjured up doesn't mean that he wasn't great historically.

LGZ obviously had a bias towards Shu if you read the book. Many of the accomplishments performed by others were accredited to Shu because of this.
GY never killed Hua Xiong or Wen Chou. There are many other examples, but I can't think of them right now.

That's true, but on the other hand, LGZ didn't include some of Cao Cao's historical atrocities (like burying surrendered soldiers alive, killing one of his concubines just for waking him up, etc.) that he could have in SGYY.

What really pissed me off was when LGZ made Wei Yan to be branded a trader just cause of Wei's conflict with Yang Yi, another Shu officer. Wei Yan was one of the greatest generals in Shu's history and deserves better. What I can say, however, is that ROTK is still a great great novel dispite of all the bias towards Shu.

Wei Yan was a good general, but he was also extremely arrogant ("He was boastful of his talents and many tended to avoid him."). Cutting off Shu troops by burning plank roads and ordering an attack on other Shu troops due to a personal vendetta wasn't exactly smart or productive.

[dan J]

Also, it was him who seeked out Liu Bei on 3 occasions and not the other way around.

out of curiosity, I just read the SGZ bio on Zhuge Liang, though the language was rather difficult to comprehand, but from what I could decypher, like the two Zhuge's have stated, it seems to be in accordance with RoTK. ironically enough, after some more reading, Zhao Yun's bio seems to be quite lackluster.

[Moinllieon]

out of curiosity, I just read the SGZ bio on Zhuge Liang, though the language was rather difficult to comprehand, but from what I could decypher, like the two Zhuge's have stated, it seems to be in accordance with RoTK. ironically enough, after some more reading, Zhao Yun's bio seems to be quite lackluster.

Yeah, which is why I prefer fiction over reality.

[Guo Xiang]

Real Zhao Yun apparently isn't that great. He's just a little more than a bodyguard. He only managed to raise in ranks after Liu Bei died.

[Zhuge Liang]

Lady Zhuge: I didn't know u visted this section!? How did you catch wind of this?

Seems i just can't avoid Mrs Zhuge!

[Moinllieon]

Lady Zhuge: I didn't know u visted this section!? How did you catch wind of this?

Seems i just can't avoid Mrs Zhuge!

Well, a lady's gotta be on the lookout on anyone dissing her man right?

[flyingfox2002]

The real persons are almost always less spectacular than their legendary alter egos.

It looks like Guan Yu was a real person. My East Asian Lit. Prof said he was ficitional. I dunno where he got that info from.

[Red Piggy]

Guan Yu was a real person but he was nowhere as powerful and amazing as the character in ROTK - the novel

[zhaozilong44]

No, historically, Liu Bei was the one who sought Kongming on 3 occasions so I don't know where you're getting this "other way around" claim from.

Well, I read from some posters in the kongming forums sometime ago about another historical source that's not SGZ, which claimed that it was Kongming who visited Lui Bei 3 times. However, that source can be wrong. I forgot the name of the source, but in Robert Moss' translation, it appears quite a lot in the notes section.

That's a matter of opinion. Just because he didn't do everything that an author conjured up doesn't mean that he wasn't great historically.

I agree.

That's true, but on the other hand, LGZ didn't include some of Cao Cao's historical atrocities (like burying surrendered soldiers alive, killing one of his concubines just for waking him up, etc.) that he could have in SGYY.

Well, I know about this and I'm not one to tag Cao Cao for being evil just cause he did these things. Who knew what Lui Bei did back then.

Also, with the killing of his concubine, LGZ used a guard in place of the concubine. I guess this part favors Cao Cao more from LGZ's standpoint.

Wei Yan was a good general, but he was also extremely arrogant ("He was boastful of his talents and many tended to avoid him."). Cutting off Shu troops by burning plank roads and ordering an attack on other Shu troops due to a personal vendetta wasn't exactly smart or productive.

[/quote]

I probably should've re-read his bio from SGZ. I don't know. I just have an own bias towards Wei Yan. hehe This is my bad.

[zhaozilong44]

No, historically, Liu Bei was the one who sought Kongming on 3 occasions so I don't know where you're getting this "other way around" claim from.

Well, I read from some posters in the kongming forums sometime ago about another historical source that's not SGZ, which claimed that it was Kongming who visited Lui Bei 3 times. However, that source can be wrong. I forgot the name of the source, but in Robert Moss' translation, it appears quite a lot in the notes section.

That's a matter of opinion. Just because he didn't do everything that an author conjured up doesn't mean that he wasn't great historically.

I agree.

That's true, but on the other hand, LGZ didn't include some of Cao Cao's historical atrocities (like burying surrendered soldiers alive, killing one of his concubines just for waking him up, etc.) that he could have in SGYY.

Well, I know about this and I'm not one to tag Cao Cao for being evil just cause he did these things. Who knew what Lui Bei did back then.

Also, with the killing of his concubine, LGZ used a guard in place of the concubine. I guess this part favors Cao Cao more from LGZ's standpoint.

Wei Yan was a good general, but he was also extremely arrogant ("He was boastful of his talents and many tended to avoid him."). Cutting off Shu troops by burning plank roads and ordering an attack on other Shu troops due to a personal vendetta wasn't exactly smart or productive.

I probably should've re-read his bio from SGZ. I don't know. I just have an own bias towards Wei Yan. hehe This is my bad.

[Lady Zhuge]

Well, I read from some posters in the kongming forums sometime ago about another historical source that's not SGZ, which claimed that it was Kongming who visited Lui Bei 3 times. However, that source can be wrong. I forgot the name of the source, but in Robert Moss' translation, it appears quite a lot in the notes section.

Considering that SGZ is the official historical record of the three kingdoms, I am more opt to believe it over an unknown/unconfirmed source.

Well, I know about this and I'm not one to tag Cao Cao for being evil just cause he did these things. Who knew what Lui Bei did back then.

My purpose in pointing some of those things out wasn't to condemn Cao Cao for being purely evil or to say that Liu Bei was a perfect angel, but just that LGZ could have made it much worse by bringing in some of Cao Cao's actual historical atrocities. Also, LGZ made Liu Bei out to be a weak crybaby at times and really undermined his intelligence.

As for "who knew what Liu Bei did back then"...that's a very weak and vague argument in it of itself. I mean, I can say who knows what else so-and-so did that wasn't recorded anywhere?

[zhaozilong44]

Considering that SGZ is the official historical record of the three kingdoms, I am more opt to believe it over an unknown/unconfirmed source.

Actually, that source is quite well known. Just give me a few days to come up with the name. It's mention quite a lot in SGYY threads over at Kongming, but I don't have much time to go online these days. So, just give me a few days when I'm free, I'll reply again with the source's name.

My purpose in pointing some of those things out wasn't to condemn Cao Cao for being purely evil or to say that Liu Bei was a perfect angel, but just that LGZ could have made it much worse by bringing in some of Cao Cao's actual historical atrocities. Also, LGZ made Liu Bei out to be a weak crybaby at times and really undermined his intelligence.

I agree with your views and I forgot to mention that Cao Cao's burning of the surrendering soldiers was a good move from a strategical standpoint. The surrendering soldiers outnumbered that of his own and if they decide to rebel, Cao Cao would be in some deep doo doo.

Yes, Lui Bei wasn't the saint he was made out to be in SGYY. I know that it was him who beat up that inspector and not Zhang Fei (it was in the early chapters of the book) and this came from the SGZ source.

As for "who knew what Liu Bei did back then"...that's a very weak and vague argument in it of itself. I mean, I can say who knows what else so-and-so did that wasn't recorded anywhere?

Yes, I agree and I shouldn't have said that. That argument pretty much applies to everyone and anyone in history. Sorry to upset u.


To the other posters who responded to my post, I apologize for I did not have time to respond to each and everyone of you. I'm rather busy these days and have little time to go online.

[Laviathan]

That's true, but on the other hand, LGZ didn't include some of Cao Cao's historical atrocities (like burying surrendered soldiers alive, killing one of his concubines just for waking him up, etc.) that he could have in SGYY.

My purpose in pointing some of those things out wasn't to condemn Cao Cao for being purely evil or to say that Liu Bei was a perfect angel, but just that LGZ could have made it much worse by bringing in some of Cao Cao's actual historical atrocities.

Considering that SGZ is the official historical record of the three kingdoms, I am more opt to believe it over an unknown/unconfirmed source.

A lot of Cao Cao's so-called atrocities are not recorded in official history either. The killing of the concubine was, IIRC, a story from the Shishuo Xinyu.

Yes, Cao Cao buried soldiers alive, and he also slaughtered the city of Xuzhou. Killing the pregnant wife of Emperor Xiandi was not nice either. But apart from that, there are not many "historical atrocities" to be found about him. Luo Guanzhong based a lot on legends and folklore to create his novel character of Cao Cao.

[Zhuge Liang]

IIRC Cao Cao also orders Xiahou Yuan or Dun to kill everyone in X city after he entered it. Can't remember which city it was though.

[Lady Zhuge]

Actually, that source is quite well known. Just give me a few days to come up with the name. It's mention quite a lot in SGYY threads over at Kongming, but I don't have much time to go online these days. So, just give me a few days when I'm free, I'll reply again with the source's name.

If you're talking about Wei Lue, Pei Songzhi disputes that account in the same passage.

I agree with your views and I forgot to mention that Cao Cao's burning of the surrendering soldiers was a good move from a strategical standpoint. The surrendering soldiers outnumbered that of his own and if they decide to rebel, Cao Cao would be in some deep doo doo.

One, that's IF they decide to rebel. Two, assuming that Cao Cao had the intelligence to disarm the surrendered soldiers, they'd have a tough time doing so. Three, Cao Cao had no problems accepting the surrender of 300,000 Yellow Turban rebels which at the time also outnumbered his own men.

Yes, Lui Bei wasn't the saint he was made out to be in SGYY. I know that it was him who beat up that inspector and not Zhang Fei (it was in the early chapters of the book) and this came from the SGZ source.

The inspector wasn't exactly a saint himself.

A lot of Cao Cao's so-called atrocities are not recorded in official history either. The killing of the concubine was, IIRC, a story from the Shishuo Xinyu.

It's from Cao Man Zhuan (written by an anonymous writer from Wu), which many Wei supporters believe to be biased against Cao Cao. Unlike the "Kongming sought out Liu Bei three times", I don't think another source just completely contradicts it, though.

A lot of Cao Cao's so-called atrocities are not recorded in official history either. The killing of the concubine was, IIRC, a story from the Shishuo Xinyu.

Yes, Cao Cao buried soldiers alive, and he also slaughtered the city of Xuzhou. Killing the pregnant wife of Emperor Xiandi was not nice either. But apart from that, there are not many "historical atrocities" to be found about him.

To mention a couple more, there's also Cao Cao attacking Yongqiu for several months and massacring the city. He killed Zhang Miao's brother, Zhang Chao, as well as his entire family. That's mentioned in SGZ-Lu Bu.
According to HHS-Tao Qian, when capturing Lu, Ju Ling, and Xia Qiu counties, Cao Cao slaughtered many people, men, women, and refugees alike.

[Laviathan]

It's from Cao Man Zhuan (written by an anonymous writer from Wu), which many Wei supporters believe to be biased against Cao Cao. Unlike the "Kongming sought out Liu Bei three times", I don't think another source just completely contradicts it, though.

Right, the Cao Man Zhuan is rather biased, why else would the author have used Cao Cao's child name? But there must be some truth in the story, I guess...

To mention a couple more, there's also Cao Cao attacking Yongqiu for several months and massacring the city. He killed Zhang Miao's brother, Zhang Chao, as well as his entire family. That's mentioned in SGZ-Lu Bu.
According to HHS-Tao Qian, when capturing Lu, Ju Ling, and Xia Qiu counties, Cao Cao slaughtered many people, men, women, and refugees alike.

Yes, I stand totally corrected. Cao Cao did a lot of nasty stuff on the battlefield in the beginning of his conquests.