Wu: The Lone Warrior of ChiBi.

Best threads of the SGYYS, for your viewing pleasure.

Re: Wu: The Lone Warrior of ChiBi.

Unread postby Jimayo » Sat Jun 26, 2004 8:09 pm

Mega Zarak wrote:This comes as a late reply. Anyway, the two attacking theory is actually about Cao Cao's northern force going to Yang Zhou from two directions. According to most standard sources, Cao Cao himself led his army up via Yang Tze after having taken Jiang Ling. I speculated that Cao Cao could have instructed another force to come south via the Han river directly from Xiang Yang.

Refer to the figure below (not drawn to scale).

Image

The second attack which I was talking about is denoted by "??". Note that Liu Bei was at Fan Kou and Guan Yu was possibly at Xia Kou (if I remember correctly). Hence, if Cao Cao did order another force to set off from Xiang Yang and come down via Han River, then Liu Bei would definitely be involved in the battle of Chi Bi/Wu Ling in one way or another. Note also that the force from Xiang Yang could possibly merge with the main force from Jiang Ling after the inital rounds of engagements. I do not have enough details with me right now to come to any good conclusion (I've forgotten quite a bit of what I posted more than a year ago) and a lot of analysis still need to be done to support this two attack theory. I look forward to visit the actual sites in China next time and perhaps, I'd have a better set of answers for you then. :)


Here's a thought for you chris. What if, there was the battle of chibi as recorded by Wu records. But Cao Cao refers to Liu Bei as his destroyer because after the Naval Battle, Liu Bei followed up with an attack of Cao Cao's camp, after which defeat, Cao Cao burned his fleet and retreated. That would make all the differing accounts make a little more sense.
98% of the internet population has a Myspace. If you're part of the 2% that isn't an emo bastard, copy and paste this into your sig.
Jimayo
Lord of the Thirteen Hells
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:38 am
Location: Nothingness. And that's where I'll be returning in oh, about 15 minutes.

Unread postby Exar Kun » Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:45 am

That might make sense if the historians were right there with the fleet writing history as it happened.
But the story would have been recorded much later.
I find it unlikely that Cao Cao would really know so little about what happened to him or simply take for granted who was responsible.Surely he would want to find out what really happened.To assume otherwise is to take him for a fool.
"Two there should be; no more, no less.
One to embody the power, the other to crave it."
-Creed of the New Sith-
User avatar
Exar Kun
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 12:18 am
Location: Cruising the Nether

Re: Wu: The Lone Warrior of ChiBi.

Unread postby Lu Kang » Thu Jul 29, 2004 11:58 pm

Jimayo Oyamitch wrote:
Here's a thought for you chris. What if, there was the battle of chibi as recorded by Wu records. But Cao Cao refers to Liu Bei as his destroyer because after the Naval Battle, Liu Bei followed up with an attack of Cao Cao's camp, after which defeat, Cao Cao burned his fleet and retreated. That would make all the differing accounts make a little more sense.


To be exact Cao Cao doesn't refer to anyone as his destroyer. Cao Cao's bio does but that was merely written off the history of Wei. Other Wei bios regarding Chi Bi refer to a combined effort of Liu Bei and Sun Quan as well as Cao Cao attacking only Sun Quan then returning. Furthermore, none of these accounts are from a Wei record and are just what Chen Shou used to put in San Guo Zhi from the Wei records. But from the various different accounts of the time period and what happened there is no question that Wei did know that Wu fought at Chi Bi and it was not just Liu Bei fighitng alone.
无口为天,有口为吴,君临万邦,天子之都
Historical Post
Lu Kang
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2003 1:04 am

Unread postby PrimeMinister Bu Zhi » Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:54 pm

Liu Bei can't possibly have defeated Cao Cao and Zhou Yu not defeating Cao Cao. It was the combined force. And what exactly defeated Cao Cao. The desease and the fire attack. Liu Bei did not cuase any of those, while one of them(the fire attack obviously) was cuased by Zhou Yu's navy. So how could Liu Bei possibly beat Cao Cao and Zhou Yu not. Cao Cao's SGZ is either wrong or is translated in a sense so that it does not imply it's full meaning of the comment. The SGZ's of the Wu generals, as well as every other SGZ of the battle do not say anything about Liu Bei alone defeating Cao Cao.
PrimeMinister Bu Zhi
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:22 pm
Location: Jiao

Unread postby Exar Kun » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:38 am

PrimeMinister Bu Zhi wrote:Liu Bei can't possibly have defeated Cao Cao and Zhou Yu not defeating Cao Cao. It was the combined force. And what exactly defeated Cao Cao. The desease and the fire attack. Liu Bei did not cuase any of those, while one of them(the fire attack obviously) was cuased by Zhou Yu's navy. So how could Liu Bei possibly beat Cao Cao and Zhou Yu not. Cao Cao's SGZ is either wrong or is translated in a sense so that it does not imply it's full meaning of the comment. The SGZ's of the Wu generals, as well as every other SGZ of the battle do not say anything about Liu Bei alone defeating Cao Cao.


Hmm?
I see a contradiction.First you say it is the combined force,THEN you say that Liu Bei did nothing and Zhou Yu did something. :roll:
An oversight I'm sure.CERTAINLY you aren't intentionally trying to spread disinformation.

And of course there's WONDERFUL logic in your last statement.If Cao Cao's bio doesn't conform to Wu's version,it's WRONG.How absolutely laughable.
Might it not have occurred to you that if Wei and Shu BOTH say it's so then the odd man out is wrong?Or is this another plot against Wu that you have again sniffed out?
It is of course INCONCEIVABLE for the Prime Minister of Han,later Duke,then KING of Wei to have better recorded history than that less advanced kingdom in the south?
Certainly it is INCONCEIVABLE that Wu,having had their tails saved by plague and an outsider(Liu Bei),decided to write the history so they don't look incompetent.

Surely not.The only possible conclusion is that Cao Cao's bio is translated badly,in which case I suggest you go give some tips to Lucy Zhang and Jack Yuan,or it's just plain recorded wrong since it doesn't conform with those 100% accurate Wu bios.
Come now,surely Sun Bofu has taught you better than this.
"Two there should be; no more, no less.
One to embody the power, the other to crave it."
-Creed of the New Sith-
User avatar
Exar Kun
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 12:18 am
Location: Cruising the Nether

Unread postby Lady Wu » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:49 am

Note, though, that the inference from the fact that there are two historical documents not saying something and one historical document saying that something, to the conclusion that that one document is clearly wrong, is equally illogical.

While it is possible that Wu historians blew up Wu's achievements at Chibi to make themselves look good, it is equally possible that Wei's historian played down the event as much as possible to save Cao Cao's face, and amateur Shu historians (since they didn't have any official ones) ignored Wu's involvement in order to make Shu look bigger than what it was.
"Whatever you do, don't fall off the bridge! It'll be a pain to try to get back up again." - Private, DW 8
User avatar
Lady Wu
There's no better state than Wu
There's no better state than Wu
 
Posts: 12847
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 2:35 am
Location: Wu-ere else?

Unread postby Liu Yuante » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:17 am

Lady Wu wrote:Note, though, that the inference from the fact that there are two historical documents not saying something and one historical document saying that something, to the conclusion that that one document is clearly wrong, is equally illogical.

While it is possible that Wu historians blew up Wu's achievements at Chibi to make themselves look good, it is equally possible that Wei's historian played down the event as much as possible to save Cao Cao's face, and amateur Shu historians (since they didn't have any official ones) ignored Wu's involvement in order to make Shu look bigger than what it was.


While I agree with the overall point of this, let me add that, practically speaking, not being a historian in an official capacity, while perhaps indicating 'bad history' in terms of the social and political role that the office was supposed to fulfill, does not necessarily have anything to do with factual accuracy. Some of the greatest historians of all time have been amateurs.

Adrian
User avatar
Liu Yuante
绯红王
 
Posts: 2682
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 12:20 am
Location: Central Pennsylvania

Unread postby Lady Wu » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:36 am

LiuYuanTe wrote:While I agree with the overall point of this, let me add that, practically speaking, not being a historian in an official capacity, while perhaps indicating 'bad history' in terms of the social and political role that the office was supposed to fulfill, does not necessarily have anything to do with factual accuracy. Some of the greatest historians of all time have been amateurs.

That I do agree with. It is even possible that amateur historians were not under the same constraints as officials ones were to produce a historical record that is favourable to their government. I guess my point was simply that the SGZ:Shu's version of the battle of Chibi can hardly be considered Shu's official position on the matter.
"Whatever you do, don't fall off the bridge! It'll be a pain to try to get back up again." - Private, DW 8
User avatar
Lady Wu
There's no better state than Wu
There's no better state than Wu
 
Posts: 12847
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2002 2:35 am
Location: Wu-ere else?

Unread postby PrimeMinister Bu Zhi » Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:32 pm

Hmm?
I see a contradiction.First you say it is the combined force,THEN you say that Liu Bei did nothing and Zhou Yu did something.
An oversight I'm sure.CERTAINLY you aren't intentionally trying to spread disinformation.

And of course there's WONDERFUL logic in your last statement.If Cao Cao's bio doesn't conform to Wu's version,it's WRONG.How absolutely laughable.
Might it not have occurred to you that if Wei and Shu BOTH say it's so then the odd man out is wrong?Or is this another plot against Wu that you have again sniffed out?
It is of course INCONCEIVABLE for the Prime Minister of Han,later Duke,then KING of Wei to have better recorded history than that less advanced kingdom in the south?
Certainly it is INCONCEIVABLE that Wu,having had their tails saved by plague and an outsider(Liu Bei),decided to write the history so they don't look incompetent.



I never said Liu Bei did nothing. And I never said Zhou Yu only beat him. What I said was that Liu Bei cannot have defeated him and Zhou Yu not. You think about it yourself. Does it make sense? Wu's fire attack was and the sickness was the only thing that cuased Cao Cao to retreat. Notice how Liu Bei did none of these. So how could he have possibly won that battle, but Wu not winning. Both sides won the battle. It's just that the idea of Shu only is wrong, easily. Liu Bei's plan was to keep on fighting, how would he win. He apparently did not have anything in mind other then simple naval combat. Apparently, this did some credit for defeating Cao Cao but not as much as the Wu fire attack. Also, Wu had more men. With a fire attack plus an attack from 30,000 men and then seiging Jiangling, compared to Liu Bei's 20,000 men attack. Obviously Wu did more. Though Liu Bei did something and deserves some credit, he does not deserve all the credit. What do you think really happened at Chi Bi. Zhou Yu did nothing and then Liu Bei attacked and defeated him?
PrimeMinister Bu Zhi
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:22 pm
Location: Jiao

Unread postby Exar Kun » Mon Aug 02, 2004 3:39 pm

Lady Wu wrote:Note, though, that the inference from the fact that there are two historical documents not saying something and one historical document saying that something, to the conclusion that that one document is clearly wrong, is equally illogical.


I disagree on that.Wei,Wu and Shu all recorded events independently of each other.Therefore they can all be used as a check on a common event,in this case Chi Bi.
If we are to assume that Wu is correct then you must then explain why Shu lied,which is easily explained by saying that just wanted a piece of it,but also why Wei lied.This is not so easy.What sense does it make for Wei to record that Liu Bei,Cao Cao's personal enemy and the contender with the Cao clan for legitimacy,burned part of Cao Cao's fleet?It makes no sense whatsoever.
If Wei bios were going to try a cover up,easier to say the epidemic forced a retreat and they burned the ships themselves,a subtle alteration of true events.
Also,as LiuYuanTe has said,Shu's historians being 'amateurs' is not even a factor.Unless they're also newcomers to little things like observation,reading and writing,they can record events just as well as anyone else.They would lack the analytical skills but that's isn't pertinent.

[quote="PrimeMinister Bu Zhi[/quote]
never said Liu Bei did nothing. And I never said Zhou Yu only beat him. What I said was that Liu Bei cannot have defeated him and Zhou Yu not. You think about it yourself. Does it make sense? Wu's fire attack was and the sickness was the only thing that cuased Cao Cao to retreat. Notice how Liu Bei did none of these. So how could he have possibly won that battle, but Wu not winning. Both sides won the battle. It's just that the idea of Shu only is wrong, easily. Liu Bei's plan was to keep on fighting, how would he win. He apparently did not have anything in mind other then simple naval combat. Apparently, this did some credit for defeating Cao Cao but not as much as the Wu fire attack. Also, Wu had more men. With a fire attack plus an attack from 30,000 men and then seiging Jiangling, compared to Liu Bei's 20,000 men attack. Obviously Wu did more. Though Liu Bei did something and deserves some credit, he does not deserve all the credit. What do you think really happened at Chi Bi. Zhou Yu did nothing and then Liu Bei attacked and defeated him?[/quote]

Ahem.I quote:
Liu Bei did not cuase any of those, while one of them(the fire attack obviously) was cuased by Zhou Yu's navy.


Unless Liu Bei was cooking rice for the victory party I see no other interpretation other than you saying that Liu Bei did nothing.

And once again you have made an interpretation based on Wu history that you 'appear' to be taking for granted."Wu fire attack"?What's that?Isn't that what's up in the air?I can't cross reference a "Wu fire attack" in Cao Cao's bio.As far as I'm concerned there's an even chance was was no "Wu fire attack" where instead there may have been an "Alliance fire attack" or even a "Wu fire attack and a separate Liu Bei fire attack".

Wu had more men?Now there's logic for you.They had more men so they obviously did more. :roll:
Rrright.How did the Scarves ever lose then eh?They had hundreds of thousands of troopers.

You ask a question,what do I think happened?Well here's what I think.
I think Cao Cao advanced to Chi Bi where he was confronted by the Liu and Sun forces.I don't believe the Huang Gai attack to be a fabrication so it must have happened in some form.Also an attack by Liu Bei happened.Due to the viewpoint of Cao Cao I believe that Liu Bei is the one that struck either closer to,or directly at the command sections and as such Wei saw him as foremost.
The description in Zhou Yu's bio of the fire attack I believe to be utter crap.The "raging inferno" never had an ounce of credibility.Ask me later if you want details.

I believe that as far as the overall situation went,the combined fire attack was relatively minor.A defeat,but not even close to a campaign winner.Thus,Cao Cao fell back to Nanjun to regroup his troops for the next plan of attack.He was pursued by allied forces.At Nanjun,his army begins to feel full blown plague and are devastated.With no other choice he retreats to Xuchang and burns the remainder of his fleet to avoid their seizure.
"Two there should be; no more, no less.
One to embody the power, the other to crave it."
-Creed of the New Sith-
User avatar
Exar Kun
Dark Lord of the Sith
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 12:18 am
Location: Cruising the Nether

PreviousNext

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved