Differences between Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang

[Erdrick]

(Now that I need the information, I can't find where I put it...)

I was hoping I could get some (well, all you have...) of the differences between Cao Cao and Zhuge Liang's accounts in the RTK and history (SGZ, ZZTJ, etc...). And, if you want to throw in some other SGZ/SGYY inconsistencies, go for it, but mostly those dealing with Cao Mengde and Zhuge Kongming; thank you.

[Peter]

differences:
Cao Cao = good politian + good warlord + surperm leader

Zhuge Liang = surperm politian + superme warload + bad leader

account in history:
Cao Cao: single handed built an empire (though never an emporer ). his skills are reconizes by people of China in all ages though out all time. He went though a pharse just like Lui Bei in the begging of his carrer. (holding a small province against Dong Zhoug).
He luckier consider than Lui Bei ( because he found a lot of warlords, I mean, a bunch full of them!)

Zhuge Liang = single handed directed an empire. His carrer highlights:
alieance with Wu's Sun Quan. Taking the souther Jin provience, and the sucess in "red-clif" naval battle, the three kingdom stragies, defending the Shu empire after Lui Bei's death and Norther Campain against Wei (defended by Sima Yi).

peraonal note: I think they are actually very similar in lots of aspects, they are no official records of direct campain between Liang and Cao. It would be interesting to see how they actually interect in the battle.

and please forgive my spellings (they are terriable!!! really bad)
hope that answers your question!

[James]

differences:
Cao Cao = good politian + good warlord + surperm leader
Zhuge Liang = surperm politian + superme warload + bad leader

I will probably post more soon, but for now I would like to comment on this. Zhuge Liang was a marvelous leader, there is more to that title than the ability to command troops in a battle (Which Zhuge Liang was good at, just not good enough to rank among the better generals). He was, as you said, a political genius, but he was also very skilled at maintaining his army and was a true visionary. He had the talent to lead a kingdom to unification of China, he just needed someone who had the talent necessary to take the front line and follow through with his objectives. He was not able to accomplish what he wanted to with the Northern Campaigns, and Jiang Wei, unfortunately, did even less. If someone like Fa Zheng were there to lead the battles, we may have seen a noteworthy difference.

Zhuge Liang had the talent, skill, and vision to lead the kingdom of Shu, that is what a leader is all about.

Cao Cao was very skilled in politics, a true leader, and also quite capable on the battlefield as well. The SGYY makes him out to be a little more evil than he was in history, although there are still instances, which we can look at (e.g. Xu Zhou). Both were good leaders, but if Cao Cao were to take the battlefield against Zhuge Liang with even odds I think Cao Cao would come out ahead.

[Jimayo]

I prefer the novel Cao Cao to the historical one. He seemed a lot nicer to me.

[Erdrick]

Oh, and I should have mentioned in the original post; if you can include specific acts/events, (like the Lu Boshe incident for Cao Cao), that would be great

[Dennis]

I prefer the novel Cao Cao to the historical one. He seemed a lot nicer to me.

Really? He seemed a little more diabolical in the novel because he always tried to rationalize all the crap he accidently did by being drunk.

In SGZ, it wasn't there as much, and everyone else was doing it, so he didn't look as bad.

Although Zhuge didn't, and I think not slaying your cronies when your drunk by San Guo standards means you're a poor leader at best.

[Jimayo]

Really? He seemed a little more diababolical in the novel because he always tried to rationalize all the crap he accidently did by being drunk.

In SGZ, it wasn't there as much, and everyone else was doing it, so he didn't look as bad.

Although Zhuge didn't, and I think not slaying your cronies when your drunk by San Guo standards means you're a poor leader at best.

Yeah but he didn't slaughter 10,000 innocent civilians, or bury 80,000 POWs alive in the novel. And he was quite nice to most of the civilians he came across(like those guys that ran away then came back and offered him their heads).

[Mega Zarak]

Yeah but he didn't slaughter 10,000 innocent civilians, or bury 80,000 POWs alive in the novel. And he was quite nice to most of the civilians he came across(like those guys that ran away then came back and offered him their heads).

I think that the descriptions of the incidents at Xu Zhou and Guan Du are much worse in SGYY.

Cao Cao's army of revenge laid waste whatever place it passed through, slaying the people and desecrating their cemeteries (AD 193).

Cao Cao's troops followed hard but could not come up with him. However, they captured all his impedimenta, and they slew some eighty thousands of his army so that the watercourses ran blood and the drowned corpses could not be counted. It was a most complete victory for Cao Cao, and he made over all the spoil to the army.

Besides these, as mentioned by Dexiang, I find that Cao Cao seemed to be more diabolical in the novel compared to the history.

[Jimayo]

I don't consider killing soldiers in battle as bad as killing POWs. And it doesn't say he killed 10,000 innocent civilians. Laying waste to all doesn't neccessarily mean he was killing innocents.

[Iznoach, Legendary Dragon]

I don't consider killing soldiers in battle as bad as killing POWs. And it doesn't say he killed 10,000 innocent civilians. Laying waste to all doesn't neccessarily mean he was killing innocents.

I think if you say "all", it means civilians, soldiers, women and children, all inclusive.