Did Zhao Yun seal Shu's fate?/dynasties built on betrayal...

Join the Romance of the Three Kingdoms discussion with our resident Scholars. Topics relating to the novel and history are both welcome. Don't forget to check the Forum Rules before posting.
Kongming’s Archives: Romance of the Three Kingdoms
Three Kingdoms Officer Biographies
Three Kingdoms Officer Encyclopedia
Scholars of Shen Zhou Search Tool

Did Zhao Yun seal Shu's fate?/dynasties built on betrayal...

Unread postby Jon » Sun Apr 27, 2003 5:46 pm

at chang ban, according to sources, he went into enemy lines and saved liu shan from being killed by wei forces. liu shan later proves to be a corrupted leader.in my opinion, zhao yun is a great guy, and a strong fighter, but he may have unknowingly destroyed what he worked so hard for.had he not been able to save liu shan, or decided not to, couldn't a less corrupt son of liu bei inherit or zhuge liang take over?i dont even know of any more sons of liu bei besides liu feng and shan, so, i would appreciate some comments on this. sorry if this has been done before.by the way, dont take any offense please, anybody who is partial to him.
Last edited by Jon on Tue Jul 29, 2003 4:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Jon
Ladies' Man
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:06 am

Unread postby TheGreatNads » Sun Apr 27, 2003 6:00 pm

Personally, I don't think Liu Shan was that bad. I don't blame him for not trusting a former Wei officer, who had been draining Shu's resources, going on a total of 9 unsucessful campaigns, avoiding Shu's capital, changing old defensive setups, etc. Liu Shan had every reason not to believe in Jiang Wei in my opinion. And Liu Bei did have two other sons, named Liu Li and Liu Yong.
TheGreatNads
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:02 am
Location: nowhere new, ever

Re: did zhao yun seal shu's fate?

Unread postby jiuwan » Sun Apr 27, 2003 6:34 pm

zhou_yu_musou03 wrote:at chang ban, according to sources, he went into enemy lines and saved liu shan from being killed by wei forces. liu shan later proves to be a corrupted leader.in my opinion, zhao yun is a great guy, and a strong fighter, but he may have unknowingly destroyed what he worked so hard for.had he not been able to save liu shan, or decided not to, couldn't a less corrupt son of liu bei inherit or zhuge liang take over?i dont even know of any more sons of liu bei besides liu feng and shan, so, i would appreciate some comments on this. sorry if this has been done before.by the way, dont take any offense please, anybody who is partial to him.


Well at Chang Ban, when Zhao Yun went behind enemy lines to save Liu Shan, there was no indication that the then infant Liu Shan would be killed by Cao Cao's forces. A good example would be when Cao Cao surrounded Guan Yu. After the battle Liu Bei's family - his two wives were not harmed in anyway. The same could be said in this instance with Liu Shan. The Xu Zhou massacre is a different matter all together :wink:
With the infant Liu Shan in his hands, Cao Cao could have exerted political stranglehold on Liu Bei (which didn't happen, but can be speculation.)
According to history, SGZ - In Liu Bei's flight, his family was left behind, which included the infant Liu Shan. Zhao Yu went back into enemy lines to rescue the young future lord. At the time how was he supposed to know what kind of ruler Liu Shan would turn out to be? This is what probably ran through his mind - "Damn! The army is in retreat, the Lord's family and son is left behind. Who can save him? *Looks around* There's no one here except me. I guess I have to face Cao Cao's legions by myself. I shall give my life in defense of Lord Liu Bei. As for his son as well. *Gallops into Cao Cao's armies to look for Liu Shan*" Proving his valiantness (is there such a word? :lol: ) And the rest is history.

Liu Feng, Liu Bei's adopted son, was executed after the death of Guan Yu. So he wouldn't have ruled if Liu Shan died at Chang Ban.
Liu Bei had two younger sons after Liu Shan (they were both born most likely after Chang Ban, since there was no mention of them at Chang Ban being left behind etc..). There names were Liu Li (Fengxiao) 劉理 (奉孝)
and Liu Yong (Gongshou) 劉永 (公壽)

So it's speculation of what would happen to Shu if someone elsed ruled instead.

Oh ya, in my oppinion, I think Liu Shan was a bad ruler. What an idiot! Surrenders to Deng Ai, after the latter penetrated to Cheng Du. Everyone can surrender, but an emperor <b>can not</b>!
Just my two cents.
jiuwan
Marquis of Shun Ping
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:46 am

Unread postby Jon » Sun Apr 27, 2003 7:31 pm

yea i guess you're right. just thought id bring this up.
Jon
Ladies' Man
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:06 am

Re: did zhao yun seal shu's fate?

Unread postby TheGreatNads » Sun Apr 27, 2003 7:35 pm

jiuwan wrote:Oh ya, in my oppinion, I think Liu Shan was a bad ruler. What an idiot! Surrenders to Deng Ai, after the latter penetrated to Cheng Du. Everyone can surrender, but an emperor <b>can not</b>!
Just my two cents.


But how does surrendering make someone an idiot?
TheGreatNads
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:02 am
Location: nowhere new, ever

Re: did zhao yun seal shu's fate?

Unread postby jiuwan » Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:13 pm

TheGreatNads wrote:But how does surrendering make someone an idiot?


Let me explain this as best as I can.....

On my signature quote you will see a long text of chinese characters? Due to the 255 character limit on the signature I was forced to cut out some of the quote. Here's what the full quote should look like....
軍事要大五:能戰當戰,不能戰當守,不能守當走,不能走當降,不能降當死耳.

Here's what it translates into:
<i>There are five essentials laws in the military:
When able to do battle then battle,
If not able to battle then defend,
If not able to defend then flee,
If not able to flee the surrender,
If not able to surrender then die!</i>

Now if you analyze what the above states, then that should be your path of what an officer or general would do. If that general is able to go out and do battle with the enemy then he would (favorable conditions). If the conditions are against him e.g. lack of troops then he would defend and hold out until reinforcements arrive (which would even the conditions thus allowing him to do battle). If the chances of reinforcements coming in time to rescue are slim to none or there's no hope, this would cause the general to not be able to defend the city, fort, castle etc. so his next option is to flee. If while the general is in the middle of trying to flee and he is unable to flee e.g. sickness or injury (such as Pang De's case) or even if he gets captured by the enemy then his next option is to surrender, since he can't fight no more, nor defend, nor flee... so his next option is to surrender.

Upon surrender, say for instance the enemy thinks he's useless or just wants him dead, then surrendering isn't an option which leaves us to the last option available - death. Do you see how the natural progression goes from attacking (doing battle) to death on the battlefield? This a fundamental law that governs military affairs on confrontations. (There's a whole lot more fundamental military laws in Sun Tzu's: The Art of War, but that's another topic.)

Now this law is all handy and dandy for generals, officers, commanders, ministers, enuachs, peasants etc etc... down the chain. <b>BUT</b> there is one exception to that rule. And that is the Emperor himself. The Emperor himself (You can include his family as well, but not necessary) is the one person that can not surrender to the enemy. Surrendering to the enemy allows one to live when he should be dead after defeat. Perhaps to even became more prosperous, advancement in career etc. with the 'enemy' now ally side. But what about the emperor? What can he do on the other side after he surrenders? Surely the side of the victors wouldn't give him an emperor's position. So the most is to give the surrendered emperor a high position, yet low enough where he can't do any damage. Usually a duke of some post. Theoretically the highest position that the surrendered emperor can get is right below the victorious emperor. And in history do you see that happening?

So for the emperor, he went from the <b>highest</b> possible position in his kingdom to some <b>lowly</b> duke of another kingdom. For an example - The king of England surrenders to the King of France, the ex-king of England is now a noble of the French King.
Which is ultimately shame. Something an emperor can't and shouldn't bear. Which is why historically most of them commit suicide instead of surrendering. Which is why Liu Shan is a bad ruler in my opinion, based on what I've said above. I guess I was thinking about the part where Liu Bei dropped him when he was an infant. In chinese people that <b>are idiots</b> are sometimes referred to as "Ah Shan." (The first character is "ah" and the second character is Liu Shan's name.) So sorry if I was a little harsh in calling him an "idiot." But think of the bright side, Sun Hao is a bigger "idiot" because he surrendered after Liu Shan to Jin.
jiuwan
Marquis of Shun Ping
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:46 am

Unread postby TheGreatNads » Mon Apr 28, 2003 12:00 am

Ok then. But honestly, I don't blame Liu Shan for surrendering. Shu was lost cause by then.
TheGreatNads
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:02 am
Location: nowhere new, ever

Unread postby jiuwan » Mon Apr 28, 2003 12:30 am

TheGreatNads wrote:Ok then. But honestly, I don't blame Liu Shan for surrendering. Shu was lost cause by then.

I understand what you're saying. It's just how society worked and how people were viewed upon by their actions back then. Liu Shan not being able to surrender is all about pride. Pride of the emperor, pride of the ancestors, pride in seeing their ancestors when they die.
jiuwan
Marquis of Shun Ping
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:46 am

Unread postby Jon » Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:29 am

sun hao totally trashed what the first 3 gave their own lives for.i despise him. back on topic, i think shan was a corrupt leader. listening to eunuchs, not managing internal affairs, etc. are the true cause along with jiang wei's wasting of resources, that lead to shu's downfall. as you know, wasnt he given the title, duke of pleasure and (dang i forgot, sorry), which gives away his personality. in this period, the first 2/3(as for wu, the others didnt have many descendants fit to rule) people in the family line to take the throne are the best.i mean, liu bei, sun jian and the 2 sons that ruled, and cao cao are dandy, but things go downhill from there. yuan shao wasnt that great to begin with, but look at his sons! they fought eachother!(off topic question, dont have to answer this, does anybody know what titles zhou yu's sons had?well i guess im talking about zhou yin, the younger, because zhou xun died early.any info on these two would be great.also more info on zhou yu's family roots and if zhou yin had any more kids so the family line continued.
Jon
Ladies' Man
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:06 am

Unread postby TheGreatNads » Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:41 am

zhou_yu_musou03 wrote:i think shan was a corrupt leader. listening to eunuchs, not managing internal affairs, etc. are the true cause along with jiang wei's wasting of resources, that lead to shu's downfall.


I couldn't disagree more. Jiang Wei's 9 nine crappy campaigns and the changing of defense at Han Zhong is what caused Shu's demise. One of Liu Shan's mistakes was not trusting Jiang Wei, on Wei's invasion. Not that I blame him for not trusting Jiang Wei. Liu Shan didn't sit around and do nothing either. He constantly promoted his officers, and when the rebellion in Liao Dong happened he knew it might be a good time to strike, so he ordered Jiang Wan to station himself in Han Zhong, and wait for Wu's actions with the possibility of a full scale attack. I think Liu Shan was better than any of the Wei rulers after Cao Rui, and better than any of the Wu rulers after Sun Quan.
TheGreatNads
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:02 am
Location: nowhere new, ever

Next

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

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