Best/Favourite Kingdom (and Why?) Discussion

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

Best/Favourite of the Three Kingdoms?

Wei
133
34%
Shu
157
40%
Wu
103
26%
 
Total votes : 393

Best/Favourite Kingdom (and Why?) Discussion

Unread postby Kong Wen » Mon Dec 08, 2003 11:41 pm

It seems like a lot of the threads about individual officers and individual events eventually turn into discussion about which kingdom is better or more powerful or more legitimate, etc. You get the idea. So I created this thread as a place for that kind of general discussion. Think Wei is the best, and want the rest of us to see the light? Post it here.

This thread isn't meant to stir up wars between the supporters of different sides. I just want all of the general discussion to stay in one place (just like the individual game discussion threads in the Games forum).
Last edited by Kong Wen on Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Kong Wen
Golden God
Golden God
 
Posts: 11807
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Canada

Unread postby Wizardman » Tue Dec 09, 2003 2:24 am

Which kingdom is the best?

Shu was great with the 5 tiger generals and the 3 brothers, but after Zhuge Liang's death, everything fell apart, and even Jiang Wei was overshadowed by Shu's downfall.

Wu had many intelligent and powerful warriors. It took Sun Quan's death for the cracks to show in Wu.

Wei had many good people, mainly because everyoen seemed to defect there. (Zhang Liao, Zhang He, etc.) Even after the detah of all these greats, Caos Pi and Rui were still good, and they still had great officers in Deng Ai, Sima Yi's sons, Xiahou Mao, and others. Even though the Sima's rebelled after Sima Yi's death, it took that to damage Wei.

Even though I'm slightly Shu-biased, I would say Wei was the strongest during the late 3-kingdoms period easily, but it's very hard to tell who would be better during the early three kingdoms period.
Huang Zhong: Are you calling me old?!
Wei Yan: ...Yes.
Huang Zhong: Liu Bei! I demand you kill him!
Liu Bei: Well it's... true...
User avatar
Wizardman
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: Between three kingdoms and a hard place.

Unread postby Lu Wei » Tue Dec 09, 2003 3:23 am

Shu - definately not. Down with Shu! Zhuge Liang is slightly overrated, and while he was a great politician and a above-average commander, there is just no way he could have brought down Wei with his resources.

Wu- second favorite. Good generals, good leaders. Like Shu, teh main handicap is location. They just didnt have the resources (or EXTREME brilliance) to conquer China.


Wei- Best kingdom. Had the talent in early days (Cheng Yu, the Xuns, Jia Xu, Dian Wei, Xiahou Dun, Cao Ren), the middle times (Xu Huang, Sima Yi, Cao Cao himself, Cao Ren, Zhang Liao) and in late (Sima Yi and co., Deng Ai, Zhong Hui). Had the manpower, the resources, and the ability to conquer China, and under a different name (the Jin) they did. Cao Cao's pure skill brought the kingdom together, held it together for a long time, and passed it into good hands.
Lu Wei
Langzhong
 
Posts: 571
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 12:07 am
Location: The great state of Tennessee

Unread postby Sima Hui » Fri Dec 12, 2003 4:29 pm

I'm a Shuist but I have to admit that Wei was the best.

Generals: Xiahou Dun, Xiahou Yuan, Zhang He, Zhang Liao etc

Strategists: Cheng Yu, Xun Wenruo, Xun You, Guo Jia and of course Sima Yi.

To top it all off is the Man himself Cao Cao. What a great kingdom!
This topic is an affront to both The Man and The Son of the Man.

-Ts'aoist

Ssuma I sucks.
He was okay when he was an obedient slave of The Man.


-Ts'aoist

Join the Cult and receive the True and Holy Word of The Man.
Sima Hui
Cult of Ts'aoist
 
Posts: 1670
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 7:21 pm
Location: Serving the Most Sacred Disciple of the Man

Unread postby Morg » Wed Dec 17, 2003 9:36 pm

No contest really, Wei dominated from the beginning and was probably the closest to being legitimate considering Cao Cao didn't depose the emperor, choosing instead to memorialise the emperor instead. Yes, Cao Cao controlled the emperor but at least he had some semblance of a claim to legitimacy which is more than can be said for the other two.
"If you do not turn your back on me, I shall not on you." - Cao Cao to Pang De
User avatar
Morg
The Man
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 11:46 am

Unread postby Lady Zhuge » Wed Dec 17, 2003 10:47 pm

Morg wrote:Yes, Cao Cao controlled the emperor but at least he had some semblance of a claim to legitimacy which is more than can be said for the other two.


I don't understand how Cao Cao could legitimately control and oppress the emperor. Liu Bei was a descendent of the royal line, and he only declared himself emperor after Cao Pi overthrew Xian. I have nothing to say in defense of Sun Quan, though.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein

¡°ÈËÉú²»¿ÉÄÜÄÇôƽµ££¬ ÄÇôÏ뵱Ȼ£» ²»¿ÉÓÀÔ¶ÔÚÏÊ»¨¶È¹ý¡£ ÕýÈçÄǾäÀÏ»°£º ¡®ÈýÊ®ÄêºÓ¶«£¬ ÈýÊ®ÄêºÓÎ÷¡£¡¯¡±

- ÌƹúÇ¿
User avatar
Lady Zhuge
Kongming's One and Only
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: With Kongming

Unread postby Morg » Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:33 pm

Lady Zhuge wrote:I don't understand how Cao Cao could legitimately control and oppress the emperor.

Perhaps I didn't explain clearly. SGYY illustrates how Cao Cao abuses his newfound power and how the emperor wishes to get rid of him (the edict hidden in the girdle). However, from Cao Cao's point of view, he continued to be a good servant of the Han, reuniting the land under the emperor.

Therefore, while Cao Cao was opressing the emperor he still had a claim of legitimacy.


Liu Bei was a descendent of the royal line, yet he only declared himself emperor after Cao Pi overthrew Xian.

Indeed but I personally feel that Liu Bei's own ambition was by far more important to him than restoring the Han. I was a very big fan of Liu Bei's until I read SGYY which managed to convince me that the man was purely out for himself as he betrayed 'friend' after 'friend'. While Luo Guanzhong firmly establishes Liu Bei as the almighty messiah of the novel, parts of the book portray Xuande in a less than favourable light which in turn can easily lead the reader to question his motives. Therefore, I am not personally inclined to believe that Liu Bei wanted anything other than to establish his own kingdom.

Just my opinion.


I have nothing to say in defense of Sun Quan, though.

I do: He had lovely eyes :lol:
"If you do not turn your back on me, I shall not on you." - Cao Cao to Pang De
User avatar
Morg
The Man
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 11:46 am

Unread postby Lady Zhuge » Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:41 pm

Morg wrote:Perhaps I didn't explain clearly. SGYY illustrates how Cao Cao abuses his newfound power and how the emperor wishes to get rid of him (the edict hidden in the girdle). However, from Cao Cao's point of view, he continued to be a good servant of the Han, reuniting the land under the emperor.

Therefore, while Cao Ca was opressing the emperor he still had a claim of legitimacy.


I think the key words in what you've stated above is from Cao Cao's point of view. From Hitler's point of view, he was purifying the human race and doing a good thing. Does that mean his reason was legitimate, though? Being a good servant of the Han means being a true and loyal subordinate to the emperor, not oppressing him. The only exception I can perhaps forgive would be if the emperor was corrupt and bringing great sorrow and suffering to the people, but Xian was not guilty of that.

Indeed but I personally feel that Liu Bei's own ambition was by far more important to him than restoring the Han. I was a very big fan of Liu Bei's until I read SGYY which managed to convince me that the man was purely out for himself as he betrayed 'friend' after 'friend'. While Luo Guanzhong firmly establishes Liu Bei as the almighty messiah of the novel, parts of the book portray Xuande in a less than favourable light which in turn can easily lead the reader to question his motives. Therefore, I am not personally inclined to believe that Liu Bei wanted anything other than to establish his own kingdom.

Just my opinion.


I guess Liu Bei's true legitimacy is a matter of perspective and opinion. While I respect your opinion, I do not agree with it. If he was truly just out for himself, I doubt he would have waited so long or even needed his advisors' persuasion to ascend the throne.
Also, I do not agree that Liu Bei was less legit than Cao Cao, considering the latter was certainly not out for the good of the Han or its emperor. You could say that he was a pretty ambitious guy himself. :wink:

I do: He had lovely eyes :lol:


Ugh, but do they really match his supposedly purple beard? :wink: :lol:
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein

¡°ÈËÉú²»¿ÉÄÜÄÇôƽµ££¬ ÄÇôÏ뵱Ȼ£» ²»¿ÉÓÀÔ¶ÔÚÏÊ»¨¶È¹ý¡£ ÕýÈçÄǾäÀÏ»°£º ¡®ÈýÊ®ÄêºÓ¶«£¬ ÈýÊ®ÄêºÓÎ÷¡£¡¯¡±

- ÌƹúÇ¿
User avatar
Lady Zhuge
Kongming's One and Only
 
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: With Kongming

Unread postby Kong Wen » Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:44 pm

Cao Cao's claim to legitimacy was the passing of the Mandate of Heaven from the Han. He knew that Han was finished, yet he continued to try to hold the system together as long as possible while making his own changes and acting on his own. Kudos to Cao Cao for not just ousting the emperor and taking over himself.

Liu Bei's actions were honourable and showed loyalty, dignity, integrity, etc., but such things don't matter if you're fighting for a losing cause or for an Empire whose time has already passed.

The Shu vs. Wei debate has always and will always rage, and the raging will always revolve around the Mandate of Heaven question (all questions of Liu Bei's character vs. Cao Cao's character are interesting but irrelevent when it comes to legitimacy issues). And Heaven only knows who really had the Mandate of Heaven. :)
"If I had to do my life over, I would change every single thing I have done."
— Raymond Douglas Davies, 1967
User avatar
Kong Wen
Golden God
Golden God
 
Posts: 11807
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Canada

Unread postby Morg » Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:24 pm

Lady Zhuge wrote:I think the key words in what you've stated above is from Cao Cao's point of view. From Hitler's point of view, he was purifying the human race and doing a good thing.


Well Hitler didn't believe that he was doing a good thing AFAIK, I think he, like other Germans, was frustrated by how well Jews were doing in Germany and decided to do something about it.


Does that mean his reason was legitimate, though? Being a good servant of the Han means being a true and loyal subordinate to the emperor, not oppressing him.

Again though that relies on the emperor's point of view. The emperor felt oppressed but was Cao Cao aware of that? The land was in chaos and I think it was entirely possible that Cao felt that he had to go to extremes to bring unity to the land, even if that meant treading on the emperor's toes along the way.


I guess Liu Bei's true legitimacy is a matter of perspective and opinion. While I respect your opinion, I do not agree with it.

Somehow I guessed that someone with Zhuge in their screen-name wouldn't agree with me ;)


If he was truly just out for himself, I doubt he would have waited so long or even needed his advisors' persuasion to ascend the throne.


That can also be applied to Cao Cao. Cao never ascended the throne so you could argue that he knew that he woud be seen as a usurper or you can argue that Cao was serving the emperor. As for Liu Bei, it was a common courtesy to refuse office and it was seen as an insult to accept on the first offer. If Xuande had accepted on the first suggestion then he would have been looked down upon, therefore he would have had to be "pursuaded" even if he did actually want to be emperor. Therefore it isn't possible to decipher Xuande's true intentions from that one incident.


Also, I do not agree that Liu Bei was less legit than Cao Cao, considering the latter was certainly not out for the good of the Han or its emperor. You could say that he was a pretty ambitious guy himself. :wink:

Absolutely, but I think that Cao Cao fell prey to the power he held to a degree. As we all know, power corrupts.

I do: He had lovely eyes :lol:


Ugh, but do they really match his supposedly purple beard? :wink: :lol:

Green and purple compliment each other quite well I think...then again, I'm the guy with the gree and purple colourscheme in his attic...
"If you do not turn your back on me, I shall not on you." - Cao Cao to Pang De
User avatar
Morg
The Man
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 11:46 am

Next

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests

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