The short Yiling bitI don't think Fu-Shiren was part of Tao Qian, he first turns up when the whole burns the arsenal thing
I were meant to say if Guan Yu did survive, then Shu would at least proceed with caution against Wu if they were going to launch a campaign on Jing, the mass death and lost of talents could be lessened. There are so many talents that lost on Shaoting, incurring major impact on Shu.
And yes, the survival of three brothers aren't really important, they're old anyway, but men like Guan Ping, Ma Liang and many others would still very likely to be alive, the campaign on Jing could proceed more carefully. The lost on Shaoting is due to Liu Bei's error and his underestimation upon his enemy.
Ma Liang yes, others you listed not so much. Loss of Huang Quan was bad. I get what your saying about the loss of a generation, when your one province that really does matter though I wouldn't call it fatal for Shu, it would have hampered the Zhuge Liang era. Where I disagree is the idea that if Guan Yu had lived, though his expirence would have been helpful in a rather green army, the scale of Yiling doesn't happen
I don't see Liu Bei's camapign as reckless. It was the same manner at his invasion of Yi and Hanzhong, slow, careful, advance bit by bit, try to a few tricks if stuck (like the fake ambush) and lacking an aggression. Huang Quan wanted a more attacking policy, Lu Xun used Liu Bei's style against him which he couldn't have done if Liu Bei was being unusually reckless. Liu Bei lost becuase his men got stuck and lax, Lu Xun spotted something nobody else did and used the fire attack
Guan YuI'm sorry if i'm bashing Guan Yu so hard, i just simply doesn't like how people keep saying that he's a great general eventhough in fact he is not. Even worse, he's even worshiped as God.
I get it. A lot of people in western 3k come into history via DW (where Guan Yu is... almost worshipped by some of the characters) and/or the novel and think he is super awesome. They then discover the historical Guan Yu and swing too far the other way. For you, given the culture you seem to be in, it is worse but we have all gone through this stage in some shape or form. Guan Yu is possibly also difficult becuase there is such a gap between the written record and that Guan Yu was hugely admired by figures like Cao Cao and Lu Meng, it is hard to quite pin down how good he was or wasn't whereas someone like Zhuge Liang, things are clearly.
Clearly none of this is Guan Yu's fault and I'm happy to try to help you on this.
There are a few things that might help
1) Pick and choose what he did wrong.
At the moment, it feels like your trying to pick apart everything he did. Talking with Xu Huang, trying to do his duty in defending Jing, willing to fight after a defeat, now we have his attacking a city where even the defenders felt they might fall. All portrayed, not just as mistakes as all humans make, but signs as he is super incompetent and super super arrogant
Some of it comes from your not understanding norms of the time (like fighting on after defeat) or understanding his thinking but the problem is you don't go "why did he do this?" but "A-HA! Further proof of how inept he was and how arrogant he was." and try to jam the idea into your belief. If something he did puzzles, ask and question why, don't leap.
2) Not everything he did was due to arrogance.
Arrogance was a key part of his personality, it did impact his judgement but he wasn't described as deluded and not every decision he made, be it when and where he invaded, his tactical moves or what he had for lunch was based on arrogance. There is no hint he thought he was the next Xiang Yu or even the most arrogant figure of the era. With human beings, multiple factors usually come into play, not just one trait and it is turning Guan Yu into a bad caricature to put everything down to one trait
3) Not everyone is pro-Guan Yu just becuase they disagree with you.
You acknowledge your bias and where it comes from, that is really helpful. The problem is when I or historians put something you don't like, bias and sugercoating is now being thrown. Me? I'm a Wei-st, I don't warm to Shu but there are figures in Shu I like, Guan Yu isn't one of them. I think people go slightly too far in their criticism of handling of Jing, I acknowledge his reputation in his time but that is as far as it goes. I try to defend any three kingdom figure if people are going too far
De Crespigny? A pro-Wu historian known to lampoon Shu figures but to you, pro Guan Yu becuase he doesn't just attack Guan Yu. The historians who didn't claim Guan Yu was in bad condition after Fan are accused of sugar-coating. It is important one can call bias and acknowledge it but throwing bias against everyone when their arguments or the facts don't go the way you like is... using that right in a bad way.
Ah yea, celebrating for his death then get executed weren't an increase of his popularity.
Defending a man who are antagonistic and ungrateful from getting executed because of offending the superior weren't as bad as retorting a joke from someone, thats nice. In a sense, its still same as sugar coating.
I'm sorry, I really don't understand what your trying to say here
In Zhao Yun's situation, his defeat was inevitable, since he was given a command of untrained troop. Liang forces were barbarian led by Beigong Boyu, i dont think he's wise enough to realize such ploy.
-Edit- Different than Guan Yu, Zhao Yun intentionally put himself at risk in order to bring his potential to the fullest (even though i personally think Zhou Yun would never been in any risk whether he intentionally or not, his skill are the real thing)
Indeed but I was talking about retreating intact. I would not underestimate the Qiang given what trouble they gave the Han at the time and they had smashed Sun Jian's army at the same time
Guan Yu put his life on the line repeatedly as part of his job as a warrior
Yea, we no longer know what really happened that time, just the praise of historian about him.
But reading back and assessing Guan Yu's trait, he chose not to retreat via Wei's land is most likely he underestimated Lu Meng, mainly he was Wu's general.
The other possibility that Guan Yu was angry as Meng Da refused to send reinforcement and that he's too proud to receive help from a man he view inferior to him. So, rather than losing face due to receiving help from inferior man, he'd rather face his 'weak' enemy head-on in battle.
The Lu Meng who had to "resign" so Guan Yu would feel free to commit more forces against Wei rather then have them defend Jing?
These examples (and the "Sorry, he never think that way. Perhaps his condition being locked by two enemies country makes me think he's trying to achieving Xiang Yu's feat.) are what I mean where arrogance is part of personality crosses into only trait he has is arrogance and it gets taken into caricature levels
You stated:
"It was in fact possible, despite his disadvantage, that Guan Yu might be able to drive Lü Meng away, or at least compel another negotiated settlement."
I replied:
"hes even has a great negotiation skill as well!"
Now you even tried to use my reply on your statement against me
At no point does De Crespigny says Guan Yu was a great negotiator in any of his works that I'm aware of but if you have evidence that he did so, please point it out
I'll admit you're a good debater. Trying so hard to defend to man you admire is quite admirable, but please don't twist your own statement to attack other.
Strictly speaking, first thing you quote from me there is from De Crespigny, sorry if I didn't make that clear enough
Let me just put your line in the actual context it was in
That statement is like stating that Guan Yu's men are in high morale. Not even had any set back even after Xu Huang slaughtered many of his men and burned his camp, hes even has a great negotiation skill as well! Thats how you make a statement when you admire someone highly, sugar coated it. Nice!
It was part of your attack on the pro-Wu historian Professor De Crespigny as being a Guan Yu biased fan who was sugar coating and twisting what the professor was saying.
ah, so losing both of his camp aren't bad? Just how much more the historian trying to sugar coat things on what happen after the battle. Where the supplies are stored? on some wodden oxen cart that can be transported anytime when the camp attacked and falls to enemies hand?
Suppose his morale are high, and Lu Meng opted to defend Jing with his men instead of commencing a propaganda. Just how long Guan Yu's men would last in the siege battle? You mention it yourself on one of the thread that a siege battle would take long time and would do a lot more casualty to attacker than the defender. Please give me an explanation how De Crespigny would say that Guan Yu would be able to drive Lu Meng away?
And why my hypothetical opinion that he should retreat via other route to survive, saving the retake of Jing for another day from the stronger position is wrong?
"Just how much more the historian trying to sugar coat things on what happen after the battle" is the type of line I point to when your accusing now Chen Shou, Pei Songzhi and Sima Guang of sugar coating. Were these figures biased? Yes in different and sometimes (due to conservative Confucian gentry class) similar ways on other things but there is no indication they were pro-Guan Yu as a bias.
It isn't great no. I'm not 100% sure were supplies were stored but it rarely seems to be main camp, focus when those are lost tend to be on insignia and so on, supplies rarely seem to be the problem forces have after losing main camp and there is no hint that it was a problem in this case
I wouldn't go as far as high. Well Guan Yu would be expecting to be going into a situation where Lu Meng is doing the besieging and he is coming to relief of the defenders but once he learns that is not the case? He going into his own lands with Lu Meng have had little time to settle the area so will have reason to expect support, as it turns out Lu Meng is badly sick, Guan Yu also can wait for Liu Bei to arrive (once Liu Bei breaches Lu Xun's captured area) as he besieges.
De Crespigny didn't set out how but given uncertainties of war (I double checked and he does mention Lu Xun cut off route between Yi and Jing though), very new holdings for Wu and Guan Yu having an army, it was certainly not impossible. De Crespigny doesn't list all possible theories (and yours is one I have never ever seen before) he can possibly think of to disapprove, historians rarely do that, they might do one. It just doesn't seem to have occurred to anybody that Guan Yu should abdicate his duties
Well, that was main point of the debate right? that he should prioritize his men's life instead of attempting to retake the lost city, he reap what his sow, his decision is what causes those who was alongside him to be executed.
and almost every general of the era would have chosen duty above their men's lives. Anybody who followed Liu Bei's journey was putting their soldiers, retainers and family at risk constantly due to frequent defeats but even for more stable starting states, war is a very risky venture. This is nothing more then every other general had and did, sending their soldiers out to face possible death for a lord the soldiers probably didn't care about but the officer did
