Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 8th, 2016, 08:35 AM   #1
Citizen
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: The Heart of Silicon Valley
Posts: 14
Hypothetical Matchups: Xiang Yu v Lui Bei


In general, which warlords of Chinese History were better commanders?

The warlords of the Late Qin dynasty (think Xiang Yu, Liu Bang, etc.)

OR

The warlords of the Late Han + 3 Kingdoms Period (think Kuan Yu, Liu Bei, Cao Cao, Yuan Shao, Chang Fei, etc.)
Agnimandur is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 10th, 2016, 04:32 AM   #2
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Must I specify?
Posts: 56

Naturally the victors would be the more competent commanders.
timtimwowo is offline  
Old November 10th, 2016, 09:17 PM   #3

Mandate of Heaven's Avatar
Ate too much
 
Joined: Jul 2010
From: Not sure what it is
Posts: 6,851

This is a classic case of masculine Homeric hero vs the feminine Odysseusian hero. Xian Yu was said to be possibly the greatest martial hero in Chinese history and definitely in his time, in both personal prowess and army commanding. Liu embodied the Chinese Taoism philosophy that emphasizes flexibility and restraint. The Treatise of Marquis Liu explains that Xian Yu won every battle but was impetuous and lost the last one, and Liu lost every battle, except the last one.
Mandate of Heaven is offline  
Old November 12th, 2016, 04:30 PM   #4
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,253

It would be an interesting fight indeed. But it would come down to several factors - how many men each side had, location of the battle, and material.

Materials include swords, spears, crossbows, armor, etc. In the case of swords - the swords of the Warring States (for example the Sword of Gaujian) are three inches shorter than that of the Three Kingdoms Period (a for example the sword found recently by Chinese archaeologist near the Red Cliffs area). In the case of crossbows - the crossbows of the later Han would be superior to that of the Three Kingdoms, by the Three Kingdoms the Repeating Crossbow had been greatly improved. The same argument for armor.
kazeuma is offline  
Old November 12th, 2016, 08:57 PM   #5
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Must I specify?
Posts: 56

Quote:
Originally Posted by kazeuma View Post
It would be an interesting fight indeed. But it would come down to several factors - how many men each side had, location of the battle, and material.

Materials include swords, spears, crossbows, armor, etc. In the case of swords - the swords of the Warring States (for example the Sword of Gaujian) are three inches shorter than that of the Three Kingdoms Period (a for example the sword found recently by Chinese archaeologist near the Red Cliffs area). In the case of crossbows - the crossbows of the later Han would be superior to that of the Three Kingdoms, by the Three Kingdoms the Repeating Crossbow had been greatly improved. The same argument for armor.
The sword of Goujian was the king's possession, using that to compare with a regular soldier's equipment is inappropriate. Also I don't think Goujian's sword would be shorter than a Three Kingdoms Period sword - Goujian's sword is close to a metre in length already, any sword longer than that would be highly impractical. Can you show me that Three Kingdoms sword, I'm quite interested in seeing it, as I haven't hear of that. Last time I heard, the site of the Battle of Red Cliff was still undetermined and there were lots of different opinions among Chinese archaeologists. The crossbows weren't that different too. The repeating crossbow lacked piercing strength and is significantly less powerful than its counterpart. It shouldn't be much of a deciding factor. I don't think the armour changed that much as well, as the Three Kingdoms Period took place just after late Han.
timtimwowo is offline  
Old November 12th, 2016, 09:01 PM   #6
Suspended until October 11th, 2018
 
Joined: Jan 2015
From: meo
Posts: 1,309

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnimandur View Post
In general, which warlords of Chinese History were better commanders?

The warlords of the Late Qin dynasty (think Xiang Yu, Liu Bang, etc.)

OR

The warlords of the Late Han + 3 Kingdoms Period (think Kuan Yu, Liu Bei, Cao Cao, Yuan Shao, Chang Fei, etc.)
I dont particularly think Cao Cao and Liu Bei can hold a candle to Xiang Yu.
A Vietnamese is offline  
Old November 13th, 2016, 03:39 AM   #7
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2016
From: Must I specify?
Posts: 56

I think Cao Cao could be able to defeat Xiang Yu though. It was recorded that Xiang Yu was more of a warrior champion than a general, it was only due to his noble background and advisor Fan Chuan he was able to win so many victories. Cao Cao, on the other hand, was a renowned tactician, politician, poet, administrator, and general. He was probably one of the most intelligent of his time.
timtimwowo is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
asian, bei, cao, hypothetical, kingdoms, lui, matchups, romance, xiang



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Liu Bang or Xiang Yu: who was the worse butcher? VHS Asian History 4 February 28th, 2016 08:27 PM
Xiang Yu individually killed hundred? Zoopiter Asian History 1 September 25th, 2012 09:40 AM
Greatest matchups in history Naomasa298 Speculative History 15 December 22nd, 2010 05:35 AM
Hypothetical for musicians throughthepastdarkly Art and Cultural History 6 October 5th, 2008 09:59 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.