This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Zhao Yun article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can we perhaps get a better main picture for Zhao Yun? He's a historical figure, not an aggregation of polygons from a video game. Such a ridiculously romanticised picture is suitable for the article on Lara Croft - not for Zhao Zilong.
SuperXW: He's a historical figure without any realistic pictures. Even the Qing dynasty's dispiction is just an imagination of that time. However, I do agree with you that not using a japanese's romanticised video game's picture as the main one. A screenshot from the CCTV drama should be ok. That one was based on most Chinese' traditional impressions of the figures. 203.198.224.143 ( talk) 05:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
A man of China or of the Chinese decendent should follow this man on honour, gallantry and wisdom then he can called him self a man of China or Chinese descendent.
Zhao yun can be said a great warrior.I really wish to see him saving the young baby e dou at Changban.written by Angela Verita lin
Why is there an individual page called "Biography of Zhao Yun"? Part of the introduction text could also be moved down to the biography section. Please clean up. -- Plastictv 22:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Even now when Honor and devotion is more of a hard practice, Zhao Yun of the Three Knigdoms shows many people that bravery, respect to his or her lord, and willing to give his or her life means having the most honor on or off the battle field. There are also others who carried the same honor just as he did for his own kingdom.
Zhang Liao: Wei General of the top Five. Zhang He: Wei General of the top Five. Huang Gai: Veteran officer of Wu. Zhou Tai: Body Guard of Sun Quan. -- Zhang Liao 04:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Zhao yuns the man in the game hes awsome but man when i learned about this dude i liked the way he was and now i think hes even more cooler . JG
"He charged into 1,000,000 of Cao Cao troops by himself"
Give me a break...Cao Cao didn't even have that many men. Not to mention that Zhao Yun would have been slaughtered.
There's just too much information taken from the novel (Not historical)
I think it based on the novel. if in the novel ROTK says so, it's OK to say that. Anyway, Cao-Cao have that number of troops. --[[User:Rudy[Rudy]] 11:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Also you did know that many documents from the 3k period were lost in Mao's revolution right? So calling 1,000,000 men rubbish isn't a good idea when you considered not knowing the exact number of troops. I.E. How many member are there in the Chinese Communist party? You don't really know but you sum up the number right? So in war is the same way. Also why can't a man face against 1 million men? it's not like they're all compact into a single area, they could be behind him or in front of him or around him. So when Zhao Zilong faced one million men it isn't that they're all in one spot but they could be spreaded out. Also I remember some guy in WWI that took out a few hundred Enemies with his gun....(Clue he was against fighting before he went to war)- Randomguy 9 July 2007
Just because someone added non-historical contents does not mean the entire article is rubbish. That error was removed once, but was added in by another individual. It can be removed again.
"Say," said Zhao Zilong, "that I will seek the lost ones in Heaven or Hell, through good or evil. And if I find them not, I will die in the battlefield."
"I am Zhao Zilong of Changshan!" Quotes of Zhao Yun aka Zhao Zilong
I don't think that's Zhao Yun in the main pic; it looks like Guan Yu.
It is indeed a picture of Zhao Yun from an old edition of "ROTK." There are different portraits (all of them imaginary) of Zhao Yun in various books, some look young and some look old. However, in Han Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms era, males with a well groomed beard (i.e., Guan Yu) were considered "handsome," while those without much facial hair were occasionally ridiculed. The picture shown here, though not a true reflection of Zhao Yun, should not be considered any less “accurate” than any other Zhao Yun portrait out there.
why insult images that they use from dynasty warriors? they do a much better job at putting them in a game then any of you do.
It has been proposed on the Talk:Qin Gong page that the information there be merged into a section on this page. I think that a section of information about his exploits in the novel should be added. The information on the Qin Gong page falls under this. As long as the information is labeled as fictional tales there shouldn't be any confusion with the historical information under the "Life" section. Any thoughts? ( Guyinblack25 22:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC))
I'm no expert on the subject, but it seams to me that this article was written by some video game fan boys with little historic accuracy. It has a wealth of un-sourced material, and I think should be tagged as 'not verified' until they can be sighted. If they remain unsighted, they should probably be removed. -- Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 01:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey sorry if I sounded rude. I didn't mean for that. However, I stand by the fact that it needs source citations. The entire page has 2 references, which are hardly even used. If the article is to be accurate, it should have a wealth of sources (considering its size). I was going to place citation needed tags in a lot of places, but I realized about 95% of the facts stated are unsourced. Realistically, I realize it shouldn't have citations after every single fact, but I'm just saying, it would be nice to have at least 5-10 sources, (preferably with footnotes). If you shoot for that, it'd probably be sufficient. Thanks for your help. --
Chopin-Ate-Liszt!
03:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Why did someone insist that some stories in ROTK about Zhao Yun were based on Chen Dao? This is pure speculation and not acceptable. This kind of speculation first arose in some internet chat rooms, it should not belong here.
In Chen Shou's San Guo Zhi as well as some other historical records, Chen Dao was mentioned only briefly and his life achievements remain unclear. To say that Luo Guan Zhong combined Chen and Zhao Yun into one character is not reasonable. Luo created many fictional characters and fictional deeds, but there is no reason to believe he decided to omit Chen Dao for the sake of enhancing Zhao Yun as a character.
In games and pictures, Zhao Yun rides a white horse.This horse is suposed to be a fast and fearless horse. Zhao Yun also has great horsemanship. Ma Chao also has great horsemanship. The horses saddle is red and gold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.157.234 ( talk) 00:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Born in 168? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.147.120.68 ( talk) 10:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I came here looking for Zhao Zilong but found Zhao Yun. I searched the article and he is referred to in a couple of quotes as Zilong "Zilong would never desert me!" but no where is it explained where Zilong comes from. Someone with ready sources want to add this secondary name in the leadin and where it came from? Please? 97.85.185.160 ( talk) 05:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
皆 in ancient time had several meanings, but it should not be translated as "together" in Zhuge's dialogue (亮曰:「大軍在祁山、箕谷,皆多於賊,而不能破賊為賊所破者,則此病不在兵少也,在一人耳。今欲減兵省將,明罰思過,校變通之道於將來;若不能然者,雖兵多何益!). First, in terms of its usage in Chinese language, "皆" used after the punctuation "," should not be translated as "together." Second, to take Zhuge's statements to be coherently logical, my translation would be: "Armies in Mount Qi and Ji Valley, were more than the foes..." Note Zhuge omitted Jieting, where Zhang He had more troops than Ma Su at this single point, so it's rather obvious how Zhuge used the word "皆". The reason I pointed out online articles' interpretation on this particular quote was that many people selectively chose the usage of this word without looking into the sentence structure and the whole meaning of the paragraph.---- EkmanLi ( talk) 08:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Ancient Chinese texts do not have Punctuation marks. If you go back to prints from just 100+ years ago, those texts do not have commas, periods, etc. The original meaning of 皆 is "all"/"together," (皆,俱词也。——《说文>;《傳》皆,遍也。與偕通; 偕,俱也。——《说文》; 俱,皆也。——《说文》 . ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I do know "recent" published work put a comma there. :) There exist many contradicting materials among the surviving historical texts. Many mistakes can be found in Chen Shou's accounts as well. To emphatically single out one historical document as not being as "authentic" as others without providing convincing evidence, or any evidence at all, is not suitable. If you can provide concrete evidence that Zhao's decoy had more people than Cao Zhen's main force, then I have no problem with you putting the paragraph back. As for now, I think it better not to have that in there.
Chen Shou did specifically mention Zhao Yun was a decoy: 诸葛亮传第五: 六年春,扬声由斜谷道取郿,使赵云、邓芝为疑军,据箕谷,魏大将军曹真举众拒之。Zhao: 疑軍, decoy. 曹真舉眾: main force. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 05:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't really know whether your new edit is appropriate, since majority of your entry is not relevant here. Do you think it is more suitable for Battle of Jieting discussions? Again you mentioned that Zhao had more people, which is the whole point of contention. I am going to remove that part since it is still disputed. No offense. BTW, "As we can see, we can see..." should not be included in the main text. Such statements belong in discussions.
Believe me, I don't want to go back and forth with this either. But your persistence at including your own interpretations, which may be wrong, is not necessarily the best thing for Wikipedia. However, they are great for discussions. Here you can have your own interpretations, as many as you want, presented here, but please don't do that on the main page and force your interpretations on other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 06:46, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
You still insisted on using your own translations and interpretations. You picked translations that fit your agenda, which is again, as I stressed, not necessarily correct. This is a common practice among Three Kingdoms fans in chatrooms. Why not say, it is in dispute whether Zhao Yun had less men than Cao Zhen, however, it's stated that his force was weaker than Cao's. There, you have it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 07:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The only source that is arguably dubious is 雲別傳----That's your opinion, not facts. Please give me 3 concrete reasons why you think 雲別傳 is dubious, and please don't cite He Zhuo 何焯, who was criticized for maligning historical figures and distorting facts.
Just adding more: Zhang He was sent separately by Cao Rui directly from Jingzhou (荆州) to the front at Jieting. 加郃位特进,遣督诸军 He was not being commanded by Cao Zhen, who was in command of the army that was already in place in Mei. 诸葛亮围祁山,南安、天水、安定三郡反应亮。帝遣真督诸军军郿,遣张郃击亮将马谡,大破之。Wei threw a lot of men into the whole campaign. Your statement that Wei put more emphasis on Wu thus not having prepared for the battle may be true at the beginning of the campaign, but it did not stay that way throughout.
Chen's work should be the primary source-----Nowadays no studies on Records of the Three Kingdoms can be considered complete or even legitimate without Pei's annotations. Your point being?
Chen Shou's SGZ is legitimate but incomplete, contains conflicting accounts by itself, obvious mistakes and blatant omissions of sensitive materials. Without Pei's annotations, we could not have found out Chen Shou's work was incomplete or even incorrect, could we? As for why Chen Shou did not include materials from 雲別傳, whether he had seen the document (was it written before his time?) or whether he was aware of those deeds is not known. Chen Shou wrote SGZ in Luo Yang, far away from Shu, and the Kingdom of Shu happened to not have an official state record, unlike Wei and Wu. Was Chen Shou able to research thoroughly and diligently enough to cover everything? Obviously not. Most biographies in Shu section are short, lacking details, especially those not from 川。And some of later Shu officials had no entries whatsoever. Prior to writing SGZ, Chen Shou collected information on famous people, mostly intellectuals, in Sichuan, which formed a basis for SGZ. That's why many biographies of local Chuan people are better presented in details.
In brief, He Zhuo (何焯) had sufficiently addressed the issue, and I can't agree to not cite him. ----I was hoping that's not where you got your "proof" that 雲別傳 is dubious. Instead of taking his words at face value, why not dig a little deeper and see that his entire logic is flawed? I am praying Wikipedia does not become a haven for people like He Zhuo.
his huge army at Qi Mountain and Zhao's army in Ji Valley, were both larger than that of the enemies.----"Both" is your own interpretation. Like I said, you cannot put disputed interpretation in there.
Not realizing the truth that Wei actually devoted most of his forces to fight Wu, some dilettanti asserted Zhao had less troops than Cao.------Zhang He was sent separately by Cao Rui directly from Jingzhou (荆州) to the front at Jieting. 加郃位特进,遣督诸军 He was not being commanded by Cao Zhen, who was in command of the army that was already in place in Mei. 诸葛亮围祁山,南安、天水、安定三郡反应亮。帝遣真督诸军军郿,遣张郃击亮将马谡,大破之。Wei threw a lot of men into the whole campaign. Your statement that Wei put more emphasis on Wu thus not having prepared for the battle may be true at the beginning of the campaign, but it did not stay that way throughout.
From the records, Zhuge had taken the crack troops for his favorite, Ma Su, and himself; Zhao was only given plenty of weaker soldiers----again, speculation on "weak" vs. "less". "crack" can be changed to "elite".
Zhuge even fantasized that number along would help him prevail over his rival-----I doubt he fantasized that. Wei's army was way more seasoned and experienced, and Zhuge knew it. He attacked the region that was not well defended, precisely because he was reluctant to engage with Wei's main forces at the early stages of the campaign(see also the conflict between Wei Yan and Zhuge Liang). The surprise came when Wei soldiers showed up en masse and defeated Ma Su swiftly at Jieting before Zhuge's main force could settle in.
the honor of being the van fell into the hands of Ma Su, instead of Zhao Yun. People of the time were surprised by Zhuge's decision on human resources. -------- Zhao Yun was sent to Jigu prior to Ma Su's appointment. Zhuge Liang could not send Zhao to Jieting even if he wanted to at the time. Zhuge promoted Ma Su over Wei Yan etc., in spite of the objections from others. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Nck88 (
talk •
contribs)
08:32, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Again, all these are my speculations, thus they belong in discussions, or in a section specifically dedicated to "speculations". :) Nck88 ( talk) 15:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Children
An image used in this article, File:Zhao Yun TV Serial.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 19 May 2012
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Zhao Yun TV Serial.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 10:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC) |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Zhao Yun article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can we perhaps get a better main picture for Zhao Yun? He's a historical figure, not an aggregation of polygons from a video game. Such a ridiculously romanticised picture is suitable for the article on Lara Croft - not for Zhao Zilong.
SuperXW: He's a historical figure without any realistic pictures. Even the Qing dynasty's dispiction is just an imagination of that time. However, I do agree with you that not using a japanese's romanticised video game's picture as the main one. A screenshot from the CCTV drama should be ok. That one was based on most Chinese' traditional impressions of the figures. 203.198.224.143 ( talk) 05:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
A man of China or of the Chinese decendent should follow this man on honour, gallantry and wisdom then he can called him self a man of China or Chinese descendent.
Zhao yun can be said a great warrior.I really wish to see him saving the young baby e dou at Changban.written by Angela Verita lin
Why is there an individual page called "Biography of Zhao Yun"? Part of the introduction text could also be moved down to the biography section. Please clean up. -- Plastictv 22:45, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Even now when Honor and devotion is more of a hard practice, Zhao Yun of the Three Knigdoms shows many people that bravery, respect to his or her lord, and willing to give his or her life means having the most honor on or off the battle field. There are also others who carried the same honor just as he did for his own kingdom.
Zhang Liao: Wei General of the top Five. Zhang He: Wei General of the top Five. Huang Gai: Veteran officer of Wu. Zhou Tai: Body Guard of Sun Quan. -- Zhang Liao 04:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Zhao yuns the man in the game hes awsome but man when i learned about this dude i liked the way he was and now i think hes even more cooler . JG
"He charged into 1,000,000 of Cao Cao troops by himself"
Give me a break...Cao Cao didn't even have that many men. Not to mention that Zhao Yun would have been slaughtered.
There's just too much information taken from the novel (Not historical)
I think it based on the novel. if in the novel ROTK says so, it's OK to say that. Anyway, Cao-Cao have that number of troops. --[[User:Rudy[Rudy]] 11:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Also you did know that many documents from the 3k period were lost in Mao's revolution right? So calling 1,000,000 men rubbish isn't a good idea when you considered not knowing the exact number of troops. I.E. How many member are there in the Chinese Communist party? You don't really know but you sum up the number right? So in war is the same way. Also why can't a man face against 1 million men? it's not like they're all compact into a single area, they could be behind him or in front of him or around him. So when Zhao Zilong faced one million men it isn't that they're all in one spot but they could be spreaded out. Also I remember some guy in WWI that took out a few hundred Enemies with his gun....(Clue he was against fighting before he went to war)- Randomguy 9 July 2007
Just because someone added non-historical contents does not mean the entire article is rubbish. That error was removed once, but was added in by another individual. It can be removed again.
"Say," said Zhao Zilong, "that I will seek the lost ones in Heaven or Hell, through good or evil. And if I find them not, I will die in the battlefield."
"I am Zhao Zilong of Changshan!" Quotes of Zhao Yun aka Zhao Zilong
I don't think that's Zhao Yun in the main pic; it looks like Guan Yu.
It is indeed a picture of Zhao Yun from an old edition of "ROTK." There are different portraits (all of them imaginary) of Zhao Yun in various books, some look young and some look old. However, in Han Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms era, males with a well groomed beard (i.e., Guan Yu) were considered "handsome," while those without much facial hair were occasionally ridiculed. The picture shown here, though not a true reflection of Zhao Yun, should not be considered any less “accurate” than any other Zhao Yun portrait out there.
why insult images that they use from dynasty warriors? they do a much better job at putting them in a game then any of you do.
It has been proposed on the Talk:Qin Gong page that the information there be merged into a section on this page. I think that a section of information about his exploits in the novel should be added. The information on the Qin Gong page falls under this. As long as the information is labeled as fictional tales there shouldn't be any confusion with the historical information under the "Life" section. Any thoughts? ( Guyinblack25 22:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC))
I'm no expert on the subject, but it seams to me that this article was written by some video game fan boys with little historic accuracy. It has a wealth of un-sourced material, and I think should be tagged as 'not verified' until they can be sighted. If they remain unsighted, they should probably be removed. -- Chopin-Ate-Liszt! 01:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey sorry if I sounded rude. I didn't mean for that. However, I stand by the fact that it needs source citations. The entire page has 2 references, which are hardly even used. If the article is to be accurate, it should have a wealth of sources (considering its size). I was going to place citation needed tags in a lot of places, but I realized about 95% of the facts stated are unsourced. Realistically, I realize it shouldn't have citations after every single fact, but I'm just saying, it would be nice to have at least 5-10 sources, (preferably with footnotes). If you shoot for that, it'd probably be sufficient. Thanks for your help. --
Chopin-Ate-Liszt!
03:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Why did someone insist that some stories in ROTK about Zhao Yun were based on Chen Dao? This is pure speculation and not acceptable. This kind of speculation first arose in some internet chat rooms, it should not belong here.
In Chen Shou's San Guo Zhi as well as some other historical records, Chen Dao was mentioned only briefly and his life achievements remain unclear. To say that Luo Guan Zhong combined Chen and Zhao Yun into one character is not reasonable. Luo created many fictional characters and fictional deeds, but there is no reason to believe he decided to omit Chen Dao for the sake of enhancing Zhao Yun as a character.
In games and pictures, Zhao Yun rides a white horse.This horse is suposed to be a fast and fearless horse. Zhao Yun also has great horsemanship. Ma Chao also has great horsemanship. The horses saddle is red and gold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.137.157.234 ( talk) 00:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Born in 168? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.147.120.68 ( talk) 10:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I came here looking for Zhao Zilong but found Zhao Yun. I searched the article and he is referred to in a couple of quotes as Zilong "Zilong would never desert me!" but no where is it explained where Zilong comes from. Someone with ready sources want to add this secondary name in the leadin and where it came from? Please? 97.85.185.160 ( talk) 05:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
皆 in ancient time had several meanings, but it should not be translated as "together" in Zhuge's dialogue (亮曰:「大軍在祁山、箕谷,皆多於賊,而不能破賊為賊所破者,則此病不在兵少也,在一人耳。今欲減兵省將,明罰思過,校變通之道於將來;若不能然者,雖兵多何益!). First, in terms of its usage in Chinese language, "皆" used after the punctuation "," should not be translated as "together." Second, to take Zhuge's statements to be coherently logical, my translation would be: "Armies in Mount Qi and Ji Valley, were more than the foes..." Note Zhuge omitted Jieting, where Zhang He had more troops than Ma Su at this single point, so it's rather obvious how Zhuge used the word "皆". The reason I pointed out online articles' interpretation on this particular quote was that many people selectively chose the usage of this word without looking into the sentence structure and the whole meaning of the paragraph.---- EkmanLi ( talk) 08:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Ancient Chinese texts do not have Punctuation marks. If you go back to prints from just 100+ years ago, those texts do not have commas, periods, etc. The original meaning of 皆 is "all"/"together," (皆,俱词也。——《说文>;《傳》皆,遍也。與偕通; 偕,俱也。——《说文》; 俱,皆也。——《说文》 . ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I do know "recent" published work put a comma there. :) There exist many contradicting materials among the surviving historical texts. Many mistakes can be found in Chen Shou's accounts as well. To emphatically single out one historical document as not being as "authentic" as others without providing convincing evidence, or any evidence at all, is not suitable. If you can provide concrete evidence that Zhao's decoy had more people than Cao Zhen's main force, then I have no problem with you putting the paragraph back. As for now, I think it better not to have that in there.
Chen Shou did specifically mention Zhao Yun was a decoy: 诸葛亮传第五: 六年春,扬声由斜谷道取郿,使赵云、邓芝为疑军,据箕谷,魏大将军曹真举众拒之。Zhao: 疑軍, decoy. 曹真舉眾: main force. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 05:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't really know whether your new edit is appropriate, since majority of your entry is not relevant here. Do you think it is more suitable for Battle of Jieting discussions? Again you mentioned that Zhao had more people, which is the whole point of contention. I am going to remove that part since it is still disputed. No offense. BTW, "As we can see, we can see..." should not be included in the main text. Such statements belong in discussions.
Believe me, I don't want to go back and forth with this either. But your persistence at including your own interpretations, which may be wrong, is not necessarily the best thing for Wikipedia. However, they are great for discussions. Here you can have your own interpretations, as many as you want, presented here, but please don't do that on the main page and force your interpretations on other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 06:46, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
You still insisted on using your own translations and interpretations. You picked translations that fit your agenda, which is again, as I stressed, not necessarily correct. This is a common practice among Three Kingdoms fans in chatrooms. Why not say, it is in dispute whether Zhao Yun had less men than Cao Zhen, however, it's stated that his force was weaker than Cao's. There, you have it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nck88 ( talk • contribs) 07:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The only source that is arguably dubious is 雲別傳----That's your opinion, not facts. Please give me 3 concrete reasons why you think 雲別傳 is dubious, and please don't cite He Zhuo 何焯, who was criticized for maligning historical figures and distorting facts.
Just adding more: Zhang He was sent separately by Cao Rui directly from Jingzhou (荆州) to the front at Jieting. 加郃位特进,遣督诸军 He was not being commanded by Cao Zhen, who was in command of the army that was already in place in Mei. 诸葛亮围祁山,南安、天水、安定三郡反应亮。帝遣真督诸军军郿,遣张郃击亮将马谡,大破之。Wei threw a lot of men into the whole campaign. Your statement that Wei put more emphasis on Wu thus not having prepared for the battle may be true at the beginning of the campaign, but it did not stay that way throughout.
Chen's work should be the primary source-----Nowadays no studies on Records of the Three Kingdoms can be considered complete or even legitimate without Pei's annotations. Your point being?
Chen Shou's SGZ is legitimate but incomplete, contains conflicting accounts by itself, obvious mistakes and blatant omissions of sensitive materials. Without Pei's annotations, we could not have found out Chen Shou's work was incomplete or even incorrect, could we? As for why Chen Shou did not include materials from 雲別傳, whether he had seen the document (was it written before his time?) or whether he was aware of those deeds is not known. Chen Shou wrote SGZ in Luo Yang, far away from Shu, and the Kingdom of Shu happened to not have an official state record, unlike Wei and Wu. Was Chen Shou able to research thoroughly and diligently enough to cover everything? Obviously not. Most biographies in Shu section are short, lacking details, especially those not from 川。And some of later Shu officials had no entries whatsoever. Prior to writing SGZ, Chen Shou collected information on famous people, mostly intellectuals, in Sichuan, which formed a basis for SGZ. That's why many biographies of local Chuan people are better presented in details.
In brief, He Zhuo (何焯) had sufficiently addressed the issue, and I can't agree to not cite him. ----I was hoping that's not where you got your "proof" that 雲別傳 is dubious. Instead of taking his words at face value, why not dig a little deeper and see that his entire logic is flawed? I am praying Wikipedia does not become a haven for people like He Zhuo.
his huge army at Qi Mountain and Zhao's army in Ji Valley, were both larger than that of the enemies.----"Both" is your own interpretation. Like I said, you cannot put disputed interpretation in there.
Not realizing the truth that Wei actually devoted most of his forces to fight Wu, some dilettanti asserted Zhao had less troops than Cao.------Zhang He was sent separately by Cao Rui directly from Jingzhou (荆州) to the front at Jieting. 加郃位特进,遣督诸军 He was not being commanded by Cao Zhen, who was in command of the army that was already in place in Mei. 诸葛亮围祁山,南安、天水、安定三郡反应亮。帝遣真督诸军军郿,遣张郃击亮将马谡,大破之。Wei threw a lot of men into the whole campaign. Your statement that Wei put more emphasis on Wu thus not having prepared for the battle may be true at the beginning of the campaign, but it did not stay that way throughout.
From the records, Zhuge had taken the crack troops for his favorite, Ma Su, and himself; Zhao was only given plenty of weaker soldiers----again, speculation on "weak" vs. "less". "crack" can be changed to "elite".
Zhuge even fantasized that number along would help him prevail over his rival-----I doubt he fantasized that. Wei's army was way more seasoned and experienced, and Zhuge knew it. He attacked the region that was not well defended, precisely because he was reluctant to engage with Wei's main forces at the early stages of the campaign(see also the conflict between Wei Yan and Zhuge Liang). The surprise came when Wei soldiers showed up en masse and defeated Ma Su swiftly at Jieting before Zhuge's main force could settle in.
the honor of being the van fell into the hands of Ma Su, instead of Zhao Yun. People of the time were surprised by Zhuge's decision on human resources. -------- Zhao Yun was sent to Jigu prior to Ma Su's appointment. Zhuge Liang could not send Zhao to Jieting even if he wanted to at the time. Zhuge promoted Ma Su over Wei Yan etc., in spite of the objections from others. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Nck88 (
talk •
contribs)
08:32, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Again, all these are my speculations, thus they belong in discussions, or in a section specifically dedicated to "speculations". :) Nck88 ( talk) 15:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Children
An image used in this article, File:Zhao Yun TV Serial.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 19 May 2012
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Zhao Yun TV Serial.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 10:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC) |