17 replies to this topic

[Toluy]

the question is DID Han Xin rebel or was he falsely accussed?

This is after establishment of Han, which I think is out of the question. And presently there is no conclusion about whether HanXin really wanted to rebel and did it in scholar arena.

[Toluy]

Dear akinkhoo,

Han Xin did plan to rebel. I would say that he was summouning people from all over China and planning to rebel Liu Bang. So, he is definitely guilty of rebelling.

Liu Bang





Dear light,

I believe you are wrong in this area. Han Xin wanted to be emperor.

Liu Bang

Wang Liqun, the historical professor of Henan University, indicates that HanXin want to be Chu Wang, which is not emperor but just a king of Chu state. HanXin's homeland is Chu and he has the thought that returning to homeland to live when he has a high status(Yi Jin Huan Xiang in Chinese). He also states that there was a universal thought all over the world that everybody wants to be a king of own feud(Lie Tu Feng Wang in Chinese). After all, there is only over ten years after Qin's establishment, whose social system definately is diffcult to be accepted by people. Most people did not welcome the emperor and they prefer to be the king of feuds instead. For example, Zhang Liang in the beginning of against Qin Dynasty actually wanted to reestablish the state of Han(HanGuo), which is Zhang Liang's homeland. However his plan failed in the end. His no way to prevent the development of history.

[Toluy]

if there was no HanXin,there would be a LiXin,or a ZhangXin,or a QianXin,etc..
i think what the history needs is just a totem,not a specific person.An united multiracial feudal dynasty was sure to take the place of Qin.

It looks neutral but I think it would not be true in reality. You said history doesn't need a specific person, however some improtant is able to decide the direction of history. Han Xin is one of them. Han Xin had many chances to be a independant state when he unified the north China but he gave up. From my view, there is at least two points the specific person must be qualified. One is the militant ability to unify the whole of north China with a small army, and the other is the trust to Liu Bang, which is signifcant to history that Han defeated Chu instead of three kindoms period. Yes it's very critical that if HanXin or another person who has the ability to unify North China didn't help LiuBang attack XiangYu but choose to be a neutral kingdom, the Han of Liu Bang will be the smallist kingdom compared to XiangYu's and HanXin's. Actually, XiangYu Do despach envoy to try to dissuade HanXin from attacking and promise neutrality to HanXin's kingdom. Hanxin chose to help LiuBang not XiangYu most because of XiangYu's haughty and distrust to himself before. If somebody who can substitute from HanXin, nobody knows whether he would choose to help LiuBang or XiangYu. I think the probability of independant of north China might higher than other choices.
Remember, what did HanXin say before his dead?'(吾悔不用蒯通之计,乃为儿女子所诈,岂非天哉!)' I cannot translate it. Maybe others can help.

All in all, HanXin is a significant person in the war of Chu and Han. Every choice of his can decide the definition of both Liu Bang and Xiang Yu! If He died before the War of Chu and Han. The history must be different!