Con mis poderes especiales, prospera mi familia campesina

Capítulo 1

Chapter 1 A Great Injustice Throughout the Ages! On Xiang Yu's Ten Major Crimes

Xiang Yu's injustice is legendary! Based on my research, the so-called "Ten Crimes of Xiang Yu" were most likely fabricated by Liu Bang to demonstrate the righteousness of his rebellion. My analysis is as follows:

For example, one of his crimes was that Liu Bang said Xiang Yu broke his promise and did not make him the King of Guanzhong, but instead made him the King of Han.

In reality, Xiang Yu was completely unaware of this agreement before Liu Bang entered Guanzhong. Otherwise, Xiang Yu would not have refrained from marching for several months after incorporating Zhang Han, showing no urgency in entering Guanzhong.

The third charge Liu Bang leveled against Xiang Yu also proves this point. The third charge was that after rescuing Zhao, Xiang Yu should have led his army back to Chu to report to King Huai of Chu, instead of leading the various feudal lords into Guanzhong.

But aren't charges one and three contradictory? Given the agreement with the King of Guanzhong, why did Xiang Yu turn back to Chu? Why didn't Liu Bang turn back?

If King Huai of Chu's order to Xiang Yu was to rescue the State of Zhao, but his mission to Liu Bang was to enter Guanzhong, then what fairness could there be in this Guanzhong King's Agreement?

His second crime was killing Song Yi's self-respect, which was even more ridiculous. Song Yi was afraid of battle and did not advance, so he should have been killed. The leader of the anti-Qin movement in Chu was Xiang Liang, and King Huai of Chu was just a figurehead. Why couldn't Xiang Yu, who was a brilliant strategist, regain control of the Chu army?

Fourthly, Xiang Yu burned down the Qin Palace and dug up the First Emperor's tomb. The fire raged for three months without going out, something that could only be accomplished by burning an oil field, yet the First Emperor's tomb is still intact.

His fifth crime was the forced killing of Prince Ziying of Qin. But why couldn't he kill the ruler of an enemy state? So many people from the six states, so many members of the Xiang family died at the hands of the Qin people. Wouldn't it be right to seek revenge on the biggest enemy?

His sixth crime was to swindle 200,000 Qin soldiers in Xin'an. This statement was first made by Han Xin, who had already betrayed Xiang Yu at the time. He deliberately praised and framed Liu Bang in order to curry favor with him, so it should not be taken seriously.

There are too many unreasonable aspects to this. Even slaughtering 200,000 pigs wouldn't be that easy, let alone humans.

Historical records regarding the size of Xiang Yu's and Zhang Han's armies also prove this point. How could Zhang Han and the other two rule the Three Qin regions without troops? How could Xiang Yu intimidate the various feudal lords without troops?

Furthermore, Zhang Han's 200,000-strong army was primarily composed of prisoners from Mount Li, with a large proportion of them being from the six former states. They could easily be absorbed into his own army. Xiang Yu even spared Zhang Han, his enemy who killed Xiang Liang; there was no need for him to kill surrendered soldiers. At most, a portion of the surrendered Qin soldiers would rebel, which Xiang Yu would then suppress. Was it really necessary to kill surrendered soldiers who rebelled? Were they to be spared so they could later have a chance to kill the Chu army?

Crimes seven through ten all refer to the same thing: Xiang Yu drove Emperor Yi, Mi Xin, away and then killed him. While it's possible Mi Xin was driven away, it's also possible he didn't want to live in such oppression and wanted to leave on his own.

As for the killing of Emperor Yi, historical records clearly state that it was Ying Bu who killed Emperor Yi. On the surface, Ying Bu was the King of Jiujiang appointed by Xiang Yu and was also one of Xiang Yu's subordinates.

In reality, after Ying Bu was made a king, apart from killing Emperor Yi, he did not "help" Xiang Yu in any other way. On the contrary, after Liu Bang raised the banner of rebellion, Ying Bu immediately betrayed Xiang Yu and followed Liu Bang. Until Liu Bang ordered Ying Bu to eat Peng Yue's flesh, Ying Bu was loyal to Liu Bang.

It's hard to say exactly who ordered Ying Bu to kill Emperor Yi. Perhaps there were many people in the world who wanted Emperor Yi dead, so much so that even after Emperor Yi fled to a place more than 2,000 li away from Pengcheng, he still couldn't escape his clutches.

In my opinion, if Mi Xin hadn't left Pengcheng and had stayed in her position as a banner leader, she might have lived to old age. Xiang Yu was young enough to wait, but most people couldn't.

Killing Emperor Yi and framing Xiang Yu was truly a brilliant move. As for the truth, who cared at the time?

The so-called ten crimes that Liu Bang accused Xiang Yu of were nothing more than a fig leaf that everyone knew about. What's laughable is that even today, people still believe such a flawed frame-up.

...

If you still have questions about Hao Jiu's characterization of Xiang Yu after reading this article, you might want to check out another article in the table of contents, "Reading the History of Chu and Han Using Logical Dialectical Analysis." If you still have questions, you can read the articles published in the "Related to Works" section of my old book, where all the questions about Xiang Yu are answered in detail.

There are always trolls or sycophants who don't read the book who come to the circle to question Xiang Yu. To be honest, I'm tired of replying to them and I feel helpless. Some people just can't stand to see Xiang Yu doing well; it's purely out of jealousy and hatred.

The following explains the character design of Xiang Yu in this book:

Great benevolence and righteousness—

At the Feast at Hongmen, Xiang Yu had the opportunity to kill Liu Ji, but he didn't. Part of the reason was that he regarded Liu Ji as a brother, but the main reason was that Xiang Yu wanted to destroy the tyrannical Qin and bring peace to the world. The tyrannical Qin had been destroyed, and it was time for the people to recuperate. Therefore, he was willing to take some risks and not declare himself emperor, rather than cause more trouble. The purpose of dividing the world into fiefdoms was to quickly quell the war. What the people needed most was a ceasefire. This was true benevolence and righteousness.

Liu Ji, driven by selfish desires, reignited the war, causing immense suffering to the people. Tragedy even erupted in Liu Ji's territory, with people resorting to cannibalism. While Xiang Yu's own army frequently went hungry, the people of Chu fared much better.

Xiang Yu employed elite troops, allowing the people to recuperate and rebuild their lives. Liu Ji, on the other hand, had almost wiped out all the able-bodied men and still failed to defeat Xiang Yu, so he had to send the elderly and weak from Guanzhong to fight.

Coincidentally, after the elderly and weak people of Guanzhong joined the battle, Xiang Yu was defeated. One can imagine the scene of Liu Ji's army driving away the elderly and weak people of Guanzhong and forcing Xiang Yu to retreat.

Iron Will and Tender Heart

I don't need to elaborate on the relationship between Xiang Yu and Yu Ji, right? The Overlord actually had a soft heart. He was not only loyal to Yu Ji in his affections, but he also shed tears for warhorses and wounded soldiers. Some people even interpreted this as womanly compassion. But would a womanly compassionate person do something like slaughtering innocent civilians?

Courageous and resourceful, possessing both wisdom and bravery.

The battles of Julu and Pengcheng perfectly illustrate Xiang Yu's courage and strategy. He possessed not only bravery and martial prowess but also strategic acumen. Could a mere brute have won consecutive victories? Could someone without wisdom have written a treatise on military strategy? Could he have become the overlord who divided the land among the feudal lords? Liu Ji went to great lengths to unite the feudal lords, resorting to spies, traitors, and frame-ups to defeat Xiang Yu. It's not an exaggeration to say that Xiang Yu was courageous, resourceful, and brave.

Unyielding to the death, a hero of unparalleled stature—

Refusing to cross the Yangtze River to the east, he committed suicide. Isn't this the act of a hero who would rather die than submit? If it were Liu Ji, he would definitely have been kneeling and begging for mercy again. He won the world but lost his integrity. Xiang Yu didn't care!

The death of Xiang Yu ended the Chu-Han Contention, which had lasted for several years. This allowed the people, who should have been recuperating after the fall of Qin, to finally breathe a sigh of relief, and also spared Jiangdong from the ravages of war.

Isn't that enough to make him a hero?

In short, while I wouldn't say my premise is flawless, it does make some sense, and it's not just something I made up.

If Xiang Yu were truly as cruel, ruthless, cunning, and treacherous as recorded in Han Dynasty historical texts, many of his choices would have been different. It's too easy to smear the loser; it's three parts truth and seven parts falsehood. Without carefully examining the original historical records, one cannot obtain the true answer.

In order to consolidate its rule, the Han Dynasty had to brainwash the people and officials. If Liu Ji's empire was obtained by betraying Xiang Yu and rebelling, why should he demand that others not rebel?

Therefore, proving that Liu Ji's rebellion against Xiang Yu was correct and deserved is the greatest function of history books. Thus, apart from the three parts of bravery that are true, the remaining seven parts of the records about Xiang Yu are all negative accounts of Xiang Yu losing the hearts of the people and the morale of the army, being cruel and inhumane, etc.

But a fake is a fake. When you cross-reference them, there will always be oversights and inconsistencies. If you're interested, you can read the next article in the section related to the work.

Chapter 2 uses logical dialectical analysis to read the history of Chu and Han.

Those who are interested can take a look; those who are not can skip it.

(I) On the book "Records of the Grand Historian"

History is written by the victors, and this is especially true when the dynasty established by the victors lasts for hundreds of years.

No victor would deliberately smear themselves in history books. They would either be fair and strictly follow the facts, or they would smear their opponents and the previous rulers of fallen dynasties to some extent.

This is an objective law, and those who do not acknowledge it are deceiving themselves.

Under what circumstances was Sima Qian's "Records of the Grand Historian" written? It was written under duress and after suffering castration for the crime of great disrespect, amidst forbearance and humiliation!

In this situation, how many eyes in the Han Dynasty would have been watching the "Records of the Grand Historian" to write a history book?

When the emperors of the Han Dynasty thought that the very people they had ordered to be castrated were writing a history book that would be passed down through the ages, how could they not pay close attention and thoroughly investigate and verify the contents?

Throughout history, there have been countless talented people who couldn't write anything, but were masters at finding fault.

Under such pressure, would Sima Qian dare to fabricate stories about Liu Bang and Xiang Yu? Did he want his whole family to be castrated?

Therefore, what Sima Qian could do was to get as close as possible to the truth of history, to be reasonable and well-founded, to be irrefutable, and to win even in a debate with a group of Confucian scholars.

But did the Han Dynasty want a history book that was completely consistent with history?

No, Liu Bang did too many despicable and treacherous things during the establishment of the Han Dynasty, which makes his acquisition of the throne illegitimate.

If it were merely about Liu Bang's personal reputation, that would be one thing, but much of it concerns matters that could shake the very foundations of the state. Therefore, the relevant content must not be allowed to circulate untouched.

However, it was already common knowledge that Sima Qian had written the Records of the Grand Historian at the time, so simply destroying the Records of the Grand Historian would be absolutely unacceptable.

Thus, the Han Dynasty made two large-scale revisions and multiple additions to the Records of the Grand Historian.

Why twice?

Because Sima Qian had already anticipated this kind of deletion and alteration when he was writing the Records of the Grand Historian, in order to leave a true history for posterity, he secretly made another copy, making a total of two copies, but only submitted one.

The other copy was given to his daughter for safekeeping and passed down in secret.

The copy submitted was heavily edited and kept in the royal treasury, where it was forbidden for others to see.

A copy kept by Sima Qian's daughter eventually fell into the hands of the Yang family after she married into the Yang family.

During the reign of Emperor Xuan of Han, Yang Yun, Sima Qian's grandson, began to disseminate the contents of the book to the public, but the book was not widely circulated and soon ceased to circulate due to Yang Yun's murder.

During the Eastern Han Dynasty, the Records of the Grand Historian finally became widely circulated, but only after being revised and reduced to more than 100,000 words.

It can be said that by this time, the Records of the Grand Historian had been completely distorted and had become a tool for maintaining the rule of the Han Dynasty. Its most crucial role was to prove the legitimacy and rationality of Liu Bang's rebellion against Xiang Yu and the establishment of the Han Dynasty.

But why are there still so many negative stories about Liu Bang even after the records have been edited?

To be honest, the emperors of the Han Dynasty were no longer able to whitewash Liu Bang's character. Some of his deeds were simply too famous. At most, they could add some embellishments to Liu Bang's abilities and then try their best to smear Xiang Yu in order to highlight Liu Bang's character.

Moreover, Liu Bang was a ruthless character who even betrayed his own family, so the Han emperors who followed him had no interest in risking ridicule to whitewash him.

The Second Emperor of Han, who was pushed off the chariot, certainly did not have a good impression of Liu Bang, and he would not have been able to cover up for Liu Bang. Moreover, he had no chance to cover up Liu Bang's character, because there were many people who were contemporaries of Liu Bang, and some of their deeds were not only well-known but also widely circulated, and could not be concealed at all.

Even Emperor Wen of Han had a very bad impression of Liu Bang. When Liu Bang was eight years old, he was enfeoffed in Dai County, which bordered the Xiongnu. Moreover, his mother, Bo Ji, was not allowed to accompany him to take care of him. It was not until Liu Bang died that the mother and son were reunited.

Emperor Jing of Han suffered the consequences of the Rebellion of the Seven States because of Liu Bang's system of enfeoffing kings with the surname Liu, and he also suffered greatly because his policy of marriage alliances enriched the Xiongnu. It seems that there is no reason for him to go against his conscience and whitewash Liu Bang's character.

During the reign of Emperor Wu of Han, the Chinese people realized that peace through marriage was useless and would only make the Xiongnu more greedy and powerful. They finally made up their minds to rise up in resistance and successfully stood up.

Sima Qian also wrote the Records of the Grand Historian during this period. Although Emperor Wu of Han ordered many parts to be deleted and revised, a considerable amount of the dishonorable deeds of Liu Bang were still preserved.

Examples include being slow and humiliating, being greedy and lustful, pushing someone off a cart, sharing the spoils, slaughtering Xiang Yu's former subordinates after becoming emperor, turning Peng Yue into meat paste for Ying Bu to eat, and massacring the city and its three clans.

However, when it came to the issue of the throne and the stability of the empire, the Han emperors could not ignore it. The righteousness of Liu Bang's rebellion against Xiang Yu had to be upheld and proven, and it was also necessary to smear Xiang Yu.

However, some of Xiang Yu's deeds are also well-known and cannot be erased easily, which is why the historical records show a benevolent side of Xiang Yu.

If Xiang Yu's acts of benevolence were false, why would the Han Dynasty allow such content to appear in its historical records? What benefit would it bring to prove that Liu Ji killed a benevolent person? Since Xiang Yu was a tyrant, why not write it according to the actual events? After all, the Records of the Grand Historian has already been revised; why not deal with the false content as well?

Therefore, the historical records about Xiang Yu's virtues are all true and indisputable, and the Han Dynasty dared not arbitrarily change them.

(ii) By looking at problems dialectically, you will discover more of the truth.

Some might ask, are all those negative stories about Xiang Yu necessarily false? Couldn't Xiang Yu have been a split personality, sometimes good and sometimes bad?

Wasn't Liu Bang sometimes praised for his kindness and benevolence, and other times for his cold-blooded ruthlessness?

If we consider this matter using the logic of modern criminal investigation, under normal circumstances, whoever benefits is the most suspicious.

If Xiang Yu was truly a ruthless killer, why did Liu Ji and his family escape unscathed when they were captured by him?

Could it be that Liu Ji was protected by heaven, and Xiang Yu suddenly became incredibly kind and his intelligence turned negative whenever he encountered Liu Ji? On one hand, he was portrayed as fierce and cunning, while on the other hand, he did all sorts of brainless and stupid things.

For example, Liu Ji wanted to become the King of Guanzhong, but if Ziying, the rightful ruler, was not eliminated, Liu Ji would feel like he had a bone stuck in his throat. Xiang Yu then brutally killed Ziying and burned Xianyang, which greatly lost the hearts of the Qin people and handed over the hearts of the Qin people to Liu Ji.

Don't ever say that Liu Ji won the hearts of the Qin people with his Three Laws. The content of the Three Laws was a basic rule against murder, robbery, and theft, which was not allowed even during the tyrannical Qin period.

Xiang Yu had already lost the hearts of the Qin people during the Battle of Julu, because he killed 200,000 Qin soldiers in the battle. This was a blood feud, but it was far less damaging to Xiang Yu than the massacre of surrendered soldiers.

For example, Liu Ji wanted to rebel against Xiang Yu but had no excuse, so Xiang Yu immediately plotted to kill Emperor Yi and made it known to the whole world. How thoughtful of him!

Furthermore, when Xiang Yu went to Qi to quell a rebellion, he carried out another massacre, losing the hearts of the people of Qi and perfectly assisting Liu Ji.

Wherever Xiang Yu went, destruction followed. Then, as soon as Xiang Yu left, the area immediately returned to its former prosperity, with plenty of manpower and food. On the contrary, Xiang Yu's army often went hungry.

If Xiang Yu really did so many atrocities of massacring and slaughtering cities, and killed everyone, where did Zhang Han's army come from after he was made a king? Liu Ji could gather hundreds of thousands of troops with a wave of his hand, and after he wiped them out, he could summon hundreds of thousands more. Was he a summoner with a protagonist's halo?

A careful reading of Han Dynasty history books reveals that most of the records about Xiang Yu are related to his negative aspects. Even those that appear to praise Xiang Yu on the surface implicitly contain his injustices. Purely positive records are scarce. Yet, because of these few positive records, Sima Qian was labeled a fan of Xiang Yu.

The statement that Xiang Yu was benevolent and loved people is definitely not something Sima Qian made up. Records including some instances of him weeping for warhorses and wounded soldiers, which were labeled as "womanly compassion," all prove this point.

Furthermore, perhaps those who revised the Records of the Grand Historian themselves did not realize that throughout the entire process from the uprising to the defeat and death, Xiang Yu always took it upon himself to bring peace to the world and worked hard for it.

The tyranny of the Qin Dynasty caused immense suffering to the people. Xiang Yu rose up, overthrew the Qin Dynasty, slowed his pace toward becoming emperor, quickly ended the war, and allowed the people to recuperate, bringing peace to the land.