next »

[King of Ba Shu]

The forum seems to be running a little slow again lately and I was trying to think of a good topic to bring in a few new posts. This is my idea.

I will post the name of an individual or a faction/force from the time period and everyone can speculate what they think are the main reasons for that individual/faction/force failed at their task/livelihood/unification of China.

The only logical way I see this happening is in chronological order.

First up: The Yellow Turbans. Why did their cause die out.

For some of these there will be definitive answers, but for others there will hopefully be a little bit of disagreement.

[scholar]

The Yellow Turban Rebellion

Why It Failed

- It was a largely peasant rebellion, scaling from the lowest of the low class. Anyone with any military training quickly got put in charge of large amounts of men. This was a huge disadvantage against a massive force of well armed, well trained, professional, veteran soldiers from the frontier regions of the far north and west, and the capital region.
- It was isolated to a very small region of China, while the actual rebellion may have been large in number the region was quite small in comparison to the landmass of the nation. It was mostly isolated to Yan, Ji, and surrounding regions. Those regions were suffering from natural disasters such as famines and droughts meaning that the soldiers were literally starved and quite literally forced into rebellion.These people were undernourished.
- Poor equipment, as I said before these were largely peasants. What was a peasants main occupation? farming. They were using farming tools to fight soldiers. 200,000 vs. 100,000. Hm... those odds don't look so good for the Han. Add in the fact that those two thousand are farmers, have no armor, probably are fighting with farming tools and are going up against the Han Imperial army it seems more like a suicidal strike.
-Lack of skilled leadership, while the Turbans did indeed have the charismatic Jiao, Zhang Mancheng, Bao, and Liang as well as a few other that my pass above mediocre in leadership status you will find yourself wondering how the hell they had a chance against the likes of Huanfu Song, Zhu Jun, Lu Zhi, Cao Cao, Sun Jian, Dong Zhou, and others who's skills were unparalleled in battle for their age. Decent just doesn't quite cut it.
-A general amnesty was issued by the then skilled leader of the Han who transformed the rebellion. Promising immediate forgiveness to all but the ringleaders of the rebellion. This was immensely well played. The rebellion had started but already it was starting to collapse, the people were starving and unable to face the Han troops, all their sins would be forgiven if they left the rebellion. And they did, in droves. And after the death of their charismatic Jiao and their other leaders only it hastened their withdrawal.

In conclusion all these points in coercion stunted this rebellion and brought it to a close, in the end it lasted less than a fraction of the rein of the Emperor Ling and was quickly squashed. It had no hope of success and in the end was a minor rebellion. The Qiang rebellion to the West, Ou Xing to the south, Zhang Xuan to the north and others would stake their claim for power. In the end only The Qiang would truly be significant and it's lasting legacy? The severe depopulation of Liang province, and when it was cut in half, the severe depopulation of two provinces. The Yellow Turban Rebellion was, however, significant in the form of a catalyst. Even the most minor of instances can bring about great change. This rebellion lead to the dissolution of one of the greatest empire the world has ever known, rivaling the Great Romans, Persia, Greece, and the Tang. It is because of this that they are regarded as significant, and elevated to a high status.

[Humble Hero]

Indeed, I agree with scholar

The Turbans were lacking supplies, equipment, training, and leadership (Especially when stacked up against the imperial forces)

The major part of war is fought via supplies, and so if I was picking one point, it would be this. Starving men cannot overpower strong, trained men who have at least a square meal a day.

The amnesty would have worked absolute wonders. Some people revolt in spur of the moment, some revolt out of hate, some probably revolted because they believed Zhang Jiao could have lead them better. Once hate seemed trivial and Jiao became unable to stop the imperial forces, amnesty was probably looking pretty sweet.

In answer to the question though, they died out, simply because they were peasants fighting disciplined, well equipped, trained soldiers.

[Ma Su]

Surprise was important for them, they had numbers but lacked a properly trained and equipped army, outside of Zhang Liang's efforts. Once that surprise was gone and the Turbans were forced to rise early, they had to win it quickly but once the Han was able to muster up it's army, the Turbans were doomed thanks to the factors scholar mentioned

[scholar]

Surprise was important for them, they had numbers but lacked a properly trained and equipped army, outside of Zhang Liang's efforts. Once that surprise was gone and the Turbans were forced to rise early, they had to win it quickly but once the Han was able to muster up it's army, the Turbans were doomed thanks to the factors scholar mentioned

I knew I could count on you as there's only so much room in a single post. 

Though I'm curious about those stray rumors that Liang may have been in fact that real defacto leader of the Rebellion while Jiao was the face of the Rebellion with no real power, or more likely was the co-leader of the rebellion with Liang while Bao fell short. Anyways I'm interested in hearing your input on this.

[Ma Su]

I would say Zhang Jiao was the real leader until he fell sick, at which point Zhang Liang took military command in Guangzhong

[ShuFan]

An A+ for scholar's first post. That pretty much covers all I could think of.

[Yue Fei]

It was a largely peasant rebellion, scaling from the lowest of the low class. Anyone with any military training quickly got put in charge of large amounts of men. This was a huge disadvantage against a massive force of well armed, well trained, professional, veteran soldiers from the frontier regions of the far north and west, and the capital region.

I'm contesting this for one reason.

Conscript service was widespread. The reason why the rebellion was initially successful, was because of the training of the peasants, who would have already had their own weapons (not farm implements). The only thing they were lacking was armour, but you'll find that most of the "professional" troops didn't have armour either.

The only professional troops were the northern cavalry forces (who had very little armour, save for a lamellar cuirass), and the troops within the capital (which were better armed), but their numbers were relatively insignificant to make a great difference.

The training is not the issue. The issue is the leadership of the Han forces, and greater access to supplies. The Yellow Turbans had to act quickly, while the imperial troops could afford to fight a war of attrition. Acting quickly is not exactly a bad thing, but it usually involves things becoming sloppy when the leadership is not up to par.

Equipment and training plays a relatively minor part, since both sides were essentially equal in those regards.

[looknohands]

The training is not the issue.

I'll disagree on this part.  Yes, the peasants may have had limited training to serve the purpose of a defensive militia, but they were going up against an army that would be led by lifelong commanders with vast knowledge of military combat and tactics, and a force with a rigid chain of command.  Even if both sides began with a force of largely conscripted/volunteer soldiers the Han would have the advantage in teaching and training, and would soon have a more effective fighting force.  I haven't really seen any evidence of coordinated campaigns led by the Yellow Turbans...more of a general uprising wherein individual commanders took the initiative to launch a few attacks, but were quickly defeated once the likes of Zhu Jun and company were able to organize the Han forces. 

[scholar]

Tsk, Tsk, Yue Fei. You can never make it easy for me to close a debate before it starts! Oh well, all your points are perfectly valid though you missed a few things, and I'll contest your contention!

These peasants while they did receive some training (basic) they were mostly farmers and conscripts. There is no point in denying that. These people couldn't perform military tactics and probably were only taught how to keep formation and how to use a weapon (again the very basic form of this).

The immediate response to the rebellion was in itself conscripts, a "help the han squash a rebellion" as frontier region troops were busy. Those with basic training and numbers would indeed have initial success over those with no numbers and no training. But as veteran troops from the West who were fighting the Qiang for decades now, or from the north who were constantly fighting nomadic peoples they were facing well organized and powerful infantry mixed in with cavalry. The Yellow Turbans are far as to my knowledge were mostly farmers without any real cavalry. A mixed army can easily out maneuver and crush an infantry army, let alone adding the fact that the mixed army is better trained, better prepared, and better provisioned.

Again this rebellion was large, but limited to a rather small region of China. Supplies were in a desperate need, and it was something they just didn't have. Famines and natural disasters plagued the landscape and overall the entire region was in strife. They couldn't support their army, while the Han was a fraction of the size and had all of China to support it.

And yes, they were in fact, fighting with Farming tools. You cannot reasonably arm an army of their size in the amount of time with their limited resources. They would maybe have a select group of individuals under skilled leaders composed of "core" units. Probably the only thing that could hope to match the Han in any form, but other than that they had nothing. They would definitely have used whatever they had available, and those would have included Hoes, Scythes, and other farming tools. (No these were not Grim Reaper scythes for people other than Yue Fei and Ma Su. They were simply a blade, curved, attached to wood. So it wasn't very fearsome and would lose in a spear/sword/pike/bow/cavalry conflict. Good news is it's better than nothing.)

[Yue Fei]

These peasants while they did receive some training (basic) they were mostly farmers and conscripts. There is no point in denying that. These people couldn't perform military tactics and probably were only taught how to keep formation and how to use a weapon (again the very basic form of this).

They knew formations, they knew maneuvers, they knew how to use a weapon (a spear is very easy to use. Doesn't take an entirely long time to become good at it. Even the "professional" troops weren't doing kung fu.)

The immediate response to the rebellion was in itself conscripts, a "help the han squash a rebellion" as frontier region troops were busy. Those with basic training and numbers would indeed have initial success over those with no numbers and no training. But as veteran troops from the West who were fighting the Qiang for decades now, or from the north who were constantly fighting nomadic peoples they were facing well organized and powerful infantry mixed in with cavalry. The Yellow Turbans are far as to my knowledge were mostly farmers without any real cavalry. A mixed army can easily out maneuver and crush an infantry army, let alone adding the fact that the mixed army is better trained, better prepared, and better provisioned.

Cavalry is useful for three things. Field battles, foraging and chasing broken infantry. You don't bring cavalry to a siege, and cavalry also has a hard time breaking infantry by themselves. It's only when the infantry is broken that cavalry can do their job. The Qiang while nomadic, were not known for their cavalry, and in fact it was almost non-existent. Their infantry was top notch though.

Again this rebellion was large, but limited to a rather small region of China. Supplies were in a desperate need, and it was something they just didn't have. Famines and natural disasters plagued the landscape and overall the entire region was in strife. They couldn't support their army, while the Han was a fraction of the size and had all of China to support it.

Argumentum ad nauseum. I already mentioned this, there's no need to repeat it.

And yes, they were in fact, fighting with Farming tools. You cannot reasonably arm an army of their size in the amount of time with their limited resources. They would maybe have a select group of individuals under skilled leaders composed of "core" units. Probably the only thing that could hope to match the Han in any form, but other than that they had nothing. They would definitely have used whatever they had available, and those would have included Hoes, Scythes, and other farming tools. (No these were not Grim Reaper scythes for people other than Yue Fei and Ma Su. They were simply a blade, curved, attached to wood. So it wasn't very fearsome and would lose in a spear/sword/pike/bow/cavalry conflict. Good news is it's better than nothing.)

Actually it's fairly easy to beat farm tools into implements of war. But they would have had a fairly sizable number of arms (peasants were expected to arm themselves with weapons, not farm implements). And scythes are very similar to the Chinese ge, and would have been formed into one. A ge will always beat a spear. It's also quite effective against cavalry.

Shields are easy to fabricate as well. Swords are a bit difficult to make, but it's a very big assumption people make in thinking that swords are not easy to use, and someone is more likely to hurt themselves than the other person. That is simply false, and the only way you would hurt yourself is if you're trying to do fancy wushu moves without training.

So no, they did not fight with farm implements. This is not like feudal Europe where the peasants were very rarely armed.

[scholar]

I think it's hard to believe that anything other than a select group of Turbans actually knew what you just said. And if you think the only thing there is to a spear is how to thrust then that's nothing but the epitome of arrogance. It was indeed an easy to use weapon, but you can't master it.

I never said the Imperial army knew Kung Fu. But you seem to think that knowing how to thrust a spear and how to form up a line means you're ready for battle. It doesn't. You never know how you'll react to battle till you see the aftermath, the dead, the dying, the fields. Everything changes. Professional is just a word, but veteran is not. Battle hardy is not. Frontier soldiers and soldiers fighting the Qiang have been fighting for decades. They have seen conflict, and they have won battles. They are more prepared and far better off than peasants in from a field with maybe a month of training.

That paragraph on cavalry, while useful, was a tangent and detached from anything I said. Mixed means that cavalry can be utilized for it's three advantages and for none of it's disadvantages. Moving on.

I know, as I said "Again" as the first thing I said. It's not a logistical fallacy to repeat yourself twice. It is when you repeat yourself over and over until no one cares anymore, therefore it's not a an actual case of Argumentum ad nauseum.

Argumentum ad nauseam or argument from repetition or argumentum ad infinitum is an argument made repeatedly (possibly by different people) until nobody cares to discuss it any more. This may sometimes, but not always, be a form of proof by assertion.

Therefore invalid argument. Moving on.

Actually... no... I can't exactly respond to you on that last bit because anything I would say would be based on reason and rhetoric, not  knowledge or logic. So I can't challenge you on that last bit as I don't have the knowledge to, if you can provide a link to an adequate source to perhaps back up your claim then I may be able to contest it. It's not that I don't trust you, it's just that it's no fun debating when I'm talking out of nothing 

[Yue Fei]

I think it's hard to believe that anything other than a select group of Turbans actually knew what you just said. And if you think the only thing there is to a spear is how to thrust then that's nothing but the epitome of arrogance. It was indeed an easy to use weapon, but you can't master it.

You can't master any weapon. But you can get a bunch of men battle ready in a few hours. Imagine when you have days and months... And yes, you are essentially only going to be thrusting with a spear when you are in a formation. Swinging it will only present more problems.

I never said the Imperial army knew Kung Fu. But you seem to think that knowing how to thrust a spear and how to form up a line means you're ready for battle. It doesn't. You never know how you'll react to battle till you see the aftermath, the dead, the dying, the fields. Everything changes. Professional is just a word, but veteran is not. Battle hardy is not. Frontier soldiers and soldiers fighting the Qiang have been fighting for decades. They have seen conflict, and they have won battles. They are more prepared and far better off than peasants in from a field with maybe a month of training.

Actually veteran is a word. I went to Kosovo, I never saw combat. But I am still classified as a veteran. Also, frontier soldiers are going to remain on the frontier. There is no need to bring them into the picture at all. The experienced soldiers that the Han had in suppressing the rebellion was very little, and their presence did not have any considerable clout on the outcome of battles.

That paragraph on cavalry, while useful, was a tangent and detached from anything I said. Mixed means that cavalry can be utilized for it's three advantages and for none of it's disadvantages. Moving on.

Mixed armies cannot outmaneuver an infantry army. Cavalry can outmaneuver the enemy infantry, but your own infantry cannot (unless of course they are lighter, but that would be infantry delegated to a skirmish role, which would have very little success against the main body of troops).

I know, as I said "Again" as the first thing I said. It's not a logistical fallacy to repeat yourself twice. It is when you repeat yourself over and over until no one cares anymore, therefore it's not a an actual case of Argumentum ad nauseum.

It is when you've repeated yourself twice, and I have already mentioned it. If you are not contesting something, don't post the same thing again.

And don't sass me.

[scholar]

If you can't master any weapon, then wouldn't one who's only been using it for several years fighting in actual conflict be more handy with the weapon than someone who only used it for a short amount of time under the guidance of an untrained and unskilled man himself? I really think you are overestimating the potency of these men.

By veteran I'm going off of the accepted view that veteran normally means combat tested. And during the time of the Han veteran  well meant combat tested. (No offense)

If you can outmaneuver the army then you can outmaneuver the army.

[Yue Fei]

If you can't master any weapon, then wouldn't one who's only been using it for several years fighting in actual conflict be more handy with the weapon than someone who only used it for a short amount of time under the guidance of an untrained and unskilled man himself? I really think you are overestimating the potency of these men.

You can only use a spear in so many ways in a formation. A man who has stronger muscles can use it with more power than a weaker man, but a thrust is a thrust is a thrust.

By veteran I'm going off of the accepted view that veteran normally means combat tested. And during the time of the Han veteran  well meant combat tested. (No offense)

You're overestimating the use of the term veteran. A "veteran" is not a better soldier than one who has just enlisted. Unless of course you have someone who has many years of experience under their belt. But the nature of combat at this time also means that the people who have a lot of combat experience are going to be very few in number, and are much better used at training other troops than actually serving on the front lines.

If you can outmaneuver the army then you can outmaneuver the army.

If you can outmaneuver the army, but can't break them it doesn't matter how much maneuvering you do.