Talk:Yue Fei

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

FA[edit]

I am the person who totally rewrote and expanded the Yue Fei page to its current status. I realize the page is no where near as good as it could be, but it's A LOT better than it was. The page was originally full of fiction presented as fact (not to say that the current page is free of that since even Yue's historical bios are steeped in myth). But since I have managed to pass Zhou Tong (archer), Yue's archery teacher, as FA-class I think more effort should be made to get this page up to standard. However, I don't feel like expanding the page myself since I have already done so much work to it. So, I hope that somebody in Wikiproject China will take on the task.

I have in my possession a huge 621 page English language biography on Yue Fei written by Dr. Edward H. Kaplan. Here is the book's citation:

Kaplan, Edward Harold. Yueh Fei and the founding of the Southern Sung. Thesis (Ph. D.) -- University of Iowa, 1970. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1970.

I'm sure someone can track this down. The only place to find it is in univeristy libraries, but I'm sure you can get it with an inter-library loan through your local library. I know of a website that sells a made-to-order reprint of the book for $41. It's a bit costly, but it's definitely worth it.(Ghostexorcist 20:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

As an outsider, who does not know this story at all, I can tell you that this article makes no sense at all. As far as I could tell, it seems to say that Yue Fei was recalled from a campaign in 1127 and executed as a direct result of those events (almost taking Kaifeng back from the Jin, which would have threatened the new Song emperor's rule). Yet Yue Fei's death is listed as being in 1141! So how come the 14 year delay between his arrest and his execution is never even discussed, as though this is common sense? More terrible and nonsensical scholarship on the English language Chinese history related material. Sigh... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.173.101.236 (talk) 23:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting views on why Yue Fei was recalled and killed[edit]

Legend tells that Yue Fei was killed wholly because of Qin Kuai's defamation and Gaozong's foolishness; however, in the recent decades a more in-depth view has been made by scholars and is quickly gaining popularity - That Gaozong would have killed Yue Fei anyway, even without Qin Kuai's influence. Search for "The Death of Yue Fei" in Google and you will barely find anyone blaming only Qin Kuai for his death. I have found three reasons which are now commonly proposed by scholars regarding why Gaozong would have wanted to kill Yue Fei (the Chinese quotes are all from the traditional historical account of Song, 宋史; sources given are articles written in Chinese by ordinary people, detailing the various points I would make）:

  1. [1] Gaozong feared that Yue Fei might recover the two captured Emperors in the Jingkang Incident, Huizong and Qinzong, threatening his throne. Being a not-so-legitimate emperor himself (the reason he became Emperor was because all of Huizong's other sons are either dead or captured, due to him being away on a mission when Kaifeng fell; which in turn was because he was not among Huizong's favored sons), Gaozong simply wished to retain his throne. This view, though most popular, is also often discredited by scholars, first because Huizong was already dead by the time Yue Fei was recalled, and also because several times Gaozong had shown his intention to recover the two Emperors, such as making it one of Yue Fei's objectives.
  2. [2] Yue Fei was stubborn ("不挫於人") and arrogant, offending the Emperor - First, Yue Fei, despite holding a minor post in the Imperial Court, suggested the Emperor in person to lead the army in the northern expedition ("愿陛下亲率六军北渡"), even when the Gaozong has no military experience whatsoever beforehand. Second, he suggested Gaozong to set an heir, a sensitive political subject at the time because Gaozong was not completely legitimate (see above). Third, he had no respect of the Emperor's wishes - in one instance, he had an argument with the then highest ranked military officer, Zhang Jun, and resigned his post afterwards, leaving no choice but for the Emperor to beg him to resume his post ("...即日上章乞解兵柄，終喪服，以張憲攝軍事，步歸，廬母墓側。浚怒，奏以張宗元為宣撫判官，監其軍。帝累詔趣飛還職，飛力辭，詔幕屬造廬以死請，凡六日，飛趨朝待罪，帝尉遣之。") [3] [4]
  3. Gaozong feared the Yue Fei may be too difficult to control if he does indeed recover the lost capital. Yue Fei had immense popularity with the people ("...舉眾來歸" "飛班師，民遮馬慟哭") - coupled with the forementioned arrogance, Gaozong predicted that Yue Fei may even threaten his throne if he indeed succeeds in his northern expedition. Having painful experience with internal strife during his first years as an Emperor, Gaozong may prefer an unstable peace with Jin rather than a civil war (He once said "敗北不足喜，諸將知尊朝廷為可喜。" i.e. "Defeating the north is not sufficient for joy; the generals respecting the Imperial Court would be a joyous matter.")

There is also a rather bold but increasingly popular suggestion that Yue Fei is in fact Gaozong's brother - However, this has little historical basis. There is also a suggestion by scholars that Zhang Jun, not Qin Kuai, was primarily responsible for Gaozong's dislike of Yue (Zhang has attempted several times to defame Yue in front of the Emperor, due to his personal rivalry with Yue, see above).

In my opinion, the current article gives little depth on why Yue Fei was killed at all - all it gave was an ambiguous two lines, first describing Qin Kuai's defamation, and then an incomplete description of Gaozong's fears. Being a popular and oft-discussed subject of Yue Fei (search 岳飞 on Google - almost every result is a discussion on his death; find his entry on 宋史, and one third is devoted to his death), it would make the article much more complete to devote a sub-section on why Yue Fei was killed. Discuss? Aran|heru|nar 07:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find good English references (preferably published) for the above views, by all means edit the article and include them. The timing of his recall has always seemed odd to me, since messages would have taken a reasonable length of time to go back and forth - but we need to avoid OR here. -- Medains 15:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All of the modern day english scholarly sources I've read about Yue Fei points the finger at Gaozong, but still states Qin had his part to play in the General's death. Depending on how long it is, I will type up some quotes from a huge 600 page Yue Fei biography dealing with the reasons for his execution.
I am the person that authored the current Yue Fei page. I realize that it is a horrible article, but it is A LOT better than what it was. I first bombarded the page with random quotes, but then strained some sections into actual fluid paragraphs. If I used the sources I currently have on Yue Fei, the page could easily pass for Feature Article status (that is if I completely rewrote the page again). But I am far too busy to do so, that is why I suggested some of these sources above in a previous post. --Ghostexorcist 20:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Story of Yue Fei[edit]

Regarding the translation "Telling the Complete Biography of Yue Fei," I didn't provide "proof" that it was wrong because it was pretty obvious to any person who had a basic understanding of Chinese, classical or modern. To be honest, it didn't even make much sense to me in English. As for the so-called "linguist" quoted here, I foresee only two possibilities: 1. He was drunk when suggesting the translation. 2. He was a hoax. I checked a few of his contribution simply because of interest, and, based on these edits [5] [6] [7] and this discussion here, I would conclude, frankly, he would not have passed an elementary school test in Chinese language without, of course, his most beloved translations (much like I would not pass an English one.) Please do not take any personal offence in this judgment - it is only an honest opinion, and I respect this user's immense contribution to Chinese and Japanese articles.

Let me first point out a few obvious flaws with the translation "Telling the Complete Biography of Yue Fei". Not only is it a dictionary word-to-word translation that renders it meaningless, it uses modern translations of the words when they were originally Classical Chinese - and there's a big difference. "小说" is a "novel", not a "little telling." "(忠义)水浒传" is Water Margin (or more accurately, "The Story/Epic of the Water Margin"), not "The Biography of Water Margin."

The meaning of "传" in Classical Chinese has two possible translations - One, "biography", and second, similar to the phrase "传奇", a "legend", "story" or an "epic." Since it was never quite obviously not intended as a professional biography (half a millenium later than the original events and with no reason to write an authentic one, for which he was not paid for) and was compiled from tales and basically legends, I see no reason to call it a "biography" instead of the much suitable translation of "legend(s)" or "epic" - I'm fine with "The Story of Yue Fei," though personally I don't like the sound of it as good as "epic."

As for the much harder "说", I could provide two translations, one based simply on Classical Chinese and translation at first glance, and the other based on a professional inquiry to the original format of 說岳全傳. I have not been able to find a semantical explanation of the word "说“ online, though I am certain that like 论，言， 话, and other similar words, it was originally used as both a noun and a verb, similar to "to say" and "a say" - examples are ”说“, ”小说“, ”学说”, etc. Classical Chinese makes little distinction between nouns and verbs - a noun could often be used as a verb, and sometimes vice versa. The Chinese concept of "novel", 小说, began around the Han Dynasty. At times, these "novels" were compilations of folktales, which are usually sang (说唱), some of which were simply complied leisurely by interested scholars, others which an official from the Imperial Court directly collects from different parts of the country, then to be sang or read by the Emperor. The idea of writing a work (read or sang) based on folktales and not just a compilation started to form around the era of Three Kingdoms and by the Tang dynasty, these novels were very popular. However, true novels based on folktales, with chapters, only began to form during and after the Yuan Dynasty - 說岳全傳 being one of them. If a translation must be given for "說" in this instance, I would suggest "Tales about..." Since meanings of "Tales about..." and "The Legends" slightly overlap, "The Complete Legends of Yue Fei" or, as I suggested before, "The Epic of Yue Fei" would probably be fine. However, as I have said about, this is a translation on first glance and based on logic - there is a far more likely meaning for "说” as explained below: In fact, the complete name of the book is "精忠演义说本岳王全传" - "說岳全傳" was only a short title, much like "三国演义" is short for "三國志通俗演義“, "水浒传" is short for "忠義水滸傳". "精忠演义" from the original title is largely useless and can be ignored; 岳王 is short for 岳武穆(鄂)王, or probably 忠武王, two titles commonly given to Yue Fei. The most important bit, however, is "说本", which means "original script" - significantly different from "tales" or the absurd "telling." As I have explained above, a 说 is a compilation of folktales usually sang, as if in a performance. A 说本 would be the original script from which a "说" would be made - and "精忠演义说本岳王全传" would be a novel rewritten or edited from this script. Here is a Chinese source I found supporting this interpretation. - All of which make matters quite complicated than expected, indeed. Discuss. Aran|heru|nar 14:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you take up the matter with the linguist who suggested the translation as I am not a scholar of Chinese. I take no offense at all since I am not the person in question. --Ghostexorcist 14:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neither do I, the person in question, take offense at your amusing evaluation of my Chinese fluency. However, what's the problem? This context clearly says "literally "Telling the Complete Biography of Yue Fei"" and a literal translation is what you (literally, if you see the irony) describe as a "dictionary word-to-word translation". I found this literal paraphrase online and linked it. Perhaps you have a better literal translation. For the literary title, "The Complete Legend/Story/Tale of Yue Fei" seems OK, mutatis mutandis. Also, if you're unable "to find a semantical explanation of the word 说 online", may I suggest Lin Yutang's dictionary. Best wishes Keahapana 02:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tattoo[edit]

Once again, before someone reverts my changes, http://www.ty.gov.cn/ReadNews.asp?NewsID=355 and http://dskb.hangzhou.com.cn/20050801/ca1039762.htm The tattoo is 尽忠报国, as indicated at the shrine. The correct pronunciation is "jìn zhōng bào guó" which translates to, literally or colloquially, to "serve the country with utmost loyalty" The previously mentioned 精忠报国 has been removed and should remain that way unless someone finds concrete evidence to the contrary.

There is currently a discussion about Yue Fei's tattoo taking place here If you would like to contribute please do so. Philg88 contact 08:10, 18 April 2024 UTC [refresh]

Book of Wumu (武穆遺書)[edit]

How about this book of Yue Fei? Is it fictional or is it real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophisticate20 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC) Sophisticate20 (talk) 21:44, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's a fictional book. It was mentioned in Jin Yong's wuxia novel The Heaven Sword and Dragon Saber (see the article for more details). There is supposedly a martial arts manual bearing that name, but it has no historical tie to Yue Fei at all. It is not mentioned in contemporary records from that time and was probably written sometime in the last century. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 02:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kneeling Iron Statues[edit]

I recall reading in Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming's book XINGYIQUAN that the Kneeling Iron Statues are replaced every six months or so because people continue to deface them.

Is that a question or a statement? Either way, Dr. Yang is not a very good source for history (the doctorate is in engineering by the way). The biography he presents in his book about Yue Fei is not accurate. Read this for more details. Anyway, if it was a question, they've had to replace the statues once before, but now there is a gate around them and a sign that asks people not to spit. Replacing something every six months would be quite costly. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:51, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yue Fei, the Chinese hero, the amazing warrior and loyal patriot[edit]

To: This wikipedia page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yue_Fei

Re: Yue Fei, the great, amazing warrior and Chinese hero

From: Yingtai (Tricia) Chiang

Your biography of Yue Fei in Wikipedia (second paragraph) is using this later historian, Deng Guangming, to wrongfully try to question Yue Ke’s more reliable, true and correct biography of Yue Fei’s amazing career with high veracity. Please correct and delete this fourth sentence in the second paragraph with incorrect criticism,” Some later historians including Deng Guangming now doubt (no) the veracity of many of Yue Ke's claims about his ancestor.[7]” You and Deng Guangming are putting your unfair criticism, your opinion in the second paragraph by saying “now doubt (some later historians) the veracity” of many of Yue Ke’s claims” because those historian’s doubt (and jealousy) is their opinion . You sound like you are using Guangming in order to incorrectly understate the high veracity of Yue Fei’s brave, patriotic and astounding career in China during the Song dynasty.

The other paragraphs (Chronical of Yue, Birth and early life, Martial training, Yue Fei’s tattoo, Military record, martial arts, poetry, folk hero etc.) are okay, are great and do not need to be deleted (except for the fourth sentence, second paragraph from “biography of Yue Fei”).

“Some later historians” are spoiled in a bad way, enjoy the convenience of modern TV sets, electricity, faucets and running water. The modern historian does not know anything about how battles in ancient China were much more interesting, verocious and challenging than modern warfare. This Deng Guangming was arguing against a good patriotic warrior from China. The patriot Yue Fei was 300 times smarter and more heroic than Guangming. Deng Guangming’s name should not be advertised in the sacred biography of Yue Fei.

“Some later historians” are jealous of Yue Ke’s great works, and that modern historian is not qualified to doubt the veracity of Yue Ke’s claims about his ancestor. The modern author, Guangming is less reliable, is spoiled and is incorrect with his doubts. Guangming who is doubtful on purpose and he has never experienced life during the year 1000-1500 in China.

        • Also, please correct and delete excessive criticism in Wikipedia, delete last two sentences under ’Story of Yue Fei”, about Qian Cai’s great wuxia novel. Although Qian Cai’s novel contained chapters that were fictional, you should recognize and acknowledge that the amazing war victories by Yue Fei were true and real and were not fictional versus, the novel with new characters by Qian Cai, those are two different things.

Under the paragraph, Story of Yue Fei, please in Wikipedia, delete last two sentences that are promoting Sir Ti-Liang. This Chief Justice of Hong Kong, Ti-Liang has been influenced in a bad way from westerners. Sir Yang Ti-Liang is wrong to try to mix up two different things. Sir Yang Ti-Lians was using his high status to kiss ass in a bad way towards westerners who are against Qian Cai. Sir Yang Ti-Liang translated the book and has no right to try to ruin Qian Cai‘s book. Qian Cai has already acknowledged that there were somesupernatural elements in his novel. In that novel by Qian Cai, it is an excellent novel which is supposed to contain an overabundance of interesting supernatural elements. Wuxia novels do contain many elements that are based on real life. Qian Cai had a wonderful and great imagination and Qian’s work should be praised. Furthermore, in the Bhuddist religion, there are many really nice and amazing heavenly elements that are not simply called supernatural. Sir Yang Ti-Liang is not respectful towards the greatness of Chinese Wuxia novels.

In other countries, western people build churches and talk about supernatural occurrences in the bible. How about people start complaining about the bible and criticizing how claims about Jesus were doubtful? How would you, Guangming or some later historians feel like if people start criticizing how they are doubtful of how Christians make claims about the greatness of Jesus, doubting the veracity of claims about Jesus??? Sir Yang Ti-Liang is bad and has bad double standards to allow other people to believe in the greatness of Jesus who is amazing but Ti-Liang will not allow Qian Cai to add some fictional characters into his novel????!!!

Yet do you know that many Chinese people do not complain and do not criticise the Catholic religion for being “supernatural” or fictional. Sir Tan Ti-Liang is evil for supporting other elements of western books that are purely fictional and not acknowledging other books are purely make-believe in other countries. However,, Ti-Liang has the guts to wrongfully criticise Qian Cai’s book, General Yue Fei.

90% of Chinese men and women and historians do strongly believe in the veracity of Yue Fei’s career. Most of modern historians and ancient historians do not doubt and believe in the veracity of Yue Ke’s claims about his ancestor. Yue Ke’s biography of Yue Fei’s personal life and career, is 650 times MORE factual than the way you (or Guangming) are wrongfully trying to put down his biography. Also, that is not called a Myth (no) as Sinologist Hellmut Wilhelm, incorrectly encouraged. The word “myth in Heemut’s title is misleading and is different from a biography, those are two different things.

Western people have written biographies about many western people that are doubtful or put up charts and statistics with material errors, material variances on the net, yet you are not complaining about them.

Please stop trying to harass and stop bothering Yue Ke’s biography of his ancestor, Yue Fei who did have extraordinary skills on the battlefield compared to other people, both in the Song dynasty and in modern life. His descendent, Yue Ke obtained fresh knowledge (60 years later) from many military officials, men and women and other people who knew and witnessed Yue Fei ‘s accomplishments. Other military and court officials, independent men and women during that dynasty have written and/or told stories and biographies about Yue Fei that matched what Yue Ke wrote in that biography. However, those biographies about Yue Fei and documents were destroyed and/or not publicized.

That privileged information from Yue Ke is 600 times more reliable and better than unreliable western influence. Deng Guangming did not do any work and Guangming and some later doubtful historians are not smart, do not have qualifications to doubt the veracity of Yue Ke’s claims about his hardworking ancestor.

Yue Ke states that Yue Fei , although strong and victorious was tortured a lot in prison for 2 months and went through a lot of bullying from the weak Qin Hui who is very bad. Some later historians and Deng Guangming are rude and making rude remarks about a biography that was already written. Some later historians and Deng Guangming are not respectful and (Guangming) not polite and are not doing justice to Yue Fei.

Other countries have your own heroes and heroines, but most of your heroes in other countries are not as great as Yue Fei’s military and martial arts’ and literary accomplishments. In a period of 90 years or 85 years, some later historians cannot ever accomplish even 1/5 of what Yue Fei achieved while risking his life hundreds of time for the emperor and the Song dynasty.

Chinese historians are totally different from you, because they do not have a habit of using a "university's image" to publicly criticizing your western heroes by publicly promoting that “biographies about your western heroes are doubtful and have no veracity”. If you have a masters degree in history or something, you are incorrectly using your western status/citizenship in a bad way, to threaten, to abuse and to bully the great fans of this Chinese hero, Yue Fei.

Yue Fei was from in China and Yue had an excellent career that 90% of modern military generals cannot ever match and cannot ever accomplish. This biography by Yue Ke is excellent and is more historically accurate that the way you are implying.

“Some later historians” you refer to should be criticizing other biographers in other countries who have written about heroes or heroines from other countries that deserve to be doubted (instead of blaming and doubting the wrong biographer).

In your introduction, you are wrongfully ignoring that there were many accounts by Yue Ke that were correct and were indeed historically accurate about the veracity of his ancestor’s career. Since you may not like Yue Ke’s hardwork, then you should at least stay neutral about the veracity of Yue Fei’s career. As a totally different person in modern society, you cannot override and you cannot steal the fact that most Chinese guys and girls, men and women and Asian Chinese men and women do believe in the veracity of Yue Fei’s career and accomplishments during the Song dynasty in China. The various biographies of Yue Fei were written by Chinese people including his grandson, Yue Yun. The biographies of Yue Fei were created in China, not in foreign countries and obviously were not written by westerners. Some westerners who publish their individual names and try to get public attention should recognize that their original sources were different Chinese people, scholars and/or historians that support Yue Ke’s biography.

This biography of Yue Fei is praiseworthy and has NOTHING to do with Deng Guangming, some later historians who are troublemakers and are no where as qualified as Yue Ke; his ancestor’s biography is none of your business. Some historians are jealous of Yue Fei‘s amazing martial arts abilities and patriotism towards the Song dynasty. Some of these historians, perhaps 10% do not believe in everything in that biography, because of excessive jealousy.

This biography of Yue Fei was the blood and sweat of Yue Ke. Yue Ke’s works deserves 900 times more credit (than what Deng Guangming, some other people etc.) incorrectly are implying and stating. Your introduction is putting forth unfounded criticism (of one of his closest family members) into the minds of readers. Your introduction is actually a lot worse than it could be, unless you delete the part of historians not wanting to believe Yue Ke’s claims. In any biography of any famous person in China, there may be chapters with 5%-15% that may not totally accurate and that is normal. For example, that famous person’s first child may be adopted and not the biological child, but the other five children are his biological children. Yue Ke's ancestor was jailed at a young age due to that evil Qin Gui and bad lady Wang.

You should be writing a biography in Wikipedia that encourages and supports Yue Fei’s greatness and supports Yue Ke’s commendable works. If you are not able to support and promote Yue Ke’s, then you and/or Deng Duangming, do NOT deserve to comment about Yue Fei’s praiseworthy career and family.

Any smart person who reads in between the lines, could tell that in your introduction in Wikipedia, you are wrongfully encouraging people to doubt Yue Ke’s great works. Yue Ke interviewed and researched fresh sources of information (from within a time period of 100 years), and Yue Ke was in the best position to know about Yue Fei’s life. Also, Yue Ke wrote his book 900 years before this evil Guangming tried to do research about Yue Fei. This Guangming and some later (5%) historians have a problem about Yue Ke’s amazing martial arts abilities, or why else are you commenting in a negative but very subtle way about the truly correct biography that Yue Ke wrote which is 90% accurate.

Qin Hui is the idiot who is guilty of rebelling and guilty of other serious crimes. Qin Hui did noting to save the emperor’s life and Qin Hui made zero contribution to the Song dynasty. On the other hand, Yue Fei did 1500 times more work to recover lost territory and to save the Song dynasty from hundreds of attacks from the Jins. The Jin’s did not actually do peace negotiations even though they were called “peace negotiations”. The greedy and evil Jurchens killed innocent Song civilians (for no good reason) and the Jins cheated and killed generals who attended “peace negotiations”. 

The idiot emperor blamed the wrong person (Yue Fei) and should have imprisoned Qin Hui and his evil wife, Lady Wang.  Qin Hui and his ancestors should bow down and pray for two hours every day for 1000 years to apologize for murdering and imprisoning Yue Fei.

Wang Gui is not honorable for not being loyal to Yue Fei and Wang Gui did not have a good reason to support the evil Qin Hui. Qin Hui was not loyal and Qing Hui and Lady Wang have terrible sins for murdering Yue Fei and his son, Yue Yun. Yue Fei is an honorable Chinese general. Yue Fei and Yue Yun were not guilty of rebelling against the people of Song dynasty. Yue Fei and Yue Yun do not have terrible sings. Qin Hui’s ancestors majorly apologies to Yue Fei and Yue Yun. That is a fact that Yue Fei successfully shot arrows and successfully did this challenging task 9 times in a row from 240 paces a way. Yue Fei achieved the highest score during the imperial examination and court officials witnessed Yue Fei’s highest achievements. Nobody knows as much as Yue Fei’s wife and his five children who know the most about Yue Fei’s career and family life. The fresh knowledge of Yue Fei’s victories was passed down to his descendant, Yue Yun and other family members who were pardoned from exile, a long long time later, twenty years later. “Some later historians such as Deng Guangming are so incompetent. Guangming cannot use modern conveniences, doing that 950 years later in the 20 th century , cannot override factual information that was written by Yun Ke. When Deng Guangming states he doubts the veracity of the biographer’s claims, that is Deng Guangming’s jealousy showing and that is Guangming’s opinion. On the other hand, if you take a measurement, provided that the numbers do not contain material errors or are materially mistated, then that is a fact. That is a fact that Yue Fei led an army of 800 soldiers to defeat and win against the invaders with 100,000 soldiers.

Yue Fei was too busy risking his life, fighting in amazing wars and battles and spending time training thousands of soldiers in China. Yue Fei is very famous as an excellent warrior from China. Also, Yue Fei was a great scholar, and that is not relevant that he was not considered an erudite scholar. Most erudite scholars do not have 1/10 th of the fighting skills that Yue Fei had with great martial arts abilities. Yue Fei ‘s martial arts abilities within and outside of the battlefield is the best in the world in ancient China and out of 200 different countries in the modern world.

Yes, there were many other Chinese army generals who made great accomplishments during the Song dynasty, but it was Yue Fei that was the strongest, most loyal and greatest among most of the army generals. Yue Fei risked his life numerous times more than many other people who risk their lives in the military . Yue Fei used his superior martial arts skills (that were created in China) to save emperor Zhao’s life. The Song emperor did nothing to protect Yue Fei’s life and the Song emperor wanted to kill the loyal Yue Fei. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.0.50.4 (talk) 18:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This made my day. Thanks for making me laugh, especially the "650" in "Yue Ke’s biography of Yue Fei’s personal life and career, is 650 times MORE factual than the way you (or Guangming) are wrongfully trying to put down his biography." Timmyshin (talk) 08:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Yue Fei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History of Yue Fei[edit]

There is a recent (2009) PhD dissertation on Yueh (Yue) Fei titled General Yueh Fei: a novel and accompanying exegesis by Dr Peter Scottney-Turbill that draws on the work of Edward Kaplan's (1970) PhD thesis titled Yueh Fei and the Founding of the Southern Sung. Dr Scottney-Turbill's thesis can be downloaded as a PDF from ACQUIRE at Central Queensland University Australia. Scottney-Turbill's dissertation is worthy of constructive scrutiny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.124.48.143 (talk) 11:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment on the posthumous name[edit]

These small details are usually quite interesting and need to be handle with care. I notice the Western sources usually do not try too hard to be accurate regarding them though.

Just like in the case of the Ming hero Yu Qian, the posthumous name was created and changed. Yu Qian's original posthumous name was Su-Min (Stern/Solemn and Suffering/Lamentable). During Wanli's reign, it became Zhong-Su (Loyal and Stern). Apparently Min (Suffering/Lamentable) would remind people that the Ming Dynasty had executed the Hero. And although in the horrible crisis, Yu Qian had taken control and became the country's Saviour (and not the Emperors), leading the army, weathering inner storms, reforming the government... he still did the job in the Dynasty's name and he died never having spoken against it - Thus it would be good to remind the people that he was Loyal.

With Yue Fei, another Saviour who was betrayed by the Dynasty, his posthumous name Wu-Mu (Martial and Stern) became Zhong-Wu (Loyal and Martial, again the "Loyal" part became the first part of the name). And the "Mu" part was removed. Although Su and Mu are both "Stern and Solemn", "Mu" is even more solemn, a word used to describe the Emperor (Example: 天子穆穆，諸侯皇皇，大夫濟濟，士蹌蹌，庶人僬僬-The Son of Heaven should be stern/majestic/serene in his demeanours; the vassal kings august; the high-ranked mandarins orderly, the low-ranked mandarins and non-governmental scholars alert; and the common people humble and hasty). Apparently the later Emperors thought that this word would have made Yue Fei too exalted.
Same with Dorgon, who threatened the "natural order" by being a military dictator who usurped imperial prerogatives and glory (kind of more actively and consciously than the two previous cases though, but absolutely a non-erasable figure, being the man who had actually conquered China and built the administrative system): his posthumous name is Ruizhong (Astute and Loyal).

Deamonpen (talk) 04:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Yue Fei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Yue Fei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Current status of Yue Fei[edit]

The article says he is no longer officially considered to be a national hero, following a 2002 decision. However, if appears that decision was overturned following widespread criticism.

https://eap.einaudi.cornell.edu/sites/eap/files/Matten%2C%20Marc%20Andre.%20The%20Worship%20of%20General%20Yue%20Fei%20and%20His%20Problematic%20Creation%20as%20a%20National%20Hero.%20Frontiers%20of%20History%20in%20China%206.1%20%282011%29.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.143.183 (talk) 03:47, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:52, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yue_Fei&oldid=1194422840"