Talk:Liu Ji (14th century)
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Liu Ji (Bowen) was named after Zhang Liang and Zhuge Liang as the most brilliant strategist to assist in military campaigns. All of them were believed to be the reincarnation of each other to carry out the mandate of heaven. They were capable of predicting past and future and understood the stars formation.
Legendary, Liu Bowen had predicted many events from 500 to 1000 years after his death of which many were realised.
I just added new info, greatly expanding the article.--PericlesofAthens 04:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
"Liu Ji's biography is found in the 128th chapter of the Chinese Ming Shi historical text, while the author Chong Tai also wrote a biography on him. no that's not true."
- Reference should be made to the Yu-li-zi, a philosophical work frequently quoted. I find a reference in the Chinese Wikipedia, but unfortunately, I can't read Chinese. Someone who can read Chinese should look into this. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I removed "He eventually became the grand chancellor at the imperial court."
Liu Ji never had this post according to Ming Shi
Wrong Info re: "Mastering the Art of War"
There is an un unsourced reference in the introduction that states that Liu Ji was a coeditor of Zhuge Liang's book, "Mastering the Art of War". I am almost 100% sure that this is completely wrong. Thomas Cleary edited a book titled "Mastering the Art of War" containing Zhuge Liang's "the Way of the General" and Liu Ji's "Lessons of War", and I believe that whoever wrote this has made their mistake based on this. Also, because Zhuge Liang died 1000 years before Liu Ji, it doesn't even make sense that they could co-edit a book. I'm going to delete this reference. If someone can find a source that indicates that it is actually true, please add it in the future.22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Translation of 時務十八策
Does anybody know the standard translation of the work "時務十八策"? I am not familiar with this book, and the translation that is used in the page is my own translation, which I believe is rather liberal. It was left over from a previous edit of the page, and I don't believe that it should be left without an English name. If anyone knows of a better translation than the one that I have used, or know how this book is usually translated, please make this edit on the first page.Ferox Seneca (talk) 23:52, 22 February 2011 (UTC)