Why were his accomplishments so exaggerated? Why choose him instead

the guy who wrote the romance was a shufag

>>1696098
Zhuge Liang may be an excellent millitary strategist, but he is not without flaws. After all, he is rather Machiavellian and doesn't care much for civilians.

>>1697616
>Zhuge Liang may be an excellent millitary strategist
He literally won just 1 (one) military campaign in his whole life, and that with the opposing army disgregating due to infighting and leader murder before he even arrived. He was definitely not an excellent military strategist, he was just a fucking politician with a gift for civil administration.

>>1696098
>Why were his accomplishments so exaggerated?
Because he literally wrote the history of his own faction and forbid anyone else to do the same, so when people go look for Shu history he's the only source for anything not related to diplomacy and warfare.
>Why choose him instead of any of the other talented people of the time?
Because the author had a strong Shu bias for political reasons and Kongming was the effective ruler of Shu from Xiaoting to his death, Li Yan and Liu Shan notwithstanding.

Shu was the only guys in the 3 kingdoms that one can refer to as "the good guys"

>>1697840
Right. I mean they warred, betrayed, ravaged enemy lands and taxed their own into ruin, but they were the good guys. I mean they had Han in the name, they must have been! Right?

>>1697616
The original canonical interpretation was that Zhuge Liang was a good civil administrator but not a good military strategist.

This was gradually changed in later revisionist histories. At various times political groups in the south needed a historic "hero" to rally around to inspire support for reconquest of the north. DZhuge Liang's repeated failed attempts to reconquer the north made him an attractive candidate for such a role.

>>1696098
>Why were his accomplishments so exaggerated?
He banned historians and wrote the histories himself.

He's the /his/ antichrist FFS.