Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Join the Romance of the Three Kingdoms discussion with our resident Scholars. Topics relating to the novel and history are both welcome. Don't forget to check the Forum Rules before posting.
Kongming’s Archives: Romance of the Three Kingdoms
Three Kingdoms Officer Biographies
Three Kingdoms Officer Encyclopedia
Scholars of Shen Zhou Search Tool

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Terranigma Freak » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:38 pm

I think one of the reasons why Sima Yi get a bad rap in the games is because they need a super powered last boss. Sima Yi was the last boss in Legend of Kongming and it does make sense. And yeah, Sima Yi once again took over the throne for himself. I mean, with Cao Cao dead, there's really no other powerful military leader to fight against, so they had to use Sima Yi. The man is suppose to be Kongming's rival, so they have to make him powerful and evil to justify him being the last boss instead of some weak Wei ruler.
Terranigma Freak
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 8:46 pm

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Lonely_dragon » Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:51 pm

Yeah first Cao Pi deposes the Han emperor than his grandson is being dispose by the Sima clan... I think it's a cycle where a betrayer gots betrayed by others...

Sima Yi a traitor? yes I think even if Cao Shuang is destroying the Wei from within a loyal subject wouldn't kill their master just like that... the loyal subject should advice the master as best as he could. I mean Dethroning Cau Shuang is a logical choice but to be murdered like that, that's just wrong... this is however just my opinion though... :)
"Know yourself Know your enemy you can win 100 battles, Know yourself and know not the enemy find win and defeat in equal measures, Know not yourself and know not the enemy defeated in every battle." Sun Tzu
User avatar
Lonely_dragon
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:32 am
Location: Lonely_dragon's heaven

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Mikhail » Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:03 pm

Lonely_dragon wrote:Sima Yi a traitor? yes I think even if Cao Shuang is destroying the Wei from within a loyal subject wouldn't kill their master just like that... the loyal subject should advice the master as best as he could. I mean Dethroning Cau Shuang is a logical choice but to be murdered like that, that's just wrong... this is however just my opinion though... :)


I think it was more of a protection maneuver rather than something to be thought of as malicious. Cao Shuang was powerful and influential. Keeping him alive could cause problems in the future, especially if Shuang manages to garner support against Sima Yi. I mean, would you allow your mortal enemy to survive with even the slightest chance that he might do harm to you?
Soweneul Malhaebwa (Tell me your wish).
User avatar
Mikhail
Great Sage Equaling Heaven
 
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:15 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby James » Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:09 pm

'Dethroning' Sima Yi instead of killing him was Cao Shuang's mistake.

Why should Sima Yi repeat it? :lol:
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 17998
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Sun Fin » Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:45 pm

Mikhail wrote:
Sun Fin wrote:Well I never played the Koei games as Sima Yi so I always viewed him as a traitor because he turned his back on the Han dynasty. Same as most of Wei to be honest... :lol:


That's not fair... considering almost everyone at the time turned their backs on the dynasty. Officers of Wei were just a bit more open about their intentions than others.


Indeed but its how its portraied in the book and as others have said initial reactions die hard. I'm also bias towards Shu and Wu so I need a scrapecoat. But Sima Yi was disloyal to his lord and as such I view him as a traitor. I can understand most people in Wei being loyal to Cao Cao over Liu Xian as he was there lord (not saying its right but I can understand it). But Sima Yi was a servant of the Cao's.
Have a question about a book or academic article before you buy it? Maybe I have it!
Check out my library here for a list of Chinese history resources I have on hand!
User avatar
Sun Fin
Librarian of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 7734
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: Vicar Factory

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby ZhouTai50 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:21 am

I definitely wouldn't say he was disloyal to his lord. Cao Shuang posed an great threat to Wei's security and stability, and his power hungry nature may have one day come back against Emperor Cao Fang. Sima Yi did a service for Wei and the Emperor by taking out a great threat.

Also, Cao Shuang was not a true Cao anyway. He was the son of Cao Zhen, who was adopted into the Cao Family by Cao Cao, and while Cao Zhen was a loyal and talented officer, his offspring were not.
User avatar
ZhouTai50
Sage
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:25 am
Location: On the Chang Jiang

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Zhilong » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:21 pm

ZhouTai50 wrote:I definitely wouldn't say he was disloyal to his lord. Cao Shuang posed an great threat to Wei's security and stability, and his power hungry nature may have one day come back against Emperor Cao Fang. Sima Yi did a service for Wei and the Emperor by taking out a great threat.


No one is really going to argue to removing Cao Shuang from power was not a good thing. The problem is how Sima Yi did it & the extent to which he went.

Firstly, he locked the gates of the capital, leaving the Emperor in the hands of Cao Shuang. The Emperor was not in any immediate danger nor was the kingdom immediately about to fall asunder but it was the actions that Sima Yi took that day which directly put the emperor in mortal danger and the state at risk of civil war.

Secondly, in the aftermath, slaying Cao's for self-protection is a euphemism for abuse of power - exactly one of the crimes of Cao Shuang is charged with. What he was doing did not escape the eyes of ppl like Fei Yi & Sun Quan who did not comment favourably on his intentions even if the removal of Cao Shuang did some good.

When Cao Rui summoned Sima Yi at his deathbed to be one of the three guardians of his successor he asked his son to hug Sima Yi & asked Sima Yi to look after him, i daresay Sima Yi had forgotten about that when he blatantly put his life in danger. The reason that Cao Rui appointed a Cao as well as Sima Yi was because he wanted his son to have the support of clansmen - while he wrongly appointed Cao Shuang due to the interference of 2 ministersm the principle is there.

The power of Cao clansmen was pretty neutered once Cao Shuang was killed and soon after the death of Sima Yi, his sons were in a position to dominate Wei. If he was really concerned about the welfare of the emperor he could have taken steps to balance power and leave the emperor in a secure position after his death. Contrast this with his peer Zhuge Liang who was pretty much in the position of dictator in Shu but relinquished power after death, and only left modest wealth to his family, as well as appointing loyal ministers to succeed him.

Imo arguing Sima Yi was thoroughly loyal is a very difficult task.
"You weaver of mats! You plaiter of straw shoes! You have been smart enough to get possession of a large region and elbow your way into the ranks of the nobles. I was just going to attack you, and now you dare to scheme against me! How I detest you!"
Zhilong
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:22 am
Location: Shang Fong Valley with petrol bombs waiting for yours truly.

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Sun Fin » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:57 pm

ZhouTai50 wrote:Also, Cao Shuang was not a true Cao anyway. He was the son of Cao Zhen, who was adopted into the Cao Family by Cao Cao, and while Cao Zhen was a loyal and talented officer, his offspring were not.


Well Cao Cao wasn't a true Cao being adopted so none of his son's or there family were Cao's either...
Have a question about a book or academic article before you buy it? Maybe I have it!
Check out my library here for a list of Chinese history resources I have on hand!
User avatar
Sun Fin
Librarian of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 7734
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:20 pm
Location: Vicar Factory

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby ZhouTai50 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:04 pm

No, but Cao Shuang was not in any way related to Cao Cao or any of the following Emperors or royalty.

I'd say Cao Fang was not in any current danger during that time. Even Cao Shuang wouldn't dare depose or harm the Emperor, at least at that time. For that, he'd need a large majority of the court to support him, which did not happen.

And on the Cao extermination thing, Sima Yi only got rid of those that had been key supporters of Cao Shuang and his decisions. Such men were just as guilty as Shuang was for going along with Shuang's tyrannical actions.

And I'm not arguing that his sons were loyal. It's obvious that they, especially Sima Zhao, were traitors with their own aspirations with the throne. However, Sima Yi cannot control his sons after he's dead, so that should not incriminate him.
User avatar
ZhouTai50
Sage
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 1:25 am
Location: On the Chang Jiang

Re: Why do people accuse Sima Yi of being a traitor?

Unread postby Mikhail » Sat Oct 11, 2008 1:30 am

Shi and Zhao basically ran the empire, regardless of their designs for the throne or not. They were able to do something even the great Mengde couldn't, and that was (under their leadership) conquering the kingdom of Shu under the Wei banner. They deserved, by merit alone, to have taken the throne from the incompetent Wei emperor, let alone the fact that they were already the de facto rulers of the state.

I can't say that they are traitors at all. They deserved their promotions. The time that they spent during their de facto rule was just "on-the-job training"
Soweneul Malhaebwa (Tell me your wish).
User avatar
Mikhail
Great Sage Equaling Heaven
 
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:15 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Sanguo Yanyi Symposium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved