http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite/blob/67b4da70/modules/hadoop-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git 
a/modules/hadoop-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
 
b/modules/hadoop-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 8efd211..0000000
--- 
a/modules/hadoop-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/hadoop/books/art-of-war.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,6982 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Art of War, by Sun Tzu
-
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
-almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
-re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
-with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
-
-
-Title: The Art of War
-
-Author: Sun Tzu
-
-Translator: Lionel Giles
-
-Release Date: May 1994  [eBook #132]
-[Last updated: January 14, 2012]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII)
-
-***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ART OF WAR ***
-
-Note: Please see Project Gutenberg's eBook #17405 for a version of
-this eBook without the Giles commentary (that is, with only the
-Sun Tzu text).
-
-
-
-                    SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR
-
-            THE OLDEST MILITARY TREATISE IN THE WORLD
-
-          Translated from the Chinese with Introduction
-                       and Critical Notes
-
-                               BY
-
-                       LIONEL GILES, M.A.
-
- Assistant in the Department of Oriental Printed Books and MSS.
-                      in the British Museum
-
-                     First Published in 1910
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-                          To my brother
-                  Captain Valentine Giles, R.G.
-                        in the hope that
-                      a work 2400 years old
-           may yet contain lessons worth consideration
-                     by the soldier of today
-                        this translation
-                  is affectionately dedicated.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Preface to the Project Gutenberg Etext
---------------------------------------
-
-     When Lionel Giles began his translation of Sun Tzu's ART OF
-WAR, the work was virtually unknown in Europe.  Its introduction
-to Europe began in 1782 when a French Jesuit Father living in
-China, Joseph Amiot, acquired a copy of it, and translated it
-into French.  It was not a good translation because, according to
-Dr. Giles, "[I]t contains a great deal that Sun Tzu did not
-write, and very little indeed of what he did."
-     The first translation into English was published in 1905 in
-Tokyo by Capt. E. F. Calthrop, R.F.A.  However, this translation
-is, in the words of Dr. Giles, "excessively bad."  He goes
-further in this criticism:  "It is not merely a question of
-downright blunders, from which none can hope to be wholly exempt.
-Omissions were frequent; hard passages were willfully distorted
-or slurred over.  Such offenses are less pardonable.  They would
-not be tolerated in any edition of a Latin or Greek classic, and
-a similar standard of honesty ought to be insisted upon in
-translations from Chinese."  In 1908 a new edition of Capt.
-Calthrop's translation was published in London.  It was an
-improvement on the first -- omissions filled up and numerous
-mistakes corrected -- but new errors were created in the process.
-Dr. Giles, in justifying his translation, wrote:  "It was not
-undertaken out of any inflated estimate of my own powers; but I
-could not help feeling that Sun Tzu deserved a better fate than
-had befallen him, and I knew that, at any rate, I could hardly
-fail to improve on the work of my predecessors."
-     Clearly, Dr. Giles' work established much of the groundwork
-for the work of later translators who published their own
-editions.  Of the later editions of the ART OF WAR I have
-examined;  two feature Giles' edited translation and notes,  the
-other two present the same basic information from the ancient
-Chinese commentators found in the Giles edition.  Of these four,
-Giles' 1910 edition is the most scholarly and presents the reader
-an incredible amount of information concerning Sun Tzu's text,
-much more than any other translation.
-     The Giles' edition of the ART OF WAR, as stated above, was a
-scholarly work.  Dr. Giles was a leading sinologue at the time
-and an assistant in the Department of Oriental Printed Books and
-Manuscripts in the British Museum.  Apparently he wanted to
-produce a definitive edition, superior to anything else that
-existed and perhaps something that would become a standard
-translation.  It was the best translation available for 50 years.
-But apparently there was not much interest in Sun Tzu in English-
-speaking countries since it took the start of the Second
-World War to renew interest in his work.  Several people
-published unsatisfactory English translations of Sun Tzu.  In
-1944,  Dr. Giles' translation was edited and published in the
-United States in a series of military science books.  But it
-wasn't until 1963 that a good English translation (by Samuel B.
-Griffith and still in print) was published that was an equal to
-Giles' translation.  While this translation is more lucid than
-Dr. Giles' translation, it lacks his copious notes that make his
-so interesting.
-     Dr. Giles produced a work primarily intended for scholars of
-the Chinese civilization and language.  It contains the Chinese
-text of Sun Tzu, the English translation, and voluminous notes
-along with numerous footnotes.  Unfortunately, some of his notes
-and footnotes contain Chinese characters; some are completely
-Chinese.  Thus,  a conversion to a Latin alphabet etext was
-difficult.  I did the conversion in complete ignorance of Chinese
-(except for what I learned while doing the conversion).  Thus, I
-faced the difficult task of paraphrasing it while retaining as
-much of the important text as I could.  Every paraphrase
-represents a loss; thus I did what I could to retain as much of
-the text as possible.  Because the 1910 text contains a Chinese
-concordance, I was able to transliterate proper names, books, and
-the like at the risk of making the text more obscure.  However,
-the text, on the whole, is quite satisfactory for the casual
-reader, a transformation made possible by conversion to an etext.
-However, I come away from this task with the feeling of loss
-because I know that someone with a background in Chinese can do a
-better job than I did; any such attempt would be welcomed.
-
-                              Bob Sutton
-                              al...@cleveland.freenet.edu
-                              b...@gnu.ai.mit.edu
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-INTRODUCTION
-
-
-Sun Wu and his Book
--------------------
-
-
-     Ssu-ma Ch`ien gives the following biography of Sun Tzu:  [1]
---
-
-       Sun Tzu Wu was a native of the Ch`i State.  His ART OF
-  WAR brought him to the notice of Ho Lu, [2] King of Wu.  Ho
-  Lu said to him:  "I have carefully perused your 13 chapters.
-  May I submit your theory of managing soldiers to a slight
-  test?"
-       Sun Tzu replied:  "You may."
-       Ho Lu asked:  "May the test be applied to women?"
-       The answer was again in the affirmative, so arrangements
-  were made to bring 180 ladies out of the Palace.  Sun Tzu
-  divided them into two companies, and placed one of the King's
-  favorite concubines at the head of each.  He then bade them
-  all take spears in their hands, and addressed them thus:   "I
-  presume you know the difference between front and back, right
-  hand and left hand?"
-       The girls replied:  Yes.
-       Sun Tzu went on:  "When I say "Eyes front,"  you must
-  look straight ahead.  When I say "Left turn," you must face
-  towards your left hand.  When I say "Right turn,"  you must
-  face towards your right hand.  When I say "About turn,"  you
-  must face right round towards your back."
-       Again the girls assented.  The words of command having
-  been thus explained, he set up the halberds and battle-axes
-  in order to begin the drill.  Then, to the sound of drums, he
-  gave the order "Right turn."  But the girls only burst out
-  laughing.  Sun Tzu said:  "If words of command are not clear
-  and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then
-  the general is to blame."
-       So he started drilling them again, and this time gave
-  the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst
-  into fits of laughter.  Sun Tzu:  "If words of command are
-  not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly
-  understood, the general is to blame.  But if his orders ARE
-  clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the
-  fault of their officers."
-       So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies
-  to be beheaded.  Now the king of Wu was watching the scene
-  from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his
-  favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly
-  alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message:   "We
-  are now quite satisfied as to our general's ability to handle
-  troops.  If We are bereft of these two concubines, our meat
-  and drink will lose their savor.  It is our wish that they
-  shall not be beheaded."
-       Sun Tzu replied:  "Having once received His Majesty's
-  commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain
-  commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am
-  unable to accept."
-       Accordingly,  he had the two leaders beheaded,  and
-  straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in
-  their place.  When this had been done, the drum was sounded
-  for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the
-  evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching
-  ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect
-  accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound.  Then
-  Sun Tzu sent a messenger to the King saying:  "Your soldiers,
-  Sire, are now properly drilled and disciplined, and ready for
-  your majesty's inspection.  They can be put to any use that
-  their sovereign may desire; bid them go through fire and
-  water, and they will not disobey."
-       But the King replied:  "Let our general cease drilling
-  and return to camp.  As for us, We have no wish to come down
-  and inspect the troops."
-       Thereupon Sun Tzu said:  "The King is only fond of
-  words, and cannot translate them into deeds."
-       After that, Ho Lu saw that Sun Tzu was one who knew how
-  to handle an army, and finally appointed him general.  In the
-  west, he defeated the Ch`u State and forced his way into
-  Ying, the capital; to the north he put fear into the States
-  of Ch`i and Chin, and spread his fame abroad amongst the
-  feudal princes.  And Sun Tzu shared in the might of the King.
-
-     About Sun Tzu himself this is all that Ssu-ma Ch`ien has to
-tell us in this chapter.  But he proceeds to give a biography of
-his descendant,  Sun Pin, born about a hundred years after his
-famous ancestor's death, and also the outstanding military genius
-of his time.  The historian speaks of him too as Sun Tzu, and in
-his preface we read:  "Sun Tzu had his feet cut off and yet
-continued to discuss the art of war." [3]  It seems likely, then,
-that  "Pin" was a nickname bestowed on him after his mutilation,
-unless the story was invented in order to account for the name.
-The crowning incident of his career, the crushing defeat of his
-treacherous rival P`ang Chuan, will be found briefly related in
-Chapter V. ss. 19, note.
-     To return to the elder Sun Tzu.  He is mentioned in two
-other passages of the SHIH CHI: --
-
-       In the third year of his reign [512 B.C.] Ho Lu, king of
-  Wu, took the field with Tzu-hsu [i.e. Wu Yuan] and Po P`ei,
-  and attacked Ch`u.  He captured the town of Shu and slew the
-  two prince's sons who had formerly been generals of Wu.  He
-  was then meditating a descent on Ying [the capital]; but the
-  general Sun Wu said:  "The army is exhausted.  It is not yet
-  possible.  We must wait"....  [After further successful
-  fighting,]  "in the ninth year  [506 B.C.],  King Ho Lu
-  addressed Wu Tzu-hsu and Sun Wu, saying:   "Formerly, you
-  declared that it was not yet possible for us to enter Ying.
-  Is the time ripe now?"  The two men replied:  "Ch`u's general
-  Tzu-ch`ang, [4] is grasping and covetous, and the princes of
-  T`ang and Ts`ai both have a grudge against him.  If Your
-  Majesty has resolved to make a grand attack, you must win
-  over T`ang and Ts`ai, and then you may succeed."   Ho Lu
-  followed this advice, [beat Ch`u in five pitched battles and
-  marched into Ying.] [5]
-
-     This is the latest date at which anything is recorded of Sun
-Wu.  He does not appear to have survived his patron, who died
-from the effects of a wound in 496.
-     In another chapter there occurs this passage:  [6]
-
-       From this time onward, a number of famous soldiers
-  arose, one after the other:  Kao-fan, [7] who was employed by
-  the Chin State; Wang-tzu, [8] in the service of Ch`i; and Sun
-  Wu, in the service of Wu.  These men developed and threw
-  light upon the principles of war.
-
-     It is obvious enough that Ssu-ma Ch`ien at least had no
-doubt about the reality of Sun Wu as an historical personage; and
-with one exception, to be noticed presently, he is by far the
-most important authority on the period in question.  It will not
-be necessary, therefore, to say much of such a work as the WU
-YUEH CH`UN CH`IU, which is supposed to have been written by Chao
-Yeh of the 1st century A.D.  The attribution is somewhat
-doubtful; but even if it were otherwise, his account would be of
-little value, based as it is on the SHIH CHI and expanded with
-romantic details.  The story of Sun Tzu will be found, for what
-it is worth, in chapter 2.  The only new points in it worth
-noting are:  (1)  Sun Tzu was first recommended to Ho Lu by Wu
-Tzu-hsu.  (2) He is called a native of Wu.  (3) He had previously
-lived a retired life, and his contemporaries were unaware of his
-ability.
-     The following passage occurs in the Huai-nan Tzu:   "When
-sovereign and ministers show perversity of mind, it is impossible
-even for a Sun Tzu to encounter the foe."  Assuming that this
-work is genuine (and hitherto no doubt has been cast upon it), we
-have here the earliest direct reference for Sun Tzu, for Huai-nan
-Tzu died in 122 B.C., many years before the SHIH CHI was given to
-the world.
-     Liu Hsiang (80-9 B.C.) says:  "The reason why Sun Tzu at the
-head of 30,000 men beat Ch`u with 200,000 is that the latter were
-undisciplined."
-     Teng Ming-shih informs us that the surname "Sun" was
-bestowed on Sun Wu's grandfather by Duke Ching of Ch`i [547-490
-B.C.].  Sun Wu's father Sun P`ing, rose to be a Minister of State
-in Ch`i, and Sun Wu himself, whose style was Ch`ang-ch`ing,  fled
-to Wu on account of the rebellion which was being fomented by the
-kindred of T`ien Pao.  He had three sons, of whom the second,
-named Ming, was the father of Sun Pin.  According to this account
-then, Pin was the grandson of Wu, which, considering that Sun
-Pin's victory over Wei was gained in 341 B.C., may be dismissed
-as chronological impossible.  Whence these data were obtained by
-Teng Ming-shih I do not know, but of course no reliance whatever
-can be placed in them.
-     An interesting document which has survived from the close of
-the Han period is the short preface written by the Great Ts`ao
-Ts`ao, or Wei Wu Ti, for his edition of Sun Tzu.  I shall give it
-in full:  --
-
-       I have heard that the ancients used bows and arrows to
-  their advantage. [10]  The SHU CHU mentions "the army" among
-  the "eight objects of government."  The I CHING says:
-  "'army' indicates firmness and justice;  the experienced
-  leader will have good fortune."  The SHIH CHING says:  "The
-  King rose majestic in his wrath, and he marshaled his
-  troops."  The Yellow Emperor, T`ang the Completer and Wu Wang
-  all used spears and battle-axes in order to succor their
-  generation.  The SSU-MA FA says:  "If one man slay another of
-  set purpose, he himself may rightfully be slain."  He who
-  relies solely on warlike measures shall be exterminated; he
-  who relies solely on peaceful measures shall perish.
-  Instances of this are Fu Ch`ai [11] on the one hand and Yen
-  Wang on the other. [12]  In military matters, the Sage's rule
-  is normally to keep the peace, and to move his forces only
-  when occasion requires.  He will not use armed force unless
-  driven to it by necessity.
-       Many books have I read on the subject of war and
-  fighting; but the work composed by Sun Wu is the profoundest
-  of them all.  [Sun Tzu was a native of the Ch`i state,  his
-  personal name was Wu.  He wrote the ART OF WAR in 13 chapters
-  for Ho Lu, King of Wu.  Its principles were tested on women,
-  and he was subsequently made a general.  He led an army
-  westwards,  crushed the Ch`u state and entered Ying the
-  capital.  In the north, he kept Ch`i and Chin in awe.  A
-  hundred years and more after his time, Sun Pin lived. He was
-  a descendant of Wu.] [13]  In his treatment of deliberation
-  and planning, the importance of rapidity in taking the field,
-  [14] clearness of conception, and depth of design,  Sun Tzu
-  stands beyond the reach of carping criticism.  My
-  contemporaries, however, have failed to grasp the full
-  meaning of his instructions, and while putting into practice
-  the smaller details in which his work abounds,  they have
-  overlooked its essential purport.  That is the motive which
-  has led me to outline a rough explanation of the whole.
-
-     One thing to be noticed in the above is the explicit
-statement that the 13 chapters were specially composed for King
-Ho Lu.  This is supported by the internal evidence of I. ss. 15,
-in which it seems clear that some ruler is addressed.
-     In the bibliographic section of the HAN SHU, there is an
-entry which has given rise to much discussion:  "The works of Sun
-Tzu of Wu in 82 P`IEN (or chapters), with diagrams in 9 CHUAN."
-It is evident that this cannot be merely the 13 chapters known to
-Ssu-ma Ch`ien,  or those we possess today.  Chang Shou-chieh
-refers to an edition of Sun Tzu's ART OF WAR of which the "13
-chapters" formed the first CHUAN, adding that there were two
-other CHUAN besides.  This has brought forth a theory, that the
-bulk of these 82 chapters consisted of other writings of Sun Tzu
---  we should call them apocryphal -- similar to the WEN TA, of
-which a specimen dealing with the Nine Situations [15] is
-preserved in the T`UNG TIEN, and another in Ho Shin's commentary.
-It is suggested that before his interview with Ho Lu, Sun Tzu had
-only written the 13 chapters, but afterwards composed a sort of
-exegesis in the form of question and answer between himself and
-the King.  Pi I-hsun, the author of the SUN TZU HSU LU, backs
-this up with a quotation from the WU YUEH CH`UN CH`IU:  "The King
-of Wu summoned Sun Tzu, and asked him questions about the art of
-war.  Each time he set forth a chapter of his work, the King
-could not find words enough to praise him."  As he points out, if
-the whole work was expounded on the same scale as in the above-
-mentioned fragments, the total number of chapters could not fail
-to be considerable.  Then the numerous other treatises attributed
-to Sun Tzu might be included.  The fact that the HAN CHIH
-mentions no work of Sun Tzu except the 82 P`IEN, whereas the Sui
-and T`ang bibliographies give the titles of others in addition to
-the "13 chapters," is good proof, Pi I-hsun thinks, that all of
-these were contained in the 82 P`IEN.  Without pinning our faith
-to the accuracy of details supplied by the WU YUEH CH`UN CH`IU,
-or admitting the genuineness of any of the treatises cited by Pi
-I-hsun,  we may see in this theory a probable solution of the
-mystery.  Between Ssu-ma Ch`ien and Pan Ku there was plenty of
-time for a luxuriant crop of forgeries to have grown up under the
-magic name of Sun Tzu, and the 82 P`IEN may very well represent a
-collected edition of these lumped together with the original
-work.  It is also possible, though less likely, that some of them
-existed in the time of the earlier historian and were purposely
-ignored by him. [16]
-     Tu Mu's conjecture seems to be based on a passage which
-states:  "Wei Wu Ti strung together Sun Wu's Art of War," which
-in turn may have resulted from a misunderstanding of the final
-words of Ts`ao King's preface.  This, as Sun Hsing-yen points
-out, is only a modest way of saying that he made an explanatory
-paraphrase, or in other words, wrote a commentary on it.  On the
-whole, this theory has met with very little acceptance.  Thus,
-the SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU says:  "The mention of the 13 chapters in
-the SHIH CHI shows that they were in existence before the HAN
-CHIH, and that latter accretions are not to be considered part of
-the original work.  Tu Mu's assertion can certainly not be taken
-as proof."
-     There is every reason to suppose, then, that the 13 chapters
-existed in the time of Ssu-ma Ch`ien practically as we have them
-now.  That the work was then well known he tells us in so many
-words.  "Sun Tzu's 13 Chapters and Wu Ch`i's Art of War are the
-two books that people commonly refer to on the subject of
-military matters.  Both of them are widely distributed, so I will
-not discuss them here."  But as we go further back, serious
-difficulties begin to arise.  The salient fact which has to be
-faced is that the TSO CHUAN, the greatest contemporary record,
-makes no mention whatsoever of Sun Wu, either as a general or as
-a writer.  It is natural, in view of this awkward circumstance,
-that many scholars should not only cast doubt on the story of Sun
-Wu as given in the SHIH CHI, but even show themselves frankly
-skeptical as to the existence of the man at all.  The most
-powerful presentment of this side of the case is to be found in
-the following disposition by Yeh Shui-hsin: [17] --
-
-       It is stated in Ssu-ma Ch`ien's history that Sun Wu was
-  a native of the Ch`i State, and employed by Wu; and that in
-  the reign of Ho Lu he crushed Ch`u, entered Ying, and was a
-  great general.  But in Tso's Commentary no Sun Wu appears at
-  all.  It is true that Tso's Commentary need not contain
-  absolutely everything that other histories contain.  But Tso
-  has not omitted to mention vulgar plebeians and hireling
-  ruffians such as Ying K`ao-shu, [18] Ts`ao Kuei,  [19],  Chu
-  Chih-wu and Chuan She-chu [20].  In the case of Sun Wu, whose
-  fame and achievements were so brilliant, the omission is much
-  more glaring.  Again, details are given, in their due order,
-  about his contemporaries Wu Yuan and the Minister P`ei.  [21]
-  Is it credible that Sun Wu alone should have been passed
-  over?
-       In point of literary style, Sun Tzu's work belongs to
-  the same school as KUAN TZU, [22] LIU T`AO, [23] and the YUEH
-  YU [24] and may have been the production of some private
-  scholar living towards the end of the "Spring and Autumn" or
-  the beginning of the "Warring States" period. [25]  The story
-  that his precepts were actually applied by the Wu State, is
-  merely the outcome of big talk on the part of his followers.
-       From the flourishing period of the Chou dynasty [26]
-  down to the time of the "Spring and Autumn," all military
-  commanders were statesmen as well, and the class of
-  professional generals, for conducting external campaigns, did
-  not then exist.  It was not until the period of the "Six
-  States" [27] that this custom changed.  Now although Wu was
-  an uncivilized State, it is conceivable that Tso should have
-  left unrecorded the fact that Sun Wu was a great general and
-  yet held no civil office?  What we are told, therefore, about
-  Jang-chu [28] and Sun Wu, is not authentic matter,  but the
-  reckless fabrication of theorizing pundits.  The story of Ho
-  Lu's experiment on the women, in particular, is utterly
-  preposterous and incredible.
-
-     Yeh Shui-hsin represents Ssu-ma Ch`ien as having said that
-Sun Wu crushed Ch`u and entered Ying.  This is not quite correct.
-No doubt the impression left on the reader's mind is that he at
-least shared in these exploits.  The fact may or may not be
-significant; but it is nowhere explicitly stated in the SHIH CHI
-either that Sun Tzu was general on the occasion of the taking of
-Ying, or that he even went there at all.  Moreover, as we know
-that Wu Yuan and Po P`ei both took part in the expedition, and
-also that its success was largely due to the dash and enterprise
-of Fu Kai, Ho Lu's younger brother, it is not easy to see how yet
-another general could have played a very prominent part in the
-same campaign.
-     Ch`en Chen-sun of the Sung dynasty has the note: --
-
-       Military writers look upon Sun Wu as the father of their
-  art.  But the fact that he does not appear in the TSO CHUAN,
-  although he is said to have served under Ho Lu King of Wu,
-  makes it uncertain what period he really belonged to.
-
-He also says: --
-
-       The works of Sun Wu and Wu Ch`i may be of genuine
-  antiquity.
-
-     It is noticeable that both Yeh Shui-hsin and Ch`en Chen-sun,
-while rejecting the personality of Sun Wu as he figures in Ssu-ma
-Ch`ien's history, are inclined to accept the date traditionally
-assigned to the work which passes under his name.  The author of
-the HSU LU fails to appreciate this distinction, and consequently
-his bitter attack on Ch`en Chen-sun really misses its mark.  He
-makes one of two points, however, which certainly tell in favor
-of the high antiquity of our "13 chapters."  "Sun Tzu," he says,
-"must have lived in the age of Ching Wang [519-476], because he
-is frequently plagiarized in subsequent works of the Chou, Ch`in
-and Han dynasties."  The two most shameless offenders in this
-respect are Wu Ch`i and Huai-nan Tzu, both of them important
-historical personages in their day.  The former lived only a
-century after the alleged date of Sun Tzu, and his death is known
-to have taken place in 381 B.C.  It was to him, according to Liu
-Hsiang,  that Tseng Shen delivered the TSO CHUAN, which had been
-entrusted to him by its author.  [29]   Now the fact that
-quotations from the ART OF WAR, acknowledged or otherwise, are to
-be found in so many authors of different epochs, establishes a
-very strong anterior to them all, -- in other words, that Sun
-Tzu's treatise was already in existence towards the end of the
-5th century B.C.  Further proof of Sun Tzu's antiquity is
-furnished by the archaic or wholly obsolete meanings attaching to
-a number of the words he uses.  A list of these, which might
-perhaps be extended, is given in the HSU LU; and though some of
-the interpretations are doubtful, the main argument is hardly
-affected thereby.  Again, it must not be forgotten that Yeh Shui-
-hsin, a scholar and critic of the first rank, deliberately
-pronounces the style of the 13 chapters to belong to the early
-part of the fifth century.  Seeing that he is actually engaged in
-an attempt to disprove the existence of Sun Wu himself, we may be
-sure that he would not have hesitated to assign the work to a
-later date had he not honestly believed the contrary.  And it is
-precisely on such a point that the judgment of an educated
-Chinaman will carry most weight.  Other internal evidence is not
-far to seek.  Thus in XIII. ss. 1, there is an unmistakable
-allusion to the ancient system of land-tenure which had already
-passed away by the time of Mencius, who was anxious to see it
-revived in a modified form. [30]  The only warfare Sun Tzu knows
-is that carried on between the various feudal princes, in which
-armored chariots play a large part.  Their use seems to have
-entirely died out before the end of the Chou dynasty.  He speaks
-as a man of Wu, a state which ceased to exist as early as 473
-B.C.  On this I shall touch presently.
-
-     But once refer the work to the 5th century or earlier,  and
-the chances of its being other than a bona fide production are
-sensibly diminished.  The great age of forgeries did not come
-until long after.  That it should have been forged in the period
-immediately following 473 is particularly unlikely, for no one,
-as a rule, hastens to identify himself with a lost cause.  As for
-Yeh Shui-hsin's theory, that the author was a literary recluse,
-that seems to me quite untenable.  If one thing is more apparent
-than another after reading the maxims of Sun Tzu, it is that
-their essence has been distilled from a large store of personal
-observation and experience.  They reflect the mind not only of a
-born strategist, gifted with a rare faculty of generalization,
-but also of a practical soldier closely acquainted with the
-military conditions of his time.  To say nothing of the fact that
-these sayings have been accepted and endorsed by all the greatest
-captains of Chinese history, they offer a combination of
-freshness and sincerity, acuteness and common sense, which quite
-excludes the idea that they were artificially concocted in the
-study.  If we admit, then, that the 13 chapters were the genuine
-production of a military man living towards the end of the "CH`UN
-CH`IU" period, are we not bound, in spite of the silence of the
-TSO CHUAN, to accept Ssu-ma Ch`ien's account in its entirety?  In
-view of his high repute as a sober historian,  must we not
-hesitate to assume that the records he drew upon for Sun Wu's
-biography were false and untrustworthy?  The answer, I fear, must
-be in the negative.  There is still one grave, if not fatal,
-objection to the chronology involved in the story as told in the
-SHIH CHI, which, so far as I am aware, nobody has yet pointed
-out.  There are two passages in Sun Tzu in which he alludes to
-contemporary affairs.  The first in in VI. ss. 21: --
-
-       Though according to my estimate the soldiers of Yueh
-  exceed our own in number, that shall advantage them nothing
-  in the matter of victory.  I say then that victory can be
-  achieved.
-
-The other is in XI. ss. 30: --
-
-       Asked if an army can be made to imitate the SHUAI-JAN, I
-  should answer, Yes.  For the men of Wu and the men of Yueh
-  are enemies;  yet if they are crossing a river in the same
-  boat and are caught by a storm, they will come to each
-  other's assistance just as the left hand helps the right.
-
-     These two paragraphs are extremely valuable as evidence of
-the date of composition.  They assign the work to the period of
-the struggle between Wu and Yueh.  So much has been observed by
-Pi I-hsun.  But what has hitherto escaped notice is that they
-also seriously impair the credibility of Ssu-ma Ch`ien's
-narrative.  As we have seen above, the first positive date given
-in connection with Sun Wu is 512 B.C.  He is then spoken of as a
-general,  acting as confidential adviser to Ho Lu, so that his
-alleged introduction to that monarch had already taken place, and
-of course the 13 chapters must have been written earlier still.
-But at that time, and for several years after, down to the
-capture of Ying in 506, Ch`u and not Yueh, was the great
-hereditary enemy of Wu.  The two states, Ch`u and Wu, had been
-constantly at war for over half a century, [31] whereas the first
-war between Wu and Yueh was waged only in 510, [32] and even then
-was no more than a short interlude sandwiched in the midst of the
-fierce struggle with Ch`u.  Now Ch`u is not mentioned in the 13
-chapters at all.  The natural inference is that they were written
-at a time when Yueh had become the prime antagonist of Wu, that
-is, after Ch`u had suffered the great humiliation of 506.  At
-this point, a table of dates may be found useful.
-
-B.C. |
-     |
-514  |  Accession of Ho Lu.
-512  |  Ho Lu attacks Ch`u, but is dissuaded from entering Ying,
-     |    the capital.  SHI CHI mentions Sun Wu as general.
-511  |  Another attack on Ch`u.
-510  |  Wu makes a successful attack on Yueh.  This is the first
-     |    war between the two states.
-509  |
- or  |  Ch`u invades Wu, but is signally defeated at Yu-chang.
-508  |
-506  |  Ho Lu attacks Ch`u with the aid of T`ang and Ts`ai.
-     |    Decisive battle of Po-chu, and capture of Ying.  Last
-     |    mention of Sun Wu in SHIH CHI.
-505  |  Yueh makes a raid on Wu in the absence of its army.  Wu
-     |    is beaten by Ch`in and evacuates Ying.
-504  |  Ho Lu sends Fu Ch`ai to attack Ch`u.
-497  |  Kou Chien becomes King of Yueh.
-496  |  Wu attacks Yueh, but is defeated by Kou Chien at Tsui-li.
-     |    Ho Lu is killed.
-494  |  Fu Ch`ai defeats Kou Chien in the great battle of Fu-
-     |    chaio, and enters the capital of Yueh.
-485  |
- or  |  Kou Chien renders homage to Wu.  Death of Wu Tzu-hsu.
-484  |
-482  |  Kou Chien invades Wu in the absence of Fu Ch`ai.
-478  |
- to  |  Further attacks by Yueh on Wu.
-476  |
-475  |  Kou Chien lays siege to the capital of Wu.
-473  |  Final defeat and extinction of Wu.
-
-     The sentence quoted above from VI. ss. 21 hardly strikes me
-as one that could have been written in the full flush of victory.
-It seems rather to imply that, for the moment at least, the tide
-had turned against Wu, and that she was getting the worst of the
-struggle.  Hence we may conclude that our treatise was not in
-existence in 505, before which date Yueh does not appear to have
-scored any notable success against Wu.  Ho Lu died in 496,  so
-that if the book was written for him, it must have been during
-the period 505-496, when there was a lull in the hostilities,  Wu
-having presumably exhausted by its supreme effort against Ch`u.
-On the other hand, if we choose to disregard the tradition
-connecting Sun Wu's name with Ho Lu, it might equally well have
-seen the light between 496 and 494, or possibly in the period
-482-473, when Yueh was once again becoming a very serious menace.
-[33]  We may feel fairly certain that the author, whoever he may
-have been, was not a man of any great eminence in his own day.
-On this point the negative testimony of the TSO CHUAN far
-outweighs any shred of authority still attaching to the SHIH CHI,
-if once its other facts are discredited.  Sun Hsing-yen, however,
-makes a feeble attempt to explain the omission of his name from
-the great commentary.  It was Wu Tzu-hsu, he says, who got all
-the credit of Sun Wu's exploits, because the latter  (being an
-alien) was not rewarded with an office in the State.
-     How then did the Sun Tzu legend originate?  It may be that
-the growing celebrity of the book imparted by degrees a kind of
-factitious renown to its author.  It was felt to be only right
-and proper that one so well versed in the science of war should
-have solid achievements to his credit as well.  Now the capture
-of Ying was undoubtedly the greatest feat of arms in Ho Lu's
-reign;  it made a deep and lasting impression on all the
-surrounding states, and raised Wu to the short-lived zenith of
-her power.  Hence, what more natural, as time went on, than that
-the acknowledged master of strategy, Sun Wu, should be popularly
-identified with that campaign, at first perhaps only in the sense
-that his brain conceived and planned it; afterwards, that it was
-actually carried out by him in conjunction with Wu Yuan, [34]  Po
-P`ei and Fu Kai?
-     It is obvious that any attempt to reconstruct even the
-outline of Sun Tzu's life must be based almost wholly on
-conjecture.  With this necessary proviso, I should say that he
-probably entered the service of Wu about the time of Ho Lu's
-accession,  and gathered experience, though only in the capacity
-of a subordinate officer, during the intense military activity
-which marked the first half of the prince's reign. [35]   If he
-rose to be a general at all, he certainly was never on an equal
-footing with the three above mentioned.  He was doubtless present
-at the investment and occupation of Ying,  and witnessed Wu's
-sudden collapse in the following year.  Yueh's attack at this
-critical juncture, when her rival was embarrassed on every side,
-seems to have convinced him that this upstart kingdom was the
-great enemy against whom every effort would henceforth have to be
-directed.  Sun Wu was thus a well-seasoned warrior when he sat
-down to write his famous book, which according to my reckoning
-must have appeared towards the end, rather than the beginning of
-Ho Lu's reign.  The story of the women may possibly have grown
-out of some real incident occurring about the same time.  As we
-hear no more of Sun Wu after this from any source, he is hardly
-likely to have survived his patron or to have taken part in the
-death-struggle with Yueh, which began with the disaster at Tsui-
-li.
-     If these inferences are approximately correct, there is a
-certain irony in the fate which decreed that China's most
-illustrious man of peace should be contemporary with her greatest
-writer on war.
-
-
-The Text of Sun Tzu
--------------------
-
-
-     I have found it difficult to glean much about the history of
-Sun Tzu's text.  The quotations that occur in early authors go to
-show that the "13 chapters" of which Ssu-ma Ch`ien speaks were
-essentially the same as those now extant.  We have his word for
-it that they were widely circulated in his day,  and can only
-regret that he refrained from discussing them on that account.
-Sun Hsing-yen says in his preface: --
-
-       During the Ch`in and Han dynasties Sun Tzu's ART OF WAR
-  was in general use amongst military commanders, but they seem
-  to have treated it as a work of mysterious import, and were
-  unwilling to expound it for the benefit of posterity.  Thus
-  it came about that Wei Wu was the first to write a commentary
-  on it.
-
-     As we have already seen, there is no reasonable ground to
-suppose that Ts`ao Kung tampered with the text.  But the text
-itself is often so obscure, and the number of editions which
-appeared from that time onward so great, especially during the
-T`ang and Sung dynasties, that it would be surprising if numerous
-corruptions had not managed to creep in.  Towards the middle of
-the Sung period, by which time all the chief commentaries on Sun
-Tzu were in existence, a certain Chi T`ien-pao published a work
-in 15 CHUAN entitled "Sun Tzu with the collected commentaries of
-ten writers."  There was another text, with variant readings put
-forward by Chu Fu of Ta-hsing, which also had supporters among
-the scholars of that period; but in the Ming editions, Sun Hsing-
-yen tells us, these readings were for some reason or other no
-longer put into circulation.  Thus, until the end of the 18th
-century, the text in sole possession of the field was one derived
-from Chi T`ien-pao's edition, although no actual copy of that
-important work was known to have survived.  That, therefore,  is
-the text of Sun Tzu which appears in the War section of the great
-Imperial encyclopedia printed in 1726, the KU CHIN T`U SHU CHI
-CH`ENG.  Another copy at my disposal of what is practically the
-same text,  with slight variations, is that contained in the
-"Eleven philosophers of the Chou and Ch`in dynasties"  [1758].
-And the Chinese printed in Capt. Calthrop's first edition is
-evidently a similar version which has filtered through Japanese
-channels.  So things remained until Sun Hsing-yen [1752-1818],  a
-distinguished antiquarian and classical scholar, who claimed to
-be an actual descendant of Sun Wu, [36] accidentally discovered a
-copy of Chi T`ien-pao's long-lost work, when on a visit to the
-library of the Hua-yin temple. [37]  Appended to it was the I
-SHUO of Cheng Yu-Hsien, mentioned in the T`UNG CHIH,  and also
-believed to have perished.  This is what Sun Hsing-yen designates
-as the "original edition (or text)" -- a rather misleading name,
-for it cannot by any means claim to set before us the text of Sun
-Tzu in its pristine purity.  Chi T`ien-pao was a careless
-compiler,  and appears to have been content to reproduce the
-somewhat debased version current in his day, without troubling to
-collate   it   with the earliest   editions   then   available.
-Fortunately,  two versions of Sun Tzu, even older than the newly
-discovered work, were still extant, one buried in the T`UNG TIEN,
-Tu Yu's great treatise on the Constitution, the other similarly
-enshrined in the T`AI P`ING YU LAN encyclopedia.  In both the
-complete text is to be found, though split up into fragments,
-intermixed with other matter, and scattered piecemeal over a
-number of different sections.  Considering that the YU LAN takes
-us back to the year 983, and the T`UNG TIEN about 200 years
-further still, to the middle of the T`ang dynasty, the value of
-these early transcripts of Sun Tzu can hardly be overestimated.
-Yet the idea of utilizing them does not seem to have occurred to
-anyone until Sun Hsing-yen, acting under Government instructions,
-undertook a thorough recension of the text.  This is his own
-account: --
-
-       Because of the numerous mistakes in the text of Sun Tzu
-  which his editors had handed down, the Government ordered
-  that the ancient edition [of Chi T`ien-pao] should be used,
-  and that the text should be revised and corrected throughout.
-  It happened that Wu Nien-hu, the Governor Pi Kua, and Hsi,  a
-  graduate of the second degree, had all devoted themselves to
-  this study, probably surpassing me therein.  Accordingly,  I
-  have had the whole work cut on blocks as a textbook for
-  military men.
-
-     The three individuals here referred to had evidently been
-occupied on the text of Sun Tzu prior to Sun Hsing-yen's
-commission,  but we are left in doubt as to the work they really
-accomplished.  At any rate, the new edition,  when ultimately
-produced, appeared in the names of Sun Hsing-yen and only one co-
-editor Wu Jen-shi.  They took the "original edition"  as their
-basis, and by careful comparison with older versions, as well as
-the extant commentaries and other sources of information such as
-the I SHUO,  succeeded in restoring a very large number of
-doubtful passages,  and turned out, on the whole, what must be
-accepted as the closes approximation we are ever likely to get to
-Sun Tzu's original work.  This is what will hereafter be
-denominated the "standard text."
-     The copy which I have used belongs to a reissue dated 1877.
-it is in 6 PEN, forming part of a well-printed set of 23 early
-philosophical works in 83 PEN. [38]  It opens with a preface by
-Sun Hsing-yen (largely quoted in this introduction),  vindicating
-the traditional view of Sun Tzu's life and performances,  and
-summing up in remarkably concise fashion the evidence in its
-favor.  This is followed by Ts`ao Kung's preface to his edition,
-and the biography of Sun Tzu from the SHIH CHI, both translated
-above.  Then come, firstly, Cheng Yu-hsien's I SHUO,  [39]  with
-author's preface, and next, a short miscellany of historical and
-bibliographical information entitled SUN TZU HSU LU, compiled by
-Pi I-hsun.  As regards the body of the work,  each separate
-sentence is followed by a note on the text, if required, and then
-by the various commentaries appertaining to it,  arranged in
-chronological order.  These we shall now proceed to discuss
-briefly, one by one.
-
-
-The Commentators
-----------------
-
-
-     Sun Tzu can boast an exceptionally long distinguished roll
-of commentators, which would do honor to any classic.  Ou-yang
-Hsiu remarks on this fact, though he wrote before the tale was
-complete,  and rather ingeniously explains it by saying that the
-artifices   of war,  being inexhaustible,  must therefore   be
-susceptible of treatment in a great variety of ways.
-
-     1.  TS`AO TS`AO or Ts`ao Kung, afterwards known as Wei Wu Ti
-[A.D.  155-220].  There is hardly any room for doubt that the
-earliest commentary on Sun Tzu actually came from the pen of this
-extraordinary man, whose biography in the SAN KUO CHIH reads like
-a romance.  One of the greatest military geniuses that the world
-has seen, and Napoleonic in the scale of his operations, he was
-especially famed for the marvelous rapidity of his marches, which
-has found expression in the line "Talk of Ts`ao Ts`ao, and Ts`ao
-Ts`ao will appear."  Ou-yang Hsiu says of him that he was a great
-captain who "measured his strength against Tung Cho, Lu Pu and
-the two Yuan, father and son, and vanquished them all;  whereupon
-he divided the Empire of Han with Wu and Shu, and made himself
-king.  It is recorded that whenever a council of war was held by
-Wei on the eve of a far-reaching campaign,  he had all his
-calculations ready; those generals who made use of them did not
-lose one battle in ten; those who ran counter to them in any
-particular saw their armies incontinently beaten and put to
-flight."   Ts`ao Kung's notes on Sun Tzu,  models of austere
-brevity, are so thoroughly characteristic of the stern commander
-known to history, that it is hard indeed to conceive of them as
-the work of a mere LITTERATEUR.  Sometimes,  indeed,  owing to
-extreme compression, they are scarcely intelligible and stand no
-less in need of a commentary than the text itself. [40]
-
-     2.  MENG SHIH.  The commentary which has come down to us
-under this name is comparatively meager, and nothing about the
-author is known.  Even his personal name has not been recorded.
-Chi T`ien-pao's edition places him after Chia Lin,and Ch`ao Kung-
-wu also assigns him to the T`ang dynasty, [41] but this is a
-mistake.  In Sun Hsing-yen's preface, he appears as Meng Shih of
-the Liang dynasty [502-557].  Others would identify him with Meng
-K`ang of the 3rd century.  He is named in one work as the last of
-the "Five Commentators," the others being Wei Wu Ti, Tu Mu, Ch`en
-Hao and Chia Lin.
-
-     3.  LI CH`UAN of the 8th century was a well-known writer on
-military tactics.  One of his works has been in constant use down
-to the present day.  The T`UNG CHIH mentions "Lives of famous
-generals from the Chou to the T`ang dynasty" as written by him.
-[42]  According to Ch`ao Kung-wu and the T`IEN-I-KO catalogue, he
-followed a variant of the text of Sun Tzu which differs
-considerably from those now extant.  His notes are mostly short
-and to the point, and he frequently illustrates his remarks by
-anecdotes from Chinese history.
-
-     4.  TU YU (died 812) did not publish a separate commentary
-on Sun Tzu,  his notes being taken from the T`UNG TIEN,  the
-encyclopedic treatise on the Constitution which was his life-
-work.  They are largely repetitions of Ts`ao Kung and Meng Shih,
-besides which it is believed that he drew on the ancient
-commentaries of Wang Ling and others.  Owing to the peculiar
-arrangement of T`UNG TIEN, he has to explain each passage on its
-merits, apart from the context, and sometimes his own explanation
-does not agree with that of Ts`ao Kung, whom he always quotes
-first.  Though not strictly to be reckoned as one of the  "Ten
-Commentators,"  he was added to their number by Chi T`ien-pao,
-being wrongly placed after his grandson Tu Mu.
-
-     5.  TU MU (803-852) is perhaps the best known as a poet -- a
-bright star even in the glorious galaxy of the T`ang period.  We
-learn from Ch`ao Kung-wu that although he had no practical
-experience of war,  he was extremely fond of discussing the
-subject,  and was moreover well read in the military history of
-the CH`UN CH`IU and CHAN KUO eras.  His notes,  therefore,  are
-well worth attention.  They are very copious, and replete with
-historical parallels.  The gist of Sun Tzu's work is thus
-summarized by him:  "Practice benevolence and justice, but on the
-other hand make full use of artifice and measures of expediency."
-He further declared that all the military triumphs and disasters
-of the thousand years which had elapsed since Sun Tzu's death
-would,  upon examination, be found to uphold and corroborate,  in
-every particular,  the maxims contained in his book.  Tu Mu's
-somewhat spiteful charge against Ts`ao Kung has already been
-considered elsewhere.
-
-     6.  CH`EN HAO appears to have been a contemporary of Tu Mu.
-Ch`ao Kung-wu says that he was impelled to write a new commentary
-on Sun Tzu because Ts`ao Kung's on the one hand was too obscure
-and subtle, and that of Tu Mu on the other too long-winded and
-diffuse.  Ou-yang Hsiu,  writing in the middle of the 11th
-century,  calls Ts`ao Kung, Tu Mu and Ch`en Hao the three chief
-commentators on Sun Tzu,  and observes that Ch`en Hao   is
-continually attacking Tu Mu's shortcomings.  His commentary,
-though not lacking in merit, must rank below those of his
-predecessors.
-
-     7.  CHIA LIN is known to have lived under the T`ang dynasty,
-for his commentary on Sun Tzu is mentioned in the T`ang Shu and
-was afterwards republished by Chi Hsieh of the same dynasty
-together with those of Meng Shih and Tu Yu.  It is of somewhat
-scanty texture, and in point of quality, too, perhaps the least
-valuable of the eleven.
-
-     8.  MEI YAO-CH`EN (1002-1060), commonly known by his "style"
-as Mei Sheng-yu, was, like Tu Mu, a poet of distinction.  His
-commentary was published with a laudatory preface by the great
-Ou-yang Hsiu, from which we may cull the following: --
-
-       Later scholars have misread Sun Tzu,  distorting his
-  words and trying to make them square with their own one-sided
-  views.  Thus, though commentators have not been lacking, only
-  a few have proved equal to the task.  My friend Sheng-yu has
-  not fallen into this mistake.  In attempting to provide a
-  critical commentary for Sun Tzu's work, he does not lose
-  sight of the fact that these sayings were intended for states
-  engaged in internecine warfare; that the author is not
-  concerned with the military conditions prevailing under the
-  sovereigns of the three ancient dynasties, [43] nor with the
-  nine punitive measures prescribed to the Minister of War.
-  [44]  Again, Sun Wu loved brevity of diction, but his meaning
-  is always deep.  Whether the subject be marching an army,  or
-  handling soldiers, or estimating the enemy,  or controlling
-  the forces of victory, it is always systematically treated;
-  the sayings are bound together in strict logical sequence,
-  though this has been obscured by commentators who have
-  probably   failed to grasp their meaning.  In his   own
-  commentary, Mei Sheng-yu has brushed aside all the obstinate
-  prejudices of these critics, and has tried to bring out the
-  true meaning of Sun Tzu himself.  In this way, the clouds of
-  confusion have been dispersed and the sayings made clear.  I
-  am convinced that the present work deserves to be handed down
-  side by side with the three great commentaries; and for a
-  great deal that they find in the sayings, coming generations
-  will have constant reason to thank my friend Sheng-yu.
-
-     Making some allowance for the exuberance of friendship, I am
-inclined to endorse this favorable judgment, and would certainly
-place him above Ch`en Hao in order of merit.
-
-     9.  WANG HSI,  also of the Sung dynasty,  is decidedly
-original in some of his interpretations, but much less judicious
-than Mei Yao-ch`en,  and on the whole not a very trustworthy
-guide.  He is fond of comparing his own commentary with that of
-Ts`ao Kung, but the comparison is not often flattering to him.
-We learn from Ch`ao Kung-wu that Wang Hsi revised the ancient
-text of Sun Tzu, filling up lacunae and correcting mistakes. [45]
-
-     10.  HO YEN-HSI of the Sung dynasty.  The personal name of
-this commentator is given as above by Cheng Ch`iao in the TUNG
-CHIH,  written about the middle of the twelfth century,  but he
-appears simply as Ho Shih in the YU HAI, and Ma Tuan-lin quotes
-Ch`ao Kung-wu as saying that his personal name is unknown.  There
-seems to be no reason to doubt Cheng Ch`iao's statement,
-otherwise I should have been inclined to hazard a guess and
-identify him with one Ho Ch`u-fei, the author of a short treatise
-on war,  who lived in the latter part of the 11th century.  Ho
-Shih's commentary,  in the words of the T`IEN-I-KO catalogue,
-"contains helpful additions"  here and there,  but is chiefly
-remarkable for the copious extracts taken, in adapted form,  from
-the dynastic histories and other sources.
-
-     11.  CHANG YU.  The list closes with a commentator of no
-great originality perhaps, but gifted with admirable powers of
-lucid exposition.  His commentator is based on that of Ts`ao
-Kung, whose terse sentences he contrives to expand and develop in
-masterly fashion.  Without Chang Yu, it is safe to say that much
-of Ts`ao Kung's commentary would have remained cloaked in its
-pristine obscurity and therefore valueless.  His work is not
-mentioned in the Sung history, the T`UNG K`AO, or the YU HAI, but
-it finds a niche in the T`UNG CHIH, which also names him as the
-author of the "Lives of Famous Generals." [46]
-     It is rather remarkable that the last-named four should all
-have flourished within so short a space of time.  Ch`ao Kung-wu
-accounts for it by saying:  "During the early years of the Sung
-dynasty the Empire enjoyed a long spell of peace, and men ceased
-to practice the art of war.  but when [Chao] Yuan-hao's rebellion
-came [1038-42] and the frontier generals were defeated time after
-time,  the Court made strenuous inquiry for men skilled in war,
-and military topics became the vogue amongst all the high
-officials.  Hence it is that the commentators of Sun Tzu in our
-dynasty belong mainly to that period. [47]
-
-     Besides these eleven commentators, there are several others
-whose work has not come down to us.  The SUI SHU mentions four,
-namely Wang Ling (often quoted by Tu Yu as Wang Tzu); Chang Tzu-
-shang;  Chia Hsu of Wei; [48] and Shen Yu of Wu.  The T`ANG SHU
-adds Sun Hao, and the T`UNG CHIH Hsiao Chi, while the T`U SHU
-mentions a Ming commentator, Huang Jun-yu.  It is possible that
-some of these may have been merely collectors and editors of
-other commentaries, like Chi T`ien-pao and Chi Hsieh,  mentioned
-above.
-
-
-Appreciations of Sun Tzu
-------------------------
-
-
-     Sun Tzu has exercised a potent fascination over the minds of
-some of China's greatest men.  Among the famous generals who are
-known to have studied his pages with enthusiasm may be mentioned
-Han Hsin (d. 196 B.C.), [49] Feng I (d. 34 A.D.), [50]  Lu Meng
-(d. 219), [51] and Yo Fei (1103-1141). [52]  The opinion of Ts`ao
-Kung,  who disputes with Han Hsin the highest place in Chinese
-military annals,  has already been recorded.  [53]   Still more
-remarkable, in one way, is the testimony of purely literary men,
-such as Su Hsun (the father of Su Tung-p`o), who wrote several
-essays on military topics,  all of which owe their   chief
-inspiration to Sun Tzu.  The following short passage by him is
-preserved in the YU HAI: [54] --
-
-       Sun Wu's saying, that in war one cannot make certain of
-  conquering,  [55]  is very different indeed from what other
-  books tell us. [56]  Wu Ch`i was a man of the same stamp as
-  Sun Wu:  they both wrote books on war, and they are linked
-  together in popular speech as "Sun and Wu."  But Wu Ch`i's
-  remarks on war are less weighty, his rules are rougher and
-  more crudely stated, and there is not the same unity of plan
-  as in Sun Tzu's work, where the style is terse,  but the
-  meaning fully brought out.
-
-     The following is an extract from the "Impartial Judgments in
-the Garden of Literature" by Cheng Hou: --
-
-       Sun Tzu's 13 chapters are not only the staple and base
-  of all military men's training, but also compel the most
-  careful attention of scholars and men of letters.  His
-  sayings   are terse yet elegant,  simple   yet   profound,
-  perspicuous and eminently practical.  Such works as the LUN
-  YU, the I CHING and the great Commentary, [57] as well as the
-  writings of Mencius, Hsun K`uang and Yang Chu, all fall below
-  the level of Sun Tzu.
-
-     Chu Hsi, commenting on this, fully admits the first part of
-the criticism, although he dislikes the audacious comparison with
-the venerated classical works.  Language of this sort, he says,
-"encourages a ruler's bent towards unrelenting warfare and
-reckless militarism."
-
-
-Apologies for War
------------------
-
-
-     Accustomed as we are to think of China as the greatest
-peace-loving nation on earth, we are in some danger of forgetting
-that her experience of war in all its phases has also been such
-as no modern State can parallel.  Her long military annals
-stretch back to a point at which they are lost in the mists of
-time.  She had built the Great Wall and was maintaining a huge
-standing army along her frontier centuries before the first Roman
-legionary was seen on the Danube.  What with the perpetual
-collisions of the ancient feudal States, the grim conflicts with
-Huns,  Turks and other invaders after the centralization of
-government,   the terrific upheavals which   accompanied   the
-overthrow of so many dynasties, besides the countless rebellions
-and minor disturbances that have flamed up and flickered out
-again one by one, it is hardly too much to say that the clash of
-arms has never ceased to resound in one portion or another of the
-Empire.
-     No less remarkable is the succession of illustrious captains
-to whom China can point with pride.  As in all countries,  the
-greatest are fond of emerging at the most fateful crises of her
-history.  Thus, Po Ch`i stands out conspicuous in the period when
-Ch`in was entering upon her final struggle with the remaining
-independent states.  The stormy years which followed the break-up
-of the Ch`in dynasty are illuminated by the transcendent genius
-of Han Hsin.  When the House of Han in turn is tottering to its
-fall,  the great and baleful figure of Ts`ao Ts`ao dominates the
-scene.  And in the establishment of the T`ang dynasty,one of the
-mightiest tasks achieved by man, the superhuman energy of Li
-Shih-min (afterwards the Emperor T`ai Tsung) was seconded by the
-brilliant strategy of Li Ching.  None of these generals need fear
-comparison with the greatest names in the military history of
-Europe.
-     In spite of all this, the great body of Chinese sentiment,
-from Lao Tzu downwards, and especially as reflected in the
-standard literature of Confucianism,  has been   consistently
-pacific and intensely opposed to militarism in any form.  It is
-such an uncommon thing to find any of the literati defending
-warfare on principle,  that I have thought it worth while to
-collect and translate a few passages in which the unorthodox view
-is upheld.  The following, by Ssu-ma Ch`ien, shows that for all
-his ardent admiration of Confucius, he was yet no advocate of
-peace at any price: --
-
-       Military weapons are the means used by the Sage to
-  punish violence and cruelty, to give peace to troublous
-  times,  to remove difficulties and dangers,  and to succor
-  those who are in peril.  Every animal with blood in its veins
-  and horns on its head will fight when it is attacked.  How
-  much more so will man, who carries in his breast the
-  faculties of love and hatred, joy and anger!   When he is
-  pleased,  a feeling of affection springs up within him;  when
-  angry, his poisoned sting is brought into play.  That is the
-  natural law which governs his being....  What then shall be
-  said of those scholars of our time,  blind to all great
-  issues, and without any appreciation of relative values,  who
-  can only bark out their stale formulas about  "virtue"  and
-  "civilization," condemning the use of military weapons?  They
-  will surely bring our country to impotence and dishonor and
-  the loss of her rightful heritage; or, at the very least,
-  they will bring about invasion and rebellion,  sacrifice of
-  territory and general enfeeblement.  Yet they obstinately
-  refuse to modify the position they have taken up.  The truth
-  is that, just as in the family the teacher must not spare the
-  rod,  and punishments cannot be dispensed with in the State,
-  so military chastisement can never be allowed to fall into
-  abeyance in the Empire.  All one can say is that this power
-  will be exercised wisely by some, foolishly by others,  and
-  that among those who bear arms some will be loyal and others
-  rebellious. [58]
-
-     The next piece is taken from Tu Mu's preface to his
-commentary on Sun Tzu: --
-
-       War may be defined as punishment, which is one of the
-  functions of government.  It was the profession of Chung Yu
-  and Jan Ch`iu, both disciples of Confucius.  Nowadays,  the
-  holding of trials and hearing of litigation, the imprisonment
-  of offenders and their execution by flogging in the market-
-  place,  are all done by officials.  But the wielding of huge
-  armies, the throwing down of fortified cities, the hauling of
-  women and children into captivity, and the beheading of
-  traitors  --  this is also work which is done by officials.
-  The objects of the rack and of military weapons   are
-  essentially the same.  There is no intrinsic difference
-  between the punishment of flogging and cutting off heads in
-  war.  For the lesser infractions of law, which are easily
-  dealt with, only a small amount of force need be employed:
-  hence the use of military weapons and wholesale decapitation.
-  In both cases, however, the end in view is to get rid of
-  wicked people, and to give comfort and relief to the good....
-       Chi-sun asked Jan Yu, saying:  "Have you, Sir,  acquired
-  your military aptitude by study, or is it innate?"   Jan Yu
-  replied:   "It has been acquired by study." [59]   "How can
-  that be so," said Chi-sun, "seeing that you are a disciple of
-  Confucius?"  "It is a fact," replied Jan Yu; "I was taught by
-  Confucius.  It is fitting that the great Sage should exercise
-  both civil and military functions, though to be sure my
-  instruction in the art of fighting has not yet gone very
-  far."
-       Now,  who the author was of this rigid distinction
-  between the "civil" and the "military," and the limitation of
-  each to a separate sphere of action, or in what year of which
-  dynasty it was first introduced, is more than I can say.
-  But,  at any rate, it has come about that the members of the
-  governing class are quite afraid of enlarging on military
-  topics,  or do so only in a shamefaced manner.  If any are
-  bold enough to discuss the subject, they are at once set down
-  as eccentric individuals of coarse and brutal propensities.
-  This is an extraordinary instance in which,  through sheer
-  lack of reasoning, men unhappily lose sight of fundamental
-  principles.
-       When the Duke of Chou was minister under Ch`eng Wang, he
-  regulated ceremonies and made music, and venerated the arts
-  of scholarship and learning; yet when the barbarians of the
-  River Huai revolted, [60] he sallied forth and chastised
-  them.  When Confucius held office under the Duke of Lu, and a
-  meeting was convened at Chia-ku, [61] he said:  "If pacific
-  negotiations are in progress, warlike preparations should
-  have been made beforehand."  He rebuked and shamed the
-  Marquis of Ch`i, who cowered under him and dared not proceed
-  to violence.  How can it be said that these two great Sages
-  had no knowledge of military matters?
-
-     We have seen that the great Chu Hsi held Sun Tzu in high
-esteem.  He also appeals to the authority of the Classics: --
-
-       Our Master Confucius, answering Duke Ling of Wei,  said:
-  "I have never studied matters connected with armies and
-  battalions."  [62]   Replying to K`ung Wen-tzu, he said:   I
-  have not been instructed about buff-coats and weapons."   But
-  if we turn to the meeting at Chia-ku, we find that he used
-  armed force against the men of Lai, so that the marquis of
-  Ch`i was overawed.  Again,  when the inhabitants of Pi
-  revolted, the ordered his officers to attack them,  whereupon
-  they were defeated and fled in confusion.  He once uttered
-  the words:  "If I fight, I conquer." [63]  And Jan Yu also
-  said:    "The   Sage exercises both civil   and   military
-  functions."  [64]   Can it be a fact that Confucius never
-  studied or received instruction in the art of war?   We can
-  only say that he did not specially choose matters connected
-  with armies and fighting to be the subject of his teaching.
-
-     Sun Hsing-yen,  the editor of Sun Tzu,  writes in similar
-strain: --
-
-       Confucius said:  "I am unversed in military matters."
-  [65]  He also said:  "If I fight,  I conquer."   Confucius
-  ordered ceremonies and regulated music.  Now war constitutes
-  one of the five classes of State ceremonial, [66]  and must
-  not be treated as an independent branch of study.  Hence, the
-  words "I am unversed in" must be taken to mean that there are
-  things which even an inspired Teacher does not know.  Those
-  who have to lead an army and devise stratagems,  must learn
-  the art of war.  But if one can command the services of a
-  good general like Sun Tzu, who was employed by Wu Tzu-hsu,
-  there is no need to learn it oneself.  Hence the remark added
-  by Confucius:  "If I fight, I conquer."
-       The men of the present day, however, willfully interpret
-  these words of Confucius in their narrowest sense, as though
-  he meant that books on the art of war were not worth reading.
-  With blind persistency, they adduce the example of Chao Kua,
-  who pored over his father's books to no purpose, [67]  as a
-  proof that all military theory is useless.  Again,  seeing
-  that books on war have to do with such things as opportunism
-  in designing plans, and the conversion of spies,  they hold
-  that the art is immoral and unworthy of a sage.  These people
-  ignore the fact that the studies of our scholars and the
-  civil administration of our officials also require steady
-  application and practice before efficiency is reached.  The
-  ancients were particularly chary of allowing mere novices to
-  botch their work. [68]  Weapons are baneful [69] and fighting
-  perilous;  and useless unless a general is in constant
-  practice, he ought not to hazard other men's lives in battle.
-  [70]  Hence it is essential that Sun Tzu's 13 chapters should
-  be studied.
-      Hsiang Liang used to instruct his nephew Chi [71] in the
-  art of war.  Chi got a rough idea of the art in its general
-  bearings,  but would not pursue his studies to their proper
-  outcome,  the consequence being that he was finally defeated
-  and overthrown.  He did not realize that the tricks and
-  artifices of war are beyond verbal computation.  Duke Hsiang
-  of Sung and King Yen of Hsu were brought to destruction by
-  their misplaced humanity.  The treacherous and underhand
-  nature of war necessitates the use of guile and stratagem
-  suited to the occasion.  There is a case on record of
-  Confucius himself having violated an extorted oath, [72]  and
-  also of his having left the Sung State in disguise. [73]  Can
-  we then recklessly arraign Sun Tzu for disregarding truth and
-  honesty?
-
-
-Bibliography
-------------
-
-
-     The following are the oldest Chinese treatises on war, after
-Sun Tzu.  The notes on each have been drawn principally from the
-SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU CHIEN MING MU LU, ch. 9, fol. 22 sqq.
-
-     1.  WU TZU, in 1 CHUAN or 6 chapters.  By Wu Ch`i  (d.  381
-B.C.).  A genuine work.  See SHIH CHI, ch. 65.
-
-     2.  SSU-MA FA, in 1 CHUAN or 5 chapters.  Wrongly attributed
-to Ssu-ma Jang-chu of the 6th century B.C.  Its date,  however,
-must be early, as the customs of the three ancient dynasties are
-constantly to be met within its pages.  See SHIH CHI, ch. 64.
-     The SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU (ch. 99, f. 1)  remarks that the
-oldest three treatises on war, SUN TZU, WU TZU and SSU-MA FA,
-are,  generally speaking, only concerned with things strictly
-military  --  the art of producing,  collecting,  training and
-drilling troops, and the correct theory with regard to measures
-of expediency, laying plans, transport of goods and the handling
-of soldiers -- in strong contrast to later works, in which the
-science of war is usually blended with metaphysics,  divination
-and magical arts in general.
-
-     3.  LIU T`AO, in 6 CHUAN, or 60 chapters.  Attributed to Lu
-Wang  (or Lu Shang, also known as T`ai Kung) of the 12th century
-B.C. [74]  But its style does not belong to the era of the Three
-Dynasties.  Lu Te-ming (550-625 A.D.) mentions the work,  and
-enumerates the headings of the six sections so that the forgery
-cannot have been later than Sui dynasty.
-
-     4.  WEI LIAO TZU, in 5 CHUAN.  Attributed to Wei Liao  (4th
-cent. B.C.), who studied under the famous Kuei-ku Tzu.  The work
-appears to have been originally in 31 chapters, whereas the text
-we possess contains only 24.  Its matter is sound enough in the
-main,  though the strategical devices differ considerably from
-those of the Warring States period.  It is been furnished with a
-commentary by the well-known Sung philosopher Chang Tsai.
-
-     5.  SAN LUEH, in 3 CHUAN.  Attributed to Huang-shih Kung,  a
-legendary personage who is said to have bestowed it on Chang
-Liang (d. 187 B.C.) in an interview on a bridge.  But here again,
-the style is not that of works dating from the Ch`in or Han
-period.  The Han Emperor Kuang Wu [25-57 A.D.] apparently quotes
-from it in one of his proclamations; but the passage in question
-may have been inserted later on,  in order to prove   the
-genuineness of the work.  We shall not be far out if we refer it
-to the Northern Sung period [420-478 A.D.], or somewhat earlier.
-
-     6.  LI WEI KUNG WEN TUI, in 3 sections.  Written in the form
-of a dialogue between T`ai Tsung and his great general Li Ching,
-it is usually ascribed to the latter.  Competent authorities
-consider it a forgery, though the author was evidently well
-versed in the art of war.
-
-     7.  LI CHING PING FA (not to be confounded with the
-foregoing)  is a short treatise in 8 chapters, preserved in the
-T`ung Tien, but not published separately.  This fact explains its
-omission from the SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU.
-
-     8.  WU CH`I CHING, in 1 CHUAN.  Attributed to the legendary
-minister Feng Hou, with exegetical notes by Kung-sun Hung of the
-Han dynasty (d. 121 B.C.), and said to have been eulogized by the
-celebrated general Ma Lung (d. 300 A.D.).  Yet the earliest
-mention of it is in the SUNG CHIH.  Although a forgery, the work
-is well put together.
-
-     Considering the high popular estimation in which Chu-ko
-Liang has always been held, it is not surprising to find more
-than one work on war ascribed to his pen.  Such are (1) the SHIH
-LIU TS`E (1 CHUAN), preserved in the YUNG LO TA TIEN; (2)  CHIANG
-YUAN  (1 CHUAN);  and  (3) HSIN SHU  (1 CHUAN),  which steals
-wholesale from Sun Tzu.  None of these has the slightest claim to
-be considered genuine.
-     Most of the large Chinese encyclopedias contain extensive
-sections devoted to the literature of war.  The following
-references may be found useful: --
-
-     T`UNG TIEN (circa 800 A.D.), ch. 148-162.
-     T`AI P`ING YU LAN (983), ch. 270-359.
-     WEN HSIEN TUNG K`AO (13th cent.), ch. 221.
-     YU HAI (13th cent.), ch. 140, 141.
-     SAN TS`AI T`U HUI (16th cent).
-     KUANG PO WU CHIH (1607), ch. 31, 32.
-     CH`IEN CH`IO LEI SHU (1632), ch. 75.
-     YUAN CHIEN LEI HAN (1710), ch. 206-229.
-     KU CHIN T`U SHU CHI CH`ENG (1726), section XXX, esp. ch. 81-
-      90.
-     HSU WEN HSIEN T`UNG K`AO (1784), ch. 121-134.
-     HUANG CH`AO CHING SHIH WEN PIEN (1826), ch. 76, 77.
-
-     The bibliographical sections of certain historical works
-also deserve mention: --
-
-     CH`IEN HAN SHU, ch. 30.
-     SUI SHU, ch. 32-35.
-     CHIU T`ANG SHU, ch. 46, 47.
-     HSIN T`ANG SHU, ch. 57,60.
-     SUNG SHIH, ch. 202-209.
-     T`UNG CHIH (circa 1150), ch. 68.
-
-     To these of course must be added the great Catalogue of the
-Imperial Library: --
-
-     SSU K`U CH`UAN SHU TSUNG MU T`I YAO (1790), ch. 99, 100.
-
-
-Footnotes
----------
-
-
-1.  SHI CHI, ch. 65.
-
-2.  He reigned from 514 to 496 B.C.
-
-3.  SHI CHI, ch. 130.
-
-4.  The appellation of Nang Wa.
-
-5.  SHI CHI, ch. 31.
-
-6.  SHI CHI, ch. 25.
-
-7.  The appellation of Hu Yen, mentioned in ch. 39 under the year
-637.
-
-8.  Wang-tzu Ch`eng-fu, ch. 32, year 607.
-
-9.  The mistake is natural enough.  Native critics refer to a
-work of the Han dynasty, which says:  "Ten LI outside the WU gate
-[of the city of Wu, now Soochow in Kiangsu] there is a great
-mound, raised to commemorate the entertainment of Sun Wu of Ch`i,
-who excelled in the art of war, by the King of Wu."
-
-10.  "They attached strings to wood to make bows, and sharpened
-wood to make arrows.  The use of bows and arrows is to keep the
-Empire in awe."
-
-11.  The son and successor of Ho Lu.  He was finally defeated and
-overthrown by Kou chien, King of Yueh, in 473 B.C.  See post.
-
-12.  King Yen of Hsu, a fabulous being, of whom Sun Hsing-yen
-says in his preface:  "His humanity brought him to destruction."
-
-13.  The passage I have put in brackets is omitted in the T`U
-SHU, and may be an interpolation.  It was known, however to Chang
-Shou-chieh of the T`ang dynasty, and appears in the T`AI P`ING YU
-LAN.
-
-14.  Ts`ao Kung seems to be thinking of the first part of chap.
-II, perhaps especially of ss. 8.
-
-15.  See chap. XI.
-
-16.  On the other hand, it is noteworthy that WU TZU, which is
-not in 6 chapters, has 48 assigned to it in the HAN CHIH.
-Likewise, the CHUNG YUNG is credited with 49 chapters, though now
-only in one only.  In the case of very short works, one is
-tempted to think that P`IEN might simply mean "leaves."
-
-17.  Yeh Shih of the Sung dynasty [1151-1223].
-
-18.  He hardly deserves to be bracketed with assassins.
-
-19.  See Chapter 7, ss. 27 and Chapter 11, ss. 28.
-
-20.  See Chapter 11, ss. 28.  Chuan Chu is the abbreviated form
-of his name.
-
-21.  I.e. Po P`ei.  See ante.
-
-22.  The nucleus of this work is probably genuine, though large
-additions have been made by later hands.  Kuan chung died in 645
-B.C.
-
-23.  See infra, beginning of INTRODUCTION.
-
-24.  I do not know what this work, unless it be the last chapter
-of another work.  Why that chapter should be singled out,
-however, is not clear.
-
-25.  About 480 B.C.
-
-26.  That is, I suppose, the age of Wu Wang and Chou Kung.
-
-27.  In the 3rd century B.C.
-
-28.  Ssu-ma Jang-chu, whose family name was T`ien, lived in the
-latter half of the 6th century B.C., and is also believed to have
-written a work on war.  See SHIH CHI, ch. 64, and infra at the
-beginning of the INTRODUCTION.
-
-29.  See Legge's Classics, vol. V, Prolegomena p. 27.  Legge
-thinks that the TSO CHUAN must have been written in the 5th
-century, but not before 424 B.C.
-
-30.  See MENCIUS III. 1. iii. 13-20.
-
-31.  When Wu first appears in the CH`UN CH`IU in 584, it is
-already at variance with its powerful neighbor.  The CH`UN CH`IU
-first mentions Yueh in 537, the TSO CHUAN in 601.
-
-32.  This is explicitly stated in the TSO CHUAN, XXXII, 2.
-
-33.  There is this to be said for the later period, that the feud
-would tend to grow more bitter after each encounter, and thus
-more fully justify the language used in XI. ss. 30.
-
-34.  With Wu Yuan himself the case is just the reverse:  -- a
-spurious treatise on war has been fathered on him simply because
-he was a great general.  Here we have an obvious inducement to
-forgery.  Sun Wu, on the other hand, cannot have been widely
-known to fame in the 5th century.
-
-35.  From TSO CHUAN:  "From the date of King Chao's accession
-[515] there was no year in which Ch`u was not attacked by Wu."
-
-36.  Preface ad fin:  "My family comes from Lo-an, and we are
-really descended from Sun Tzu.  I am ashamed to say that I only
-read my ancestor's work from a literary point of view, without
-comprehending the military technique.  So long have we been
-enjoying the blessings of peace!"
-
-37.  Hoa-yin is about 14 miles from T`ung-kuan on the eastern
-border of Shensi.  The temple in question is still visited by
-those about the ascent of the Western Sacred Mountain.  It is
-mentioned in a text as being "situated five LI east of the
-district city of Hua-yin.  The temple contains the Hua-shan
-tablet inscribed by the T`ang Emperor Hsuan Tsung [713-755]."
-
-38.  See my "Catalogue of Chinese Books" (Luzac & Co., 1908), no.
-40.
-
-39.  This is a discussion of 29 difficult passages in Sun Tzu.
-
-40.  Cf.  Catalogue of the library of Fan family at Ningpo:  "His
-commentary is frequently obscure; it furnishes a clue, but does
-not fully develop the meaning."
-
-41.  WEN HSIEN T`UNG K`AO, ch. 221.
-
-42.  It is interesting to note that M. Pelliot has recently
-discovered chapters 1, 4 and 5 of this lost work in the "Grottos
-of the Thousand Buddhas."  See B.E.F.E.O., t. VIII, nos. 3-4, p.
-525.
-
-43.  The Hsia, the Shang and the Chou.  Although the last-named
-was nominally existent in Sun Tzu's day, it retained hardly a
-vestige of power, and the old military organization had
-practically gone by the board.  I can suggest no other
-explanation of the passage.
-
-44.  See CHOU LI, xxix. 6-10.
-
-45.  T`UNG K`AO, ch. 221.
-
-46.  This appears to be still extant.  See Wylie's "Notes," p. 91
-(new edition).
-
-47.  T`UNG K`AO, loc. cit.
-
-48.  A notable person in his day.  His biography is given in the
-SAN KUO CHIH, ch. 10.
-
-49.  See XI. ss. 58, note.
-
-50.  HOU HAN SHU, ch. 17 ad init.
-
-51.  SAN KUO CHIH, ch. 54.
-
-52.  SUNG SHIH, ch. 365 ad init.
-
-53.  The few Europeans who have yet had an opportunity of
-acquainting themselves with Sun Tzu are not behindhand in their
-praise.  In this connection, I may perhaps be excused for quoting
-from a letter from Lord Roberts, to whom the sheets of the
-present work were submitted previous to publication:  "Many of
-Sun Wu's maxims are perfectly applicable to the present day, and
-no. 11 [in Chapter VIII] is one that the people of this country
-would do well to take to heart."
-
-54.  Ch. 140.
-
-55.  See IV. ss. 3.
-
-56.  The allusion may be to Mencius VI. 2. ix. 2.
-
-57.  The TSO CHUAN.
-
-58.  SHIH CHI, ch. 25, fol. I.
-
-59.  Cf. SHIH CHI, ch 47.
-
-60.  See SHU CHING, preface ss. 55.
-
-61.  See SHIH CHI, ch. 47.
-
-62.  Lun Yu, XV. 1.
-
-63.  I failed to trace this utterance.
-
-64.  Supra.
-
-65.  Supra.
-
-66.  The other four being worship, mourning, entertainment of
-guests, and festive rites.  See SHU CHING, ii. 1. III. 8, and
-CHOU LI, IX. fol. 49.
-
-67.  See XIII. ss. 11, note.
-
-68.  This is a rather obscure allusion to the TSO CHUAN, where
-Tzu-ch`an says:  "If you have a piece of beautiful brocade, you
-will not employ a mere learner to make it up."
-
-69.  Cf.  TAO TE CHING, ch. 31.
-
-70.  Sun Hsing-yen might have quoted Confucius again.  See LUN
-YU, XIII. 29, 30.
-
-71.  Better known as Hsiang Yu [233-202 B.C.].
-
-72.  SHIH CHI, ch. 47.
-
-73.  SHIH CHI, ch. 38.
-
-74.  See XIII. ss. 27, note.  Further details on T`ai Kung will
-be found in the SHIH CHI, ch. 32 ad init.  Besides the tradition
-which makes him a former minister of Chou Hsin, two other
-accounts of him are there given, according to which he would
-appear to have been first raised from a humble private station by
-Wen Wang.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-I.  LAYING PLANS
-
-     [Ts`ao Kung, in defining the meaning of the Chinese for the
-title of this chapter, says it refers to the deliberations in the
-temple selected by the general for his temporary use, or as we
-should say, in his tent.  See. ss. 26.]
-
-     1.  Sun Tzu said:  The art of war is of vital importance to
-the State.
-     2.  It is a matter of life and death, a road either to
-safety or to ruin.  Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on
-no account be neglected.
-     3.  The art of war, then, is governed by five constant
-factors,  to be taken into account in one's deliberations,  when
-seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
-     4.  These are:  (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven;  (3)  Earth;
-(4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
-
-     [It appears from what follows that Sun Tzu means by  "Moral
-Law" a principle of harmony, not unlike the Tao of Lao Tzu in its
-moral aspect.  One might be tempted to render it by  "morale,"
-were it not considered as an attribute of the ruler in ss. 13.]
-
-     5,  6.  The MORAL LAW causes the people to be in complete
-accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless
-of their lives, undismayed by any danger.
-
-     [Tu Yu quotes Wang Tzu as saying:   "Without constant
-practice,  the officers will be nervous and undecided when
-mustering for battle; without constant practice, the general will
-be wavering and irresolute when the crisis is at hand."]
-
-     7.  HEAVEN signifies night and day, cold and heat, times and
-seasons.
-
-     [The commentators, I think, make an unnecessary mystery of
-two words here.  Meng Shih refers to "the hard and the soft,
-waxing and waning" of Heaven.  Wang Hsi, however, may be right in
-saying that what is meant is "the general economy of Heaven,"
-including the five elements, the four seasons, wind and clouds,
-and other phenomena.]
-
-     8.  EARTH comprises distances, great and small; danger and
-security; open ground and narrow passes; the chances of life and
-death.
-     9.  The COMMANDER stands for the virtues of   wisdom,
-sincerity, benevolence, courage and strictness.
-
-     [The five cardinal virtues of the Chinese are (1)  humanity
-or benevolence; (2) uprightness of mind; (3) self-respect,  self-
-control,  or "proper feeling;" (4) wisdom; (5) sincerity or good
-faith.  Here "wisdom" and "sincerity" are put before "humanity or
-benevolence,"  and the two military virtues of  "courage"  and
-"strictness"  substituted for "uprightness of mind"  and  "self-
-respect, self-control, or 'proper feeling.'"]
-
-     10.  By METHOD AND DISCIPLINE are to be understood the
-marshaling   of the army in its proper   subdivisions,   the
-graduations of rank among the officers, the maintenance of roads
-by which supplies may reach the army, and the control of military
-expenditure.
-     11.  These five heads should be familiar to every general:
-he who knows them will be victorious; he who knows them not will
-fail.
-     12.  Therefore,  in your deliberations,  when seeking to
-determine the military conditions, let them be made the basis of
-a comparison, in this wise: --
-     13.  (1)   Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the
-Moral law?
-
-     [I.e., "is in harmony with his subjects."  Cf. ss. 5.]
-
-     (2)  Which of the two generals has most ability?
-     (3)  With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and
-Earth?
-
-     [See ss. 7,8]
-
-     (4)  On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced?
-
-     [Tu Mu alludes to the remarkable story of Ts`ao Ts`ao  (A.D.
-155-220),  who was such a strict disciplinarian that once,  in
-accordance with his own severe regulations against injury to
-standing crops, he condemned himself to death for having allowed
-his horse to shy into a field of corn!  However,  in lieu of
-losing his head, he was persuaded to satisfy his sense of justice
-by cutting off his hair.  Ts`ao Ts`ao's own comment on the
-present passage is characteristically curt:  "when you lay down a
-law,  see that it is not disobeyed; if it is disobeyed the
-offender must be put to death."]
-
-     (5)  Which army is stronger?
-
-     [Morally as well as physically.  As Mei Yao-ch`en puts it,
-freely rendered, "ESPIRIT DE CORPS and 'big battalions.'"]
-
-     (6)  On which side are officers and men more highly trained?
-
-     [Tu Yu quotes Wang Tzu as saying:   "Without constant
-practice,  the officers will be nervous and undecided when
-mustering for battle; without constant practice, the general will
-be wavering and irresolute when the crisis is at hand."]
-
-     (7)   In which army is there the greater constancy both in
-reward and punishment?
-
-     [On which side is there the most absolute certainty that
-merit will be properly rewarded and misdeeds summarily punished?]
-
-     14.  By means of these seven considerations I can forecast
-victory or defeat.
-     15.  The general that hearkens to my counsel and acts upon
-it, will conquer:   --let such a one be retained in command!  The
-general that hearkens not to my counsel nor acts upon it,  will
-suffer defeat:  --let such a one be dismissed!
-
-     [The form of this paragraph reminds us that Sun Tzu's
-treatise was composed expressly for the benefit of his patron Ho
-Lu, king of the Wu State.]
-
-     16.  While heading the profit of my counsel, avail yourself
-also of any helpful circumstances over and beyond the ordinary
-rules.
-     17.  According as circumstances are favorable,  one should
-modify one's plans.
-
-     [Sun Tzu,  as a practical soldier, will have none of the
-"bookish theoric."  He cautions us here not to pin our faith to
-abstract principles; "for," as Chang Yu puts it, "while the main
-laws of strategy can be stated clearly enough for the benefit of
-all and sundry, you must be guided by the actions of the enemy in
-attempting to secure a favorable position in actual warfare."  On
-the eve of the battle of Waterloo, Lord Uxbridge, commanding the
-cavalry,  went to the Duke of Wellington in order to learn what
-his plans and calculations were for the morrow, because,  as he
-explained, he might suddenly find himself Commander-in-chief and
-would be unable to frame new plans in a critical moment.  The
-Duke listened quietly and then said:  "Who will attack the first
-tomorrow -- I or Bonaparte?"  "Bonaparte," replied Lord Uxbridge.
-"Well," continued the Duke, "Bonaparte has not given me any idea
-of his projects; and as my plans will depend upon his,  how can
-you expect me to tell you what mine are?" [1] ]
-
-     18.  All warfare is based on deception.
-
-     [The truth of this pithy and profound saying will be
-admitted by every soldier.  Col.  Henderson tells us   that
-Wellington,  great in so many military qualities, was especially
-distinguished by "the extraordinary skill with which he concealed
-his movements and deceived both friend and foe."]
-
-     19.  Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable;  when
-using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near,  we
-must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away,  we
-must make him believe we are near.
-     20.  Hold out baits to entice the enemy.  Feign disorder,
-and crush him.
-
-     [All commentators,  except Chang Yu, say, "When he is in
-disorder, crush him."  It is more natural to suppose that Sun Tzu
-is still illustrating the uses of deception in war.]
-
-     21.  If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him.  If
-he is in superior strength, evade him.
-     22.  If your opponent is of choleric temper,  seek to
-irritate him.  Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
-
-     [Wang Tzu,  quoted by Tu Yu, says that the good tactician
-plays with his adversary as a cat plays with a mouse,  first
-feigning weakness and immobility, and then suddenly pouncing upon
-him.]
-
-     23.  If he is taking his ease, give him no rest.
-
-     [This is probably the meaning though Mei Yao-ch`en has the
-note:  "while we are taking our ease, wait for the enemy to tire
-himself out."  The YU LAN has "Lure him on and tire him out."]
-
-If his forces are united, separate them.
-
-     [Less plausible is the interpretation favored by most of the
-commentators:   "If sovereign and subject are in accord,  put
-division between them."]
-
-     24.  Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are
-not expected.
-     25.  These military devices, leading to victory, must not be
-divulged beforehand.
-     26.   Now the general who wins a battle makes   many
-calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought.
-
-     [Chang Yu tells us that in ancient times it was customary
-for a temple to be set apart for the use of a general who was
-about to take the field, in order that he might there elaborate
-his plan of campaign.]
-
-The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations
-beforehand.  Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few
-calculations to defeat:  how much more no calculation at all!  It
-is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to
-win or lose.
-
-
-[1]  "Words on Wellington," by Sir. W. Fraser.
-
--

<TRUNCATED>

Reply via email to