http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite/blob/11b00873/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>
