III. u: JJI and |ft^ antithetically opposed in the sense of ffiff ML and

XL 6:» =XI
INTRODUCTION XXV
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. § i, there is an unmistakable allusion to the ancient system of land- tenure which had already passed away by the time ol Mencius, who was anxious to see it revived in a modified form. L The only warfare Sun Tzu knows is that carried on between the various feudal princes ( ^ ^ ), in which armoured 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 \vhich 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 dona fide pro- duction 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 parti- cularly 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, 3 that seems to me quite untenable. If one thing is more apparent than an- other 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 gene- ralisation, but also of a practical soldier closely acquainted with the military conditions of his time. To say nothing
1 See Mencius III. I. iii. 13 — 20.
2 | 1 j /|>fC |Jjl ~JT need not be pressed to mean an actual dweller in the mountains. I think it simply denotes a person living a retired life and standing aloof from public affairs.
XXVI INTRODUCTION
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, acute- ness 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 pro- duction of a military man living towards the end of the "Ch'un Ch4u" period, are we not bound, in spite of the silence of the Tso Chuan, to accept Ssu-ma Ch'ien's ac- count 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 is in VI. §21: —
Though according to my estimate the soldiers of Yiieh 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. § 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 Yiieh 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 cre- dibility of Ssu-ma Ch'ien's narrative. As we have seen above, the first positive date given in connection with Sun Wu is 5 1 2 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,
INTRODUCTION XXVII
and of course the 1 3 chapters must have been written earlier still. But at that time, and for several years after, down to the capture of Ying in 506, ^ Chlu, and not Yiieh, was the great hereditary enemy of Wu. The two states, Ch'u and Wu, had been constantly at war for over half a century, 1 whereas the first war between Wu and Ylieh was waged only in 510, 2 and even then was no more than a short interlude sandwiched in the midst 01 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 Ylieh 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.
5H 512
510
tween the two states. 5°9
or 508 506
505
5°4 497 496
Accession of Ho Lu.
Ho Lu attacks Ch'u, but is dissuaded from entering !g[$ Ying, the
capital. Shih Chi mentions Sun Wu as general. Another attack on Ch'u. Wu makes a successful attack on Yiieh. This is the first war be-
Ch'u invades Wu, but is signally defeated at J& jl^ Yii-chang. Ho Lu attacks Ch'u with the aid of T'ang and Ts'ai. Decisive
battle of yjv^l Jljf; Po-chii, and capture of Ying. Last mention
of Sun Wu in Shih Chi. Yiieh makes a raid on Wu in the absence of its army. Wu is
beaten by Ch'in and evacuates Ying. Ho Lu sends 4 £ Fu Ch'ai to attack Ch'u.
""*
^J {j|| Kou Chien becomes King of Yiieh.
Wu attacks Yiieh, but is defeated by Kou Chien at #|| ^ Tsui-li. Ho Lu is killed.
1 When Wu first appears in the Ch'-un CWiu in 584, it is already at variance with its powerful neighbour. The Cfrun Ch'-iu first mentions Yiieh in 537, the Tso Chuan in 60 1.
This is explicitly stated in the Tso Chuan, ft3 ^. XXXII, 2 : W J& >ffe
XXVIII INTRODUCTION
B.C.
494
and enters the capital of Yueh. 485 '
or
484 482
Fu Ch'ai defeats Kou Chien in the great battle of $ Fu-chiao,
Kou Chien renders homage to Wu. Death of Wu Tztt-hsu. Kou Chien invades Wu in the absence of Fu Ch'ai.
47 Further attacks by Yueh on Wu. 476
475 473
Kou Chien lays siege to the capital of Wu. Final defeat and extinction of Wu.
The sentence quoted above from VI. § 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 been exhausted by its supreme effort against Chcu. 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. l 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
1 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. § 30.
INTRODUCTION XXIX
the great commentary. It was Wu Tzu-hsii, 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. 1
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 _weiL-yersed in thescience o£ja£ar- should have solid achievements to his credit as well. Now the capture of Ying was un- doubtedly 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, 3 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 that prince's reign. 3 If he rose to be a general at all, he certainly was never on an equal footing with the three
i See his preface to Sun Tzu: »
2 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.
3 See Tso Chuan, fc ^ , 4th year (506), § 14: g $J ^ [t|J $L ^ g*
^ ^fC ^ 6Bf UFrom the date of Kin£ Cnao's accession [515] there was no year in which Ch'u was not attacked by Wu."
XXX INTRODUCTION
above mentioned. He was doubtless present at the in- vestment and occupation of Ying, and witnessed Wu's sudden collapse in the following year. Ylieh'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, ot 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 Ylieh, 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 Tzij.
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. 1 Sun Hsing-yen says in his preface: —
During the Ch'in and Han dynasties Sun Tzu's Art of War was in
»*^4.A..- • 7^^ — """^ i"*""" " "^TT7"r~ .. X.
mysterious import, and were unwillineMto ex
1 See supra^ p. xx.
INTRODUCTION XXXI
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 Tlien-pao published a work in 15 chuan entitled -f- ^ $j> 3f* ^ ££ "Sun Tzu with the collected commentaries of ten writers." 3 There was another text, with variant readings put forward by Chu Fu of ^ J|L Ta-hsing, 3 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 i8th century, the text in sole pos- session 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 surrived. That, therefore, is the text of Sun Tzu which appears in the War section of the great Imperial encyclopaedia printed in 1726, the ~j!t ^f*" HO 1§* ^H jfc fat 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 ^ ffs; -j- — • ^ "Eleven philosophers of the Chou and Ch'in dynasties"
a # ffl ^ ir
2S« %&%&•
3 Alluded to on p. xvii, note 3*
XXXII INTRODUCTION
[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 •££ M t/T Sun Hsing-yen [1752-1818], a distinguished antiquarian and classical scholar, l who claimed to be an actual descendant of Sun Wu, 2 accidentally discovered a copy of Chi T'ien-pao's long-lost work, when on a visit to the library of the §p $& Hua-yin temple. 3 Appended to it was the ^ jjfc / Skno of J|$ £ ji^ Cheng Yu-hsien, mentioned in the T^ung Chih, and also believed to have perished. 4 This is what Sun Hsing-yen designates as the "j^f ^5C or Jg( ^ "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, 6 and appears to have been content to reproduce the somewhat debased version current in his day, without troubling to collate it
1 A good biographical notice, with a list of his works, will be found in the
H $J It A H Sfr> ch- «8> to
• Preface * /,,,
y\^ -Jjjj "My family comes from Lo-an, and we are really descended from Sun Tztt. 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!"
3 Hua-yin is about 14 miles from yjj| ^ T'ung-kuan on the eastern border of Shensi. The temple in question is still visited by those about to make the ascent of the 3p [Jj or Western Sacred Mountain. It is mentioned in the ~fc HH
, ch. 32, f. 22, as the : -
% ^ -Ji jfe ^ J^ If ' 41-111 asituated five
east of the district city of Hua-yin. The temple contains the Hua-shan tablet in scribed by the T'ang Emperor Hsiian Tsuncr [713—755] "
5 Cf. Sua Hsing-yen's remark h frapos of his mistakes in the names and order of the commentators: *
INTRODUCTION XXXIII
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 Yii Lan encyclo- paedia. 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 irii^J^_of^hje_J.t_aii^_jlyna^^ ', the value of these early transcripts of Sun Tzu can hardly be overestimated. Yet the idea of utilising them does not seem to have oc- curred to anyone until Sun Hsing-yen, acting under Govern- ment 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 them- selves to this study, probably surpassing me therein. Accordingly, I have had the whole work cut on blocks as a text-book for military men. l
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, J^ J{ tjjj[ Wu Jen-chi. They took the "original text" as their basis, and by careful comparison with the older versions, as well as the extant commentaries and other sources of information such as
C
XXXIV INTRODUCTION
the / Shuo, succeeded in restoring a very large number of doubtful passages, and turned out, on the whole, what must be accepted as the closest 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 re-issue dated 1877. It is in 6 pen, forming part of a well-printed set of 23 early philosophical works in 83 pen. 1 It opens with a preface by Sun Hsing-yen (largely quoted in this intro- duction), vindicating the traditional view of Sun Tzu's life and performances, and summing up in remarkably concise fashion the evidence in its favour. 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, 3 with author's preface, and next, a short miscellany of historical and bibliographical information entitled ^ -^ ^ ^ Sun Tzu Hsu Lu, compiled by ||f. J£( £3] Pi I-hsiin. 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 and distinguished
roll of commentators, which would do honour to any classic.
Hfc 87 ^ 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 in-
1 See my "Catalogue of Chinese Books" (Luzac & Co., 1908), no. 40.
This is a discussion of 29 difficult passages in Sun Tzti, namely: I. 2; 26; 16; II. 9 & 105 III. 3; HI & VII; III. 17; IV. 4; 6; V. 3; 10 & n; 14; the headings of the 13 chapters, with special reference to chap. VII; VII. 5; 15 & 16; 27; 33, &c.; VIII. 1-6; IX. n; X. 1-20; XI. 23; 31; 19; 43; VII. 12-14 & XI. 52; XI. 56; XIII. 15 & 16; 26; XIII in general.
INTRODUCTION XXXV
exhaustible, must therefore be susceptible of treatment in a great variety of ways. l
1 • W ^ Ts'ao Ts'ao or ~§f ^ Ts'ao Kung, afterwards known as ^ j£ ffi 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 extra- ordinary man, whose biography in the San fato Chih 3 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 marvellous rapidity of his marches, which has found expression in the line m 1" & W II «fc PI "^Ik 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." 3 Ts'ao Kung's notes on Sun Tzu, models of austere brevity, are so thoroughly charac- teristic 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 com-
Preface to Mei Yao-ch'en's edition: ^
~ tin M^
s See ch.
XXXVI INTRODUCTION
pression, they are scarcely intelligible and stand no less in need of a commentary than the text itself. 1 As we have seen, Ts'ao Rung is the reputed author of the ffi fj, a book on war in 100,000 odd words, now lost, but mentioned in the ||| ^ . 3
2- InL J^t Meng Shih. The commentary which has come down to us under this name is comparatively meagre, 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 f§ 4^ 3l£ Ch'ao Kung-wu also assigns him to the T'ang dynasty, 3 but this is obviously a mistake, as his work is mentioned in the |^ |J |g |§ ^ . In Sun Hsing-yen's preface, he appears as Meng Shih of the Liang dynasty [502—557]. Others would identify him with ^ |f£ Meng K'ang of the 3rd century. In the ^ jjj J| he is named last of the 3£ ^ "Five Commentators the others being Wei Wu Ti, Tu Mu, Ch'en Hao and Chia Lin.
3. ^ ^ Li Ch'iian of the 8th century was a well- known writer on military tactics. His -fc E=J (^ $§£ nas been in constant use down to the present day. The JH ^ mentions ^ #[» ^ ^ (lives of famous generals from the Chou to the T'ang dynasty) as written by him. 5 He is also generally supposed to be the real author of the popular Taoist tract, the |^ ^f $g. According to Ch'ao Kung-wu and the T'ien-i-ko catalogue, 6 he followed the ^ £u ^g ^ text of Sun Tzu, which differs considerably from those
, "
Catalogue of the library of the Fan
family at Ningpo, - , fol. I2 ^ : ^ |± ^ (g ^ ^| fig ^ ^
"His commentary is frequently obscure 5 it furnishes a clue, but does not fully develop the meaning." 2 See ^g yjj , ch. 141 ad init.
3 ^F^w Hsien T'-ung K^ao^ ch. 221, f. 9^°. 4 Ch. 207, f. 5 r°.
5 It is interesting to note that M. Pelliot has recently discovered chapters i, 4 and 5 of this lost work in the "Grottos of the Thousand Buddhas." See B. E. F. E. O, t. VIII, nos. 3—4, p. 525. 6 LoCt cit.
INTRODUCTION XXXVII
now extant. His notes are mostly short and to the point, and he frequently illustrates his remarks by anecdotes from Chinese history.
4. ti'fe Tu Yu O^ed 8l2) did n°t publish a separate commentary on Sun Tzu, his notes being taken from the T^ung Tien, the encyclopaedic treatise on the Constitution which was his life-work. They are largely repetitions of Ts'ao Kung and Meng Shih, besides which it is believed that he drew on the ancient commentaries of ^ ^ Wang Ling and others. Owing to the peculiar arrangement of the T^ung Tien, he has to explain each passage on its merits, apart from the context, and sometimes his own explanation does not agree with that of Ts'ao Kung, whom he always quotes first. Though not strictly to be reckoned as one of the "Ten Commentators," he was added to their number by Chi T'ien-pao, being wrongly placed after his grandson Tu Mu.
5- ti$C Tu MU (803-852) is perhaps 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 more- over well read in the military history of the Cfcun Ck'iu and Chan Kuo eras. l 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 summarised by him: "Practise benevolence and justice, but on the other hand make full use of artifice and measures of ex- pediency." 3 He further declared that all the military
i Wen Hsien T^ung K^ao, ch. 221, f . 9 : {ft f | >$ $fr ffi ^ g |&
2 Preface to his commentary (T
XXXVIII INTRODUCTION
triumphs and disasters of the thousand years which had elapsed since Sun Wu'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 con- sidered elsewhere.
6- $jt (}!| Ch'en Hao appears to have been a contemp- orary of Tu Mu. Ch'ao Kung-wu says that he was im- pelled 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.2 Ou-yang Hsiu, writing in the middle of the nth century, calls Ts'ao Kung, Tu Mu and Ch'en Hao the three chief commentators on Sun Tzu (5Ei ^£), and observes that Ch'en Hao is continually attacking Tu Mu's short- comings. His commentary, though not lacking in merit, must rank below those of his predecessors.
7- W ffi Chia Lin is known to have lived under the T'ang dynasty, for his commentary on Sun Tzu is men- tioned in the jfijf ^ and was afterwards republished by $£ HJ Chi Hsieh of the same dynasty together with those of Meng Shih and Tu Yu. 3 It is of somewhat scanty texture, and in point of quality, too, perhaps the least valuable of the eleven.
8- $1 Jl E£ Mei Yao-ch'en (1002-1060), commonly known by his "style" as Mei H -$£ Sheng-yu, was, like 1 u Mu, a poet of distinction. His commentary was pub- lished 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
1 **' & ft'% # ft ? A4M* $ jft*f |ft
* #l ttc £ •
INTRODUCTION XXXIX
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 at- tempting 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 en- gaged in internecine warfare; that the author is not concerned with the military conditions prevailing under the sovereigns of the three ancient dynasties, ' nor with the nine punitive measures prescribed to the Minister of War. 2 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. 3
Making some allowance for the exuberance of friendship, I am inclined to endorse this favourable judgment, and would certainly place him above Ch'en Hao in order of merit.
1 The Hsia, the Shang and the Chou. Although the last-named was nominally existent in Sun Tzii's day, it retained hardly a vestige of power, and the old mili- tary organisation had practically gone by the board. I can suggest no other ex- planation of the passage.
2 See Chou Li, XXIX. 6-10.
• see r« s*., r m, ch. 9o, f. ,„.
XL INTRODUCTION
9- 3E 1=[ 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 com- parison 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. l
10. '(of $& $$9 Ho Yen-hsi of the Sung dynasty. The personal name of this commentator is given as above by JfU jftj. Cheng Ch'iao in the T'ung Chih, written about the middle of the twelfth century, but he appears simply as 'fof J^ Ho Shih in the Yu Hai, and Ma Tuan-lin quotes Ch'ao Kung-wu as saying that his personal name is un- known. There seems to be no reason to doubt Cheng Ch'iao's statement, otherwise I should have been inclined to hazard a guess and identify him with one yfBf -^ ^ Ho Ch'u-fei, the author of a short treatise on war entitled 'Off ffjjjf, who lived in the latter part of the nth century. 2 Ho Shih's commentary, in the words of the T'ien-i-ko catalogue, ^ fff ^L j£ "contains helpful additions" here and there, but is chiefly remarkable for the copious ex- tracts taken, in adapted form, from the dynastic histories and other sources.
1 1 - §11 Bl Chang Yii. The list closes with a com- mentator of no great originality perhaps, but gifted with admirable powers of lucid exposition. His commentary is based on that of Ts'ao Kung, whose terse sentences he contrives to expand and develop in masterly fashion. Without Chang Yu, it is safe to say that much of Tslao Kung's commentary would have remained cloaked in its pristine obscurity and therefore valueless. His work is not mentioned in the Sung history, the T'ung K'ao, or
m
See |HJ Jjjl £ m, ch. 99, f.
INTRODUCTION XLI
the Yu Hai, but it finds a niche in the T'ung Chih, which also names him as the author of the ^j $$• *$$ "Lives of Famous Generals." l
It is rather remarkable that the last-named four should all have flourished within so short a space of time. Ch'ao Kung-wu accounts for it by saying: "During the early years of the Sung dynasty the Empire enjoyed a long spell of peace, and men ceased to practise the art of war. But when [Chao] Yiian-hao's rebellion came [1038-42] and the frontier generals were defeated time after time, the Court made strenuous enquiry for men skilled in war, and military topics became the vogue amongst all the high officials. Hence it is that the commentators of Sun Tzu in our dynasty belong mainly to that period." '
Besides these eleven commentators, there are several others whose work has not come down to us. The Sui Shu mentions four, namely ££ /|| Wang Ling (often quoted by Tu Yu as J -J-); ijg -^ $j$ Chang Tzu-shang; f|f ffj Chia Hsu of Ut Wei-,3 and #£ £ Shen Yu of ^ Wu. The T^ang Shu adds $fc ^ Sun Hao, and the T^ing Chih jjlf •=*• Hsiao Chi, while the T'u Shu mentions a Ming commentator, ^ }|ij 3£ Huang Jun-yii. It is possible that some of these may have been merely collectors and editors of other commentaries, like Chi T;ien-pao and Chi Hsieh, mentioned above. Certainly in the case of the latter, the entry ${* ^ xi J£ ^ m tne T^ung K'ao, without the fol- lowing note, would give one to understand that he had written an independent commentary of his own.
There are two works, described in the Ssu K'u Ch'uan
1 This appears to be still extant. See Wylie's "Notes," p. 91 (new edition). • T**g A-X he. ci,.: fc J|j ^ ^ ^ ^ # T A ^ ^ ^
3 A notable person in his day. His biography is given in the San Kuo Chih^ ch. 10.
XLII INTRODUCTION
Shu l and no doubt extremely rare, which I should much like to have seen. One is entitled $fa ^ j^ |5f , in 5 chuan. It gives selections from four new commentators, probably of the Ming dynasty, as well as from the eleven known to us. The names of the four are $$ jf; Hsieh Yuan ; ^ ||| Chang Ao; 2$5 ^ Li Tslai; and ^ yg \ ^ Huang Chih- cheng. The other work is ^ -^ f|| f|fc in 4 chuan, compiled by J|[$ ^ Cheng Tuan of the present dynasty. It is a com- pendium of information on ancient warfare, with special reference to Sun Tzu's 1 3 chapters.
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 ^ {=f Han Hsin (d. B.C. I96),2 ay| Feng I (d. A.D. 34), 3 g || Lu Meng (d. 219), 4 and -gj- ^ Yo Fei (i 103-1 141). 5 The opinion of Ts'ao Kung, "wHo~ disputes with Han Hsin the highest place in Chinese military annals, has already been recorded. 6 Still more remarkable, in one way, is the testimony of purely literary men, such as ^ ^J Su Hsiin (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:1 —
1 Ch. ioo, ff. 2, 3. 2 see p. 144. 3 Hou Han S/iu, ch. 17 ad init.
4 San Kuo Chih^ ch. 54, f. ioz/° (commentary). 6 Sung Shih, ch. 365 ad init.
0 The few Europeans who have yet had an opportunity of acquainting themselves with Sun Tzti are not behindhand in their praise. In this connection, I may per- haps 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. 1 1 on page 77 is one that the people of this country would do well to take to heart "
1 Ch. 140, f. 13^°.
INTRODUCTION XLIIT
Sun Wu's saying, that in war one cannot make certain of conquering, * is very different indeed from what other books tell us. 2 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 work, wherej:he style is terse,but themeaning fully brought out»
The ^ ^| fH 3?|, ch. 17, contains the following extract from the 5| pf] ffi ^ "Impartial Judgments in the Garden of Literature" by Jf|$ j|* 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 / Ching and the great Commentary, 4 as well as the writings of Mencius, Hsiin K'uang and Yang Chu, all fall below the level of Sun Tzu. 5
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." 6
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
1 See IV. § 3.
2 The allusion may be to Mencius VI. 2. ix. 2 :
4 The Tso Chuan.
m m % ro * in ffi w JB m
XLIV INTRODUCTION
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 col- lisions of the ancient feudal States, the grim conflicts with Huns, Turks and other invaders after the centralisation 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 cap- tains to whom China can point with pride. As in all countries, the greatest are found 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 illumined 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 do- minates the scene. And in the establishment of the Pang 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
INTRODUCTION XLV
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 succour 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 "civilisation," condemning the use of military weapons? They will surely bring our country to impotence and dishonour 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. *
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
1 Shih Chi, ch. 25, fol. i:
itt m nfr a fc & % g
£ & z
XLVI INTRODUCTION
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 haling 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 be- tween 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 institution of torture and flogging. For more serious outbreaks of lawlessness, which are hard to suppress, a greater amount of force is necessary: 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 2 . . . .
Chi-sun a,sked Jan Yu, saying: "Have you. Sir, acquired your military aptitude by study, or is it innate?" Jan Yu replied: "It has been ac- quired by study." 3 "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 of the way in
1 The first instance of ^fc ^^ given in the P'-'ei Wen Yun Fu is from Ssu-ma Ch'ien's letter to 'fjj- 4^ Jen An (see AJT vjg ? cn. 41, f. 9 r°), where M. Chavannes translates it "la cangue et la chaine." But in the present passage it seems rather to indicate some single instrument of torture.
3 Cf. SAIA Chi, ch. 47, f. ii
INTRODUCTION XLVII
which, through sheer lack of reasoning, men unhappily lose sight of fun- damental principles. l
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, 2 he sal- lied forth and chastised them. When Confucius held office under the Duke of Lu, and a meeting was convened at Chia-ku, 3 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." 5 Replying to K'ung Wen-tzu, he said: "I have not been instructed about buff-coats and weapons." 6 But if we turn to the meeting at Chia-ku, 7 we find that he used armed force against the men of Lai, 8 so that the marquis of Ch'i was overawed. Again, when the inhabitants of Pi revolted, he ordered his officers to attack them, whereupon they were defeated and fled in confusion. 9 He once uttered the words : "If I fight, I con-
0 * ?i •? li ¥ * ft # 0
tr * * * m £ ift Sf-
2 See Shti Ching^ preface § 55.
3 See Tso Chuan, Jj£ ^ X. 2 ; Shih Chi, ch. 47, f. 4 r°
4 J3 * # JA BE
» Lun KB, XV. i.
6 Tso Chuan^ j ^. , XI. 7. 7 See supra.
8 Tso Chuan, X. 2. 9 Ibid. XII. 5; CA*Vz K«i ch-
XLVIII INTRODUCTION
quer." * And Jan Yu also said : "The Sage exercises both civil and mil- itary functions."2 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. 3
Sun Hsing-yen, the editor of Sun Tzu, writes in similar strain : —
Confucius said: "I am unversed in military matters." * 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, 5 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 Tzti-hsu, there is no need to learn it oneself. Hence the remark added by Confucius : "If I fight, I conquer." 6
The men of the present day, however, wilfully 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, 7 as a proof that all military theory is useless. Again, seeing
1 have failed to trace this utterance. See note 2 on p. xliii.
2 See supra.
- IN « & m m A ffi m & ti ft A z
ft M 6 ff ± £ ft £ HB ftA ft 1? B.3U M &
* See supra.
5 Vh., Epf jjjg , the other four being "=jy , |X| , !jj| and J|£ "worship, mourning, entertainment of guests and festive rites." See Shu Ching, II. I. iii. 8, and Chou Li, IX. fol. 49.
« Preface to Sun Tzu: ^^.g^^^^^^^^^
E m & m s. m z - ^ M
See p. 166.
INTRODUCTION XLIX
that books on war have to do with such things as opportunism in design- ing 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. l Weapons are baneful 2 and fighting perilous: and unless a general is in constant practice, he ought not to hazard other men's lives in battle. 3 Hence it is essential that Sun Tzu's 13 chapters should be studied. *
Hsiang Liang used to instruct his nephew Chi 5 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 realise that the tricks and artifices of war are beyond verbal computation. Duke Hsiang of Sung G and King Yen of Hsu 7 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, 8 and also of his having left the Sung State in disguise. 9 Can we then recklessly arraign Sun Tzu for disregarding truth and honesty?10
1 This is a rather obscure allusion to Tso Chuan, ^tQ fl
>^c -*-^
Tzu-ch^an says: ^ ^ E^ ^ ^ |jg ^ ^ JJL || "If you have a piece of beautiful brocade, you will not employ a mere learner to make it up." * Cf. Too Te Ching, ch. 31: & % ^ f£ £ $$ .
3 Sun Hsing-yen might have quoted Confucius again. See Lun Yu, XIII. 29, 30.
A
5 Better known as Hsiang ^j Yii [B.C. 233-202].
6 The third among the ^ 4t\ (or tfH) enumerated on p. 141. For the in-
• • * I r-l -^Jyv
cident referred to, see Tso Chuan, 4&L /fe , XXII. 4.
7 See supra, p. xvi, note 4. 8 Shih Chi, ch. 47, f. 7 r°.
9 Ibid., ch. 38, f. 8z>°.
10 ig ^ ^5, m ft fch 43
L INTRODUCTION
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
The following are the oldest Chinese treatises on war, after Sun Tzu. The notes on each have been drawn principally from the 0 jj £ ^ fgj ^ g ^ Stf #« ch'uan shu chien ming mu lu, ch. 9, fol. 22 sqq.
1 . -^ -^ Wu Tzu, in i chuan or 6 ^ chapters. By ^ ^g Wu Ch'i (df. B.C. 381). A genuine work. See Shih Chi, ch. 65.
2. Hj ,lf ^ Ssu-ma Fa, in i chuan or 5 chapters. Wrongly attributed to fjf) J| fj| |£ 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 con- stantly to be met with in its pages. * See Shih Chi, ch. 64.
The Ssu K^u Ch'uan Shu (ch. 99, f. i) remarks that the oldest three treatises on war, Sun Tzu, Wu Tzu and the Ssu-ma Fa, are, generally speaking, only concerned with things strictly military - - the art of producing, col- lecting, training and drilling troops, and the correct theory with regard to measures of expediency, laying plans, trans- port of goods and the handling of soldiers 2 - - 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. At- tributed to g H Lii Wang (or Lii ^ Shang, also
known as ^ /^ T'ai Kung) of the 1 2th century B.C. 3 But
3 See p. 174. 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.
INTRODUCTION LI
its style does not belong to the era of the Three Dynasties. 1 1^ M W Lu Timing (550-625 A.D.) mentions the work,
and enumerates the headings of the six sections, ^, jj£, J5% ' ^K) » HI anc* ^t ' so t^iat t^ie forgery cannot have been
later than the Sui dynasty.
4- It IS "7" Wei Liao Tzu» in 5 chuan. Attributed to Wei Liao (4th cent. B.C.), who studied under the famous JJjL & ^r Kuei-ku Tzu. The g| ^, under ^ ^, men- tions a book of Wei Liao 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. 3 It has been furnished with a commentary by the well- known Sung philosopher ij|f jjfc Chang Tsai.
5- H 0& San Liieh, in 3 chuan. Attributed to J| ^ ^ Huang-shih Kung, a legendary personage who is said to have bestowed it on Chang Liang (d. B.C. 187) in an interview on a bridge. 8 But here again, the style is not that of works dating from the Ch'in or Han period. The Han Emperor Kuang Wu [A.D. 25—57] 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. 4
3 See Han Shu, Jg j^ ^ , ch. 40. The work is there called^ ^ .& ££ .
Hence it has been confused with the Liu T~ao. The T~u Shu attributes both the Liu T-ao and the San Liieh to Tlai Kung.
* && 7'tt#it M *ff'£ ft ••$.! 2
4k -^j?> l/j[ ImF •%&. ~jfc H}| pf ?^ . Another work said to have been written by Huang-shih Kung, and also included in the military section of the Imperial Catalogue, is the -|pr ips Su Shu in i chuan. A short ethical treatise of Taoist
Lil INTRODUCTION
6. ^ f§ Written in the form of a dialogue between T'ai Tsung and his great general ^ jf| 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. l
7. ^ ip| & $; Li Ching Ping Fa (not to be confounded with the foregoing) is a short treatise in 8 chapters, preserved in the Tung Tien, but not published separately. This fact explains its omission from the Ssu K'u Ch'uan Shu.
8- S ^ $S Wu Ch 3 m i ^-««». Attributed to the legendary minister Jjj^ Jg Feng Hou, with exegetical notes by $$ $fc ^ Kung-sun Hung of the Han dynasty (d. B.C. 121), and said to have been eulogised by the celebrated general Jf pj| Ma Lung (d. A.D. 300). Yet the earliest mention of it is in the ^ ^. Although a forgery, the work is well put together. 3
Considering the high popular estimation in which ^ ^ ^ Chu-ko Liang has always been held, it is not sur- prising to find more than one work on war ascribed to his pen. Such are (i) the -f- ^ ^ Shih Liu Ts'e ( i chuan\ preserved in the ^
(2) ?ff $L Chiang Yuan (i ^.)- and (3) Aj) § Hsin Shu
(i ch.\ which steals wholesale from Sun Tzu. None of these has the slightest claim to be considered genuine.
savour, having no reference whatever to war, it is pronounced a forgery from the hand of ^^ |^ _ml Chang Shang-ying (d. 1121), who edited it with commentary.
Correct Wylie's "Notes," new edition, p. 90, and Courant's "Catalogue des Livres Chinois," no. 5056.
We are told in the ^ ^ J? that the above six works, together with Sun Tzii, were those prescribed for military training in the j^ J|i. period (1078-85). See Yu Hai, ch. 140, f. 4 r°. 2 Also written g ^ j and | J Wu Chi Ching.
INTRODUCTION LIII
Most of the large Chinese encyclopaedias contain ex- tensive sections devoted to the literature of war. The following" references may be found useful : —
Tung Tien (circa 800 A.D.), ch. 148-162.
T 3$C fit M ^ W^n Hsien T'ung K'ao (13* cent.), ch. 221. 35 '/S Yii Hai (13th cent.), ch. 140, 141. H yf HII H" San Ts'ai T'u Hui (16* cent.), \ ^ ch. 7, 8. If IS $3 ^ Kuang Po Wu Chih (1607), ch. 31, 32. }f ^|||J;ChHen Ch'io Lei Shu (1632), ch. 75. ?K3 SS iS ® Yiian Chien Lei Han (1710), ch. 206-229. "ifr -4* H S ^1 J?!c Ku Chin T