Part 125

See Wên Hsien T‘ung K‘ao, ch. 221, f. 9 r^o: 世之言兵者祖孫武然 孫武事吳闔閭而不見於左傳不知果何時人也.

See Hsü Lu, f. 14 r^o: 孫吳或是古書.

按孫子生於敬王之代故周秦兩漢諸書皆多襲用其文. Here is a list of the passages in Sun Tzŭ from which either the substance or the actual words have been appropriated by early authors: VII. 9; IX. 17; I. 24 (戰國策). IX. 23; IX. 1, 3, 7; V. 1; III. 18; XI. 58; VII. 31; VII. 24; VII. 26; IX. 15; IX. 4 (bis) (吳子). III. 8; IV. 7 (尉繚子). VII. 19; V. 14; III. 2 (鶡冠子). III. 8; XI. 2; I. 19; XI. 58; X. 10 & VI. 1 (史記. Two of the above are given as quotations). V. 13; IV. 2 (呂氏春秋). IX. 11, 12; XI. 30; I. 13; VII. 19 & IV. 7; VII. 32; VII. 25; IV. 20 & V. 23; IX. 43; V. 15; VII. 26; V. 4 & XI. 39; VIII. 11; VI. 4 (淮南子). V. 4 (太元經). II. 20; X. 14 (潛夫論).

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.

The instances quoted are:—III. 14, 15: 同 is said to be equivalent to 昌; II. 15: 𦮼 = 萁; VII. 28: 歸 = 息; XI. 60: 詳 = 佯; XI. 24: the use of 鬥 instead of 鬭 (the later form); XI. 64: 誅 = 治; IX. 3: 絶 = 越; III. 11: 周 and 隙 antithetically opposed in the sense of 無缺 and 有缺; XI. 56: 犯 = 動; XI. 31: 方 = 縛.

See Mencius III. 1. iii. 13–20.

山林處士 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.

When Wu first appears in the Ch‘un Ch‘iu in 584, it is already at variance with its powerful neighbour. The Ch‘un Ch‘iu first mentions Yüeh in 537, the Tso Chuan in 601.

This is explicitly stated in the Tso Chuan, 昭公 XXXII, 2: 夏吳伐越始用師於越也.

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.

See his preface to Sun Tzŭ:—入郢威齊晉之功歸之子胥故春秋傳不載其名葢功成不 受官.

With Wu Yüan 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.

See Tso Chuan, 定公, 4th year (506), § 14: 自昭王卽位無歲不有吳師 “From the date of King Chao’s accession there was no year in which Ch‘u was not attacked by Wu.”

See supra, p. xx.

秦漢已來用兵皆用其法而或祕其書不肯注以傳世魏武始爲之注.

See 宋藝文志.

Alluded to on p. xvii, note 3.

Loc. cit.: 葢宋人又從大興朱氏處見明人刻本餘則世無傳者.

A good biographical notice, with a list of his works, will be found in the 國朝詩人徵略, ch. 48, fol. 18 sqq.

Preface ad fin.: 吾家出樂安眞孫子之後媿余徒讀祖書考証文字不通方略亦享承 平之福者久也 “My family comes from Lo-an, and we are really descended from Sun Tzŭ. 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!”

Hua-yin is about 14 miles from 潼關 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 華山 or Western Sacred Mountain. It is mentioned in the 大明一統志 [A.D. 1461], ch. 32, f. 22, as the 西嶽廟:—在 華陰縣東五里廟有唐𤣥宗所製華山碑 “Situated five li east of the district city of Hua-yin. The temple contains the Hua-shan tablet inscribed by the T‘ang Emperor Hsüan Tsung [713–755].”

曩予游𨵿中讀華陰嶽廟道藏見有此書後有鄭友賢遺說一卷.

Cf. Sun Hsing-yen’s remark à propos of his mistakes in the names and order of the commentators: 吉天保之不深究此書可知.

國家令甲以孫子校士所傳本或多錯謬當用古本是正其文適吳念湖太守畢恬溪孝廉皆爲此 學所得或過于予遂刋一編以課武士.

See my “Catalogue of Chinese Books” (Luzac & Co., 1908), no. 40.

This is a discussion of 29 difficult passages in Sun Tzŭ, namely: I. 2; 26; 16; II. 9 & 10; III. 3; III & VII; III. 17; IV. 4; 6; V. 3; 10 & 11; 14; the headings of the 13 chapters, with special reference to chap. VII; VII. 5; 15 & 16; 27; 33, &c.; VIII. 1–6; IX. 11; X. 1–20; XI. 23; 31; 19; 43; VII. 12–14 & XI. 52; XI. 56; XIII. 15 & 16; 26; XIII in general.

Preface to Mei Yao-ch‘ên’s edition: 孫子注者尤多武之書本於兵兵之術非 一而以不窮爲奇宜其說者之多也.

See 魏書, ch. 1.