SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR

SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR ^ | 1910 | Translated by LIONEL GILES

[Alpha One]

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.

This publication is based on an Etext version provided by the Project Gutenberg. Dr. Giles's commentaries are inluded for the benefit of those who are not familiar with the Ancient Chinese History (500 BC).

Etext Annotations	Preface to the Project Gutenburg Etext Introduction The Text of Sun Tzu Appreciations of Sun Tzu Bibliography Footnotes
Art of War	Chapter I. Laying Plans Chapter II. Waging War Chapter III. ATTACK BY STRATAGEM Chapter IV. TACTICAL DISPOSITIONS Chapter V. ENERGY Chapter VI. WEAK POINTS AND STRONG Chapter VII. MANEUVERING Chapter VIII. VARIATION IN TACTICS Chapter IX. THE ARMY ON THE MARCH Chapter X. TERRAIN Chapter XI. THE NINE SITUATIONS Chapter XII. THE ATTACK BY FIRE Chapter XIII. THE USE OF SPIES

Brought to you by Korea WebWeekly

[Poohbah]

And if memory serves...the Army of Northern Virginia was trying to get SHOES...

[LibKill]

And if memory serves...the Army of Northern Virginia was trying to get SHOES...

Yep. They were a little short on Leather Personnel Carriers. :)

If you ever get a chance, go to Gettysburg. It's awesome.

[Poohbah]

I remember a commercial that had Dad announcing a family vacation consisting of driving to Civil War battle sites, and the kids rebelling.

In my family, we joked that it would go "OK, Rick, you bring your West Point Atlas of the Civil War, George, you bring your Catton books, and I'll bring my Shelby Foote collection. YEE-HAW!"

[rboatman]

Bttt

[FreedomFarmer]

I collect various editions and translations of The Art of War. IMHO, Samuel B. Griffith's is the most consise, James Clavel's the most readable. Giles' redux of 1910 has a number of problems.
The worst translation is probably Fr. Amiot's of 1772 in Paris, which Napoleon likely studied.

The worst plagiarism of The Art of War is Clausewitz's insufferable On War; the best is Mao Tse-tung's Little Red Book.

[Travis McGee]

How did Lancaster factor in Viking morale on plundering and pilaging raids?

[Poohbah]

Get yer mind out of the gutter, Travis :o)

He didn't. He assumed, to keep the math manageable, that one combatant equals one combatant.

[Travis McGee]

I just found the Viking Babe over on Full-Auto.com and had to share!

[river rat]

Naaah, you were drunk that night..
It was in Pattaya (sp) - and the girl had a twin sister...
You thought you were seeing double, and passed out....

They "revived" you...
Now, do you remember??

Semper Fi

[Squantos]

LOL !......Sawahdi Pooh ying, Sway Mock Mock ......red note ?? 5 Bhat , Sandalwood soap.... iced coffee.... twofer's ??!! or something to that effect.......:o)

Stay Safe RR !

[Squantos]

LMBO......Great set of chains and handlebars included .....Oh My !!

Stay Safe !

[Clive]

Extract from Chapter III (Paras 1 to 7) (Excluding the commentary):

1. Sun Tzu said: In the operations of war, where there are in the field a thousand swift chariots, as many heavy chariots, and a hundred thousand mail-clad soldiers, with provisions enough to carry them a thousand LI, the expenditure at home and at the front, including entertainment of guests, small items such as glue and paint, and sums spent on chariots and armor, will reach the total of a thousand ounces of silver per day. Such is the cost of raising an army of 100 ,000 men.

2. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.

3. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.

4. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.

5. Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.

6. There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.

7 It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of carrying it on.

Bush has no doubt read the Sun Tzu. Certainly his military advisers have.

[river rat]

5 Bhat!
Oh my, Squantos -- you're not moving in the right circles.....
That cheap stuff kills!!!!!

Semper Fi

[Clive]

Fine, so far as it goes.

But agressiveness and technical superiority also play a part.

The Romans relied on technical superiority (ballistae, better order of battle , better discipline, etc.) which prevailed everywhere except in the barbarian north where superior aggressiveness came into play.

So if technical superiority was not offset by aggressiveness, the legions won when they had equal or superior numbers and often when they had inferior numbers.

As citizens, the legions did not have the aggressiveness of the German tribesmen, so when they came to battle against equal numbers, the odds of winning were even because the German aggressiveness counterbalanced the Roman technology and discipline.

Caesar won in Gaul by always ensuring that the superior numbers of tribal warriors were never concentrated against him, while his legions always kept their cohesion and therefore always kept superiority in numbers in the places where he chose to fight. His facility with logistics, movements and communications allowed him to choose the battle ground.

When the Germans were able to bring equal numbers to bear, the results were often quite different.

[Clive]

-

[Ff--150]

What is interesting about the Art of War is that these strategies have been used today. I need to reread this to get up to speed. Very good reading.

[The Pheonix]

LOL

The British had lots of machine-guns and modern weapons when they fought a famous battle against the half-naked primitive Zulus Warriors, armed only with spears and wooden clubs in South Africa, in the early 1900s.

Guess what, the Brits were massacred, wiped out to the last man. Why ????

Cos the arrogant Brit General ignored the most basic advice of Sun Tzu, who said "Never ever divide your army into two and never fight on two fronts at the same time". YUP, that's what the Brits General did, divide his army into two.

Similarly, Hilter did NOT follow Sun Tzu and tried to fight on TWO FRONTS at one time, the Western Front and Eastern Front. And the Allied opened up yet a THIRD FRONT, the Southern front to teach the arrogant NAZIs a lesson or two

[The Pheonix]

And of course. our very own General Custer, who split his troops into 2 groups and learnt the hard way

at Little Big Horn

May NOT have happened if he had read Sun Tzu

[justaguy]

Thanks, bump

[Cacique]

ping