the art of war wikipedia The Art of War is an ancient Chinese military treatise attributed to Sun Tzu, a high-ranking

military general, strategist and tactician. The text is composed of 1 chapters, each of which is de!oted to one aspect of warfare. "t is commonly known to be the definiti!e work on military strategy and tactics of its time. "t has been the most famous and influential of China#s Se!en $ilitary Classics, and %for the last two thousand years it remained the most important military treatise in &sia, where e!en the common people knew it by name.%'1( "t has had an influence on )astern and *estern military thinking, business tactics, legal strategy and beyond. The book was first translated into the +rench language in 1,,- by +rench .esuit .ean .oseph $arie &miot and a partial translation into )nglish was attempted by /ritish officer )!erard +erguson Calthrop in 1012. The first annotated )nglish language translation was completed and published by 3ionel 4iles in 1011.'-( 3eaders as di!erse as $ao 5edong, 4eneral 6o 7guyen 4iap, 4eneral 8ouglas $ac&rthur and leaders of "mperial .apan ha!e drawn inspiration from the work.

Contents
1 Themes - The 1 chapters Chapter summary 9 Timeline 9.1 Traditionalist !iewpoint 9.- 3ater criticism 9. $odern archaeological findings 9.9 &lternati!e !iewpoints of origin 2 :istorical annotations ; <uotations ;.1 Chinese ;.- )nglish , $ilitary and intelligence applications = &pplication outside the military 0 Sources and translations 11 See also 11 >eferences 1- )xternal links

Themes
Sun Tzu considered war as a necessary e!il that must be a!oided whene!er possible. The war should be fought swiftly to a!oid economic losses? %7o long war e!er profited any country? 111 !ictories in 111 battles is simply ridiculous. &nyone who excels in defeating his enemies triumphs before his enemy#s threats become real%. &ccording to the book, one must a!oid massacres and atrocities because this can pro!oke resistance and possibly allow an enemy to turn the war in his fa!or.' ( +or the !ictor, %the best policy is to capture the state intact@ it should be destroyed only if no other options are a!ailable%.' ( Sun Tzu emphasized the importance of positioning in military strategy. The decision to position an army must be based on both obAecti!e conditions in the physical en!ironment and the subAecti!e beliefs of other, competiti!e actors in that en!ironment. :e thought that strategy was not planning in the sense of working through an established list, but rather that it reBuires Buick and appropriate responses to changing conditions. Clanning works in a controlled en!ironment@ but in a changing en!ironment, competing plans collide, creating unexpected situations.

The 13 chapters
The Art of War is di!ided into 1 chapters Dor pinE@ the collection is referred to as being one zhun D%whole% or alternati!ely %chronicle%E. The Art of War chapter names in translations by 4iles, *ing, Sawyer, and Chow-:ou Lionel Giles Ralph D. Sa !er Chapter R.L. Wing (1988) Cho #$o% Wee (&003) (1910) (199") 8etail &ssessment and Clanning " 3aying Clans The Calculations "nitial )stimations DChinese? E *aging *ar "" *aging *ar The Challenge *aging *ar DChinese? E Strategic &ttack &ttack by """ The Clan of &ttack Clanning Fffensi!es DChinese? E Stratagem 8isposition of the &rmy Tactical "6 Cositioning $ilitary 8isposition DChinese? E 8ispositions +orces Strategic $ilitary 6 )nergy 8irecting DChinese? E Cower *eaknesses and Strengths *eak Coints and "llusion and 6acuity and 6" DChinese? E Strong >eality Substance $ilitary $aneu!ers )ngaging The 6"" $aneu!ering $ilitary Combat DChinese? E +orce 6ariations and &daptability The 7ine 6""" 6ariation of Tactics 7ine Changes DChinese? E 6ariations $o!ement and 8e!elopment The &rmy on the $aneu!ering the of Troops "G $o!ing The +orce $arch &rmy DChinese? E

G G" G"" G"""

Situational Cositioning The 7ine The 7ine Situations Situations Terrain The &ttack by +ire The +iery &ttack The Hse of Spies The Hse of "ntelligence

Configurations of Terrain 7ine Terrains "ncendiary &ttacks )mploying Spies

Terrain DChinese? E The 7ine /attlegrounds DChinese? E &ttacking with +ire DChinese? E "ntelligence and )spionage DChinese? E

Chapter s%mmar!

The beginning of The Art of War in a classical bamboo book from the reign of the <ianlong )mperor 1. La!ing 'lans(The Calc%lations explores the fi!e fundamental factors Dthe *ay, seasons, terrain, leadership and managementE and se!en elements that determine the outcomes of military engagements. /y thinking, assessing and comparing these points, a commander can calculate his chances of !ictory. :abitual de!iation from these calculations will ensure failure !ia improper action. The text stresses that war is a !ery gra!e matter for the state and must not be commenced without due consideration. -. Waging War(The Challenge explains how to understand the economy of warfare and how success reBuires winning decisi!e engagements Buickly. This section ad!ises that successful military campaigns reBuire limiting the cost of competition and conflict. . )ttac* +! Stratagem(The 'lan o, )ttac* defines the source of strength as unity, not size, and discusses the fi!e factors that are needed to succeed in any war. "n order of importance, these critical factors are? &ttack, Strategy, &lliances, &rmy and Cities. 9. Tactical Dispositions('ositioning explains the importance of defending existing positions until a commander is capable of ad!ancing from those positions in safety. "t teaches commanders the importance of recognizing strategic opportunities, and teaches not to create opportunities for the enemy. 2. -nerg!(Directing explains the use of creati!ity and timing in building an army#s momentum.

;. Wea* 'oints . Strong(/ll%sion an0 Realit! explains how an army#s opportunities come from the openings in the en!ironment caused by the relati!e weakness of the enemy and how to respond to changes in the fluid battlefield o!er a gi!en area. ,. 1ane%2ering(-ngaging The 3orce explains the dangers of direct conflict and how to win those confrontations when they are forced upon the commander. =. 4ariation in Tactics(The 5ine 4ariations focuses on the need for flexibility in an army#s responses. "t explains how to respond to shifting circumstances successfully. 0. The )rm! on the 1arch(1o2ing The 3orce describes the different situations in which an army finds itself as it mo!es through new enemy territories, and how to respond to these situations. $uch of this section focuses on e!aluating the intentions of others. 11.Terrain(Sit%ational 'ositioning looks at the three general areas of resistance Ddistance, dangers and barriersE and the six types of ground positions that arise from them. )ach of these six field positions offer certain ad!antages and disad!antages. 11.The 5ine Sit%ations(5ine Terrains describes the nine common situations Dor stagesE in a campaign, from scattering to deadly, and the specific focus that a commander will need in order to successfully na!igate them. 1-.The )ttac* +! 3ire(3ier! )ttac* explains the general use of weapons and the specific use of the en!ironment as a weapon. This section examines the fi!e targets for attack, the fi!e types of en!ironmental attack and the appropriate responses to such attacks. 1 .The 6se o, Spies(The 6se o, /ntelligence focuses on the importance of de!eloping good information sources, and specifies the fi!e types of intelligence sources and how to best manage each of them.'citation needed(

Timeline
Tra0itionalist 2ie point
Traditionalist scholars attribute the writings of Sun Tzu to the historical Sun *u, who is recorded in both the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji) and the Spring and Autumn Annals as ha!ing been acti!e in *u around the end of the sixth century /C, beginning in 21- /C. The traditional interpretation concludes that the text should therefore date from this period, and should directly reflect the tactics and strategies used and created by Sun *u. The traditionalist approach assumes that only !ery minor re!isions may ha!e occurred shortly after Sun *u#s death, in the early fifth century /C, as the body of his writings may ha!e needed to be compiled in order to form the complete, modern text. '9( The textual support for the traditionalist !iew is that se!eral of the oldest of the Se!en $ilitary Classics share a focus on specific literary concepts Dsuch as terrain classificationsE which traditionalist scholars assume were created by Sun Tzu. The Art of War also shares se!eral entire phrases in common with the other ilitar! "lassics, implying that other texts borrowed from the Art of War, andIor that The Art of War borrowed from other texts. &ccording to traditionalist scholars, the fact that The Art of War was the most widely reproduced and circulated military text of the *arring States period indicates that any

textual borrowing between military texts must ha!e been exclusi!ely from The Art of War to other texts and not !ice !ersa.'2( The classical texts which most similarly reflect Sun Tzu#s terms and phraseology are the Wei #iaozi and Sun $in%s Art of War.';(

Later criticism
Skeptics to the traditionalist !iew within China ha!e abounded since at least the time of the Song dynasty. Some, following 8u $u, accused The Art of War%s first commentator, Cao Cao, of butchering the text.',( The criticisms of Cao Cao were based on a $oo& of Han bibliographical notation of a work composed of eighty-two sections that was attributed to Sun Tzu.'=('0( The description of a work by Sun Tzu composed of eighty-two sections contrasts with the description of the Art of War from the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji), in which the Art of War is described as ha!ing thirteen sections Dthe current numberE. Fthers doubted Sun Tzu#s historical existence and claimed that the work must be a later forgery. $uch of The Art of War%s historical condemnation within China has been due to its realistic approach to warcraft? it ad!ocates utilizing spies and deception. The ad!ocacy of dishonest methods contradicted percei!ed Confucian !alues, making it a target of Confucian literati throughout later Chinese history. &ccording to later Confucian scholars, Sun Tzu#s historical existence was accordingly a late fabrication, unworthy of consideration except by the morally reprehensible.'11( "f the modern text of The Art of War reflects contrasting interpretations of the !alue in chi!alry in warfare, the existence of these differing interpretations within the text supports the theory that the core of The Art of War was created by a figure Dfor example? the historical Sun TzuE who existed at a time when chi!alry was more highly !alued Di.e., the Spring and &utumn periodE, and that the text was amended by his followers to reflect the realities of warfare in a subseBuent, distinctly un-chi!alric period Di.e., the *arring States periodE.'11(

1o0ern archaeological ,in0ings

Fn &pril 11, 10,-, the JinBueshan :an Tombs were accidentally unearthed by construction workers in Shandong.'11('1-( Scholars unco!ered a nearly complete *estern :an 8ynasty D-1; /C - --1 &8E copy of The Art of War, known as the JinBueshan :an Slips, which is almost completely identical to modern editions, lends support that The Art of War had achie!ed its current form by at least the early :an dynasty, and findings of less-complete copies dated earlier support the !iew that it existed in roughly its current form by at least the time of the mid-late *arring States. /ecause the archaeological e!idence pro!es that The Art of War existed in its present form by the early :an dynasty, the :an dynasty record of a work of eighty-two sections attributed to Sun Tzu is assumed by modern historians to be either a mistake, or a lost work combining the existing The Art of War with biographical and dialectical material. Some modern scholars suggest that The Art of War must ha!e existed in thirteen sections before Sun Tzu met the King of *u, since the king mentions the number thirteen in the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji) description of their meeting.'11('1 (

)lternati2e 2ie points o, origin

Some modern historians''hich(( challenge the traditionalist interpretation of the text#s history. )!en if

the possibility of later re!isions is disregarded, the traditionalist interpretation that Sun Tzu created The Art of War himself De) nihiloE, and that all other military scholars must ha!e copied and borrowed from him, disregards the likelihood of any pre!ious formal or literary tradition of tactical studies, despite the historical existence of o!er -,111 years of Chinese warfare and tactical de!elopment before 211 /C. /ecause it is unlikely that Sun Tzu created China#s entire body of tactical studies, %basic concepts and common passages seem to argue in fa!or of a comprehensi!e military tradition and e!ol!ing expertise, rather than creation e) nihilo.%'2( Fne modern alternati!e to the traditionalist theory states that The Art of War achie!ed its current form by the mid-to-late *arring States Dthe fourth-to-third century /CE, centuries after the historical Sun Tzu#s death. This interpretation relies on disparities between The Art of War%s tactics and the historical conditions of warfare in the late Spring and &utumn period Dthe late sixth century /CE. )xamples of warfare described in The Art of War which did not occur until the *arring States period include? the mobilization of one thousand chariots and 111,111 soldiers for a single battle protracted sieges Dcities were small, weakly fortified, economically and strategically unimportant centers in the Spring and &utumn periodE the existence of military officers as a distinct subclass of nobility deference of rulers# right to command armies to these officers the ad!anced and detailed use of spies and unorthodox tactics Dne!er emphasized at all in the Spring and &utumn periodE the extensi!e emphasis on infantry speed and mobility, rather than chariot warfare /ecause the conditions and tactics ad!ocated in The Art of War are historically anachronistic to the historical Sun Tzu#s time, it is possible that The Art of War was created in the mid-to-late *arring States period.'19( & !iew that mediates between the traditionalist interpretation that the historical Sun Tzu was the only creator of The Art of War in the Spring and &utumn Ceriod and the opposite !iew, that The Art of War was created in the mid-late *arring States period centuries after Sun Tzu#s death, suggests that the core of the text was created by Sun Tzu and underwent a period of re!ision before achie!ing roughly its current form within a century of Sun Tzu#s death Din the last half of the fifth-century /CE. "t seems likely that the historical figure Dof Sun TzuE existed, and that he not only ser!ed as a strategist and possibly a general, but also composed the core of the book that bears his name. Thereafter, the essential teachings were probably transmitted within the family or a close-knit school of disciples, being impro!ed and re!ised with the passing decades while gradually gaining wider dissemination.'12( The !iew that The Art of War achie!ed roughly its current form by the late fifth-century /C is supported by the reco!ery of the oldest existing fragments of The Art of War and by the analysis of the prose of The Art of War, which is similar to other texts dated more definiti!ely to the late fifth-century /C Di.e. oziE, but dissimilar either to earlier Di.e. The AnalectsE or later Di.e. *unziE literature from roughly the same period.';( This theory accounts both for the historical record attributing The Art of

War to Sun Tzu and for the description of tactics anachronistic to Sun Tzu#s time within The Art of War. 7ot all combat elements in The Art of War are anachronisms. Fne maAor missing element from The Art of War is the army#s use of ca!alry which was generally employed by 1, /C in China,'1;( during the *arring States period but a century after the Spring and &utumn period, thereby !alidating the traditionalist theory.

$istorical annotations

& portion of The Art of War in Tangut script /efore the bamboo scroll !ersion was disco!ered by archaeologists in &pril 10,-, a commonly cited !ersion of The Art of War was the Annotation of Sun Tzu%s Strategies by Cao Cao, the founder of the Kingdom of *ei.'-( "n the preface, he wrote that pre!ious annotations were not focused on the essential ideas. &fter the mo!able type printer was in!ented, The Art of War Dwith Cao Cao#s annotationsE was published in a military textbook along with six other strategy books, collecti!ely known as the Se!en $ilitary Classics D I E.'1,( &s reBuired reading in military textbooks since the Song 8ynasty, more than 1 differently annotated !ersions of these books exist today. The $oo& of Sui documented se!en books named after Sun Tzu. &n annotation by 8u $u also includes Cao Cao#s annotation. 3i .ing#s The Art of War is said to be a re!ision of $aster Sun#s strategies. &nnotations by Cao Cao, 8u $u and 3i <uan were translated into the Tangut language before year 1191. Fther annotations cited in official history books include Shen Jou#s D1,;--19E Sun Tzu%s ilitar! Strateg!, .ia Gu#s "op! of Sun Tzu%s ilitar! Strateg!, and Cao Cao and *ang 3ing#s Sun Tzu%s ilitar! Strateg!.

7%otations
Chinese
6erses from the book occur in modern daily Chinese idioms and phrases, such as the last !erse of Chapter ?
!"#$%# &!'(')%# #!*+$,

So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred

battles without a single loss. "f you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose. "f you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself. This has been more tersely interpreted and condensed into the Chinese modern pro!erb?
! "#$, D5hL A zhL b, bi zhMn bN dMi.E

"f you know both yourself and your enemy, you can win numerous Dliterally, %a hundred%E battles without Aeopardy.

-nglish
Common examples can also be found in )nglish use, such as !erse 1= in Chapter 1?
-./0,1&23#1&23#4&2355&234

&ll warfare is based on deception. :ence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable@ when using our forces, we must appear inacti!e@ when we are near, we must make the enemy belie!e we are far away@ when far away, we must make him belie!e we are near. This has been abbre!iated to its most basic form and condensed into the )nglish modern pro!erb? &ll warfare is based on deception.

1ilitar! an0 intelligence applications

"n many )ast &sian countries, The Art of War was part of the syllabus for potential candidates of military ser!ice examinations. 6arious translations are a!ailable. 8uring the Sengoku era in .apan, a daimyo named Takeda Shingen D12-1O12, E is said to ha!e become almost in!incible in all battles without relying on guns, because he studied The Art of War.'1=( The book e!en ga!e him the inspiration for his famous battle standard %+Prinkazan% D*ind, +orest, +ire and $ountainE, meaning fast as the wind, silent as a forest, ferocious as fire and immo!able as a mountain. The translator Samuel /. 4riffith offers a chapter on %Sun Tzu and $ao Tse-Tung% where The Art of War is cited as influencing $ao#s +n Guerrilla Warfare, +n the ,rotracted War and Strategic ,ro-lems of "hina%s Re.olutionar! War, and includes $ao#s Buote? %*e must not belittle the saying in the book of Sun *u Tzu, the great military expert of ancient China, #Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a thousand battles without disaster.#%'1=( 8uring the 6ietnam *ar, some 6ietcong