been the production of some private scholar living towards the end of

the “Spring and Autumn” or the beginning of the “.Warring States ’ period..1 The story that his precepts were actually applied by the Wu State, 1s merely the outcome of big talk on the part of h1s followers. 2 . From the flourishing period of the Chou dynasty 3 down to the t1me of the “Spring and Autumn,” all military commanders were statesmen as well, and the class of professional generals, for conducting external campalgns, did not then exist. It was not until the period of the “Six States’”I that this custom changed. Now although Wu was an uncivilised State, is it conceivable that Tso should have left unrecorded the fact that Sun Wu was a great general and yet held no civil ofiice? What we are told, therefore, about Jang—chu5 and Sun Wu, is not authentic matter, but the reckless fabrication of theorising pundits. The story of Ho Lu’s ex— periment on the women, in particular, is utterly preposterous and incredible.8

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 d0ubt the impression left on the reader’s mind is that he at least shared in these exploits; but the actual subject of the verbs m, A, El: and is certainly % as is shown by the next words:

j] 1%.7 The fact may or may not be

significant; but it is nowhere explicitly stated in the S/zz'k

Chi either that Sun Tzu was general on the occasion of