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. ' 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 Tzi’i’s 13 chapters should be studied. 4' 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 Sung6 and King Yen of Hsi'17 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 Tzii for disregarding truth and honesty?