From　the　flourishing　period　of　the　Chou　dynasty　＇26＇
  down　to　the　time　of　the　〃Spring　and　Autumn；〃　all　military
  commanders　were　statesmen　as　well；　and　the　class　of
  professional　generals；　for　conducting　external　campaigns；　did
  not　then　exist。　　It　was　not　until　the　period　of　the　〃Six
  States〃　＇27＇　that　this　custom　changed。　　Now　although　Wu　was
  an　uncivilized　State；　it　is　conceivable　that　Tso　should　have
  left　unrecorded　the　fact　that　Sun　Wu　was　a　great　general　and
  yet　held　no　civil　office？　　What　we　are　told；　therefore；　about
  Jang…chu　＇28＇　and　Sun　Wu；　is　not　authentic　matter；　　but　the
  reckless　fabrication　of　theorizing　pundits。　　The　story　of　Ho
  Lu's　experiment　on　the　women；　in　particular；　is　utterly
  preposterous　and　incredible。
  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　doubt　the　impression　left　on　the　reader's　mind　is　that　he　at
  least　shared　in　these　exploits。　　The　fact　may　or　may　not　be
  significant；　but　it　is　nowhere　explicitly　stated　in　the　SHIH　CHI
  either　that　Sun　Tzu　was　general　on　the　occasion　of　the　taking　of
  Ying；　or　that　he　even　went　there　at　all。　　Moreover；　as　we　know
  that　Wu　Yuan　and　Po　P‘ei　both　took　part　in　the　expedition；　and
  also　that　its　success　was　largely　due　to　the　dash　and　enterprise
  of　Fu　Kai；　Ho　Lu's　younger　brother；　it　is　not　easy　to　see　how　yet
  another　general　could　have　played　a　very　prominent　part　in　the
  same　campaign。
  Ch‘en　Chen…sun　of　the　Sung　dynasty　has　the　note：
  Military　writers　look　upon　Sun　Wu　as　the　father　of　their
  art。　　But　the　fact　that　he　does　not　appear　in　the　TSO　CHUAN；
  although　he　is　said　to　have　served　under　Ho　Lu　King　of　Wu；
  makes　it　uncertain　what　period　he　really　belonged　to。
  He　also　says：
  The　works　of　Sun　Wu　and　Wu　Ch‘i　may　be　of　genuine
  antiquity。
  It　is　noticeable　that　both　Yeh　Shui…hsin　and　Ch‘en　Chen…sun；
  while　rejecting　the　personality　of　Sun　Wu　as　he　figures　in　Ssu…ma
  Ch‘ien's　history；　are　inclined　to　accept　the　date　traditionally
  assigned　to　the　work　which　passes　under　his　name。　　The　author　of
  the　HSU　LU　fails　to　appreciate　this　distinction；　and　consequently
  his　bitter　attack　on　Ch‘en　Chen…sun　really　misses　its　mark。　　He
  makes　one　of　two　points；　however；　which　certainly　tell　in　favor
  of　the　high　antiquity　of　our　〃13　chapters。〃　　〃Sun　Tzu；〃　he　says；
  〃must　have　lived　in　the　age　of　Ching　Wang　＇519…476＇；　because　he
  is　frequently　plagiarized　in　subsequent　works　of　the　Chou；　Ch‘in
  and　Han　dynasties。〃　　The　two　most　shameless　offenders　in　this
  respect　are　Wu　Ch‘i　and　Huai…nan　Tzu；　both　of　them　important
  historical　personages　in　their　day。　　The　former　lived　only　a
  century　after　the　alleged　date　of　Sun　Tzu；　and　his　death　is　known
  to　have　taken　place　in　381　B。C。　　It　was　to　him；　according　to　Liu
  Hsiang；　　that　Tseng　Shen　delivered　the　TSO　CHUAN；　which　had　been
  entrusted　to　him　by　its　author。　　＇29＇　　　Now　the　fact　that
  quotations　from　the　ART　OF　WAR；　acknowledged　or　otherwise；　are　to
  be　found　in　so　many　authors　of　different　epochs；　establishes　a
  very　strong　anterior　to　them　all；　　in　other　words；　that　Sun
  Tzu's　treatise　was　already　in　existence　towards　the　end　of　the
  5th　century　B。C。　　Further　proof　of　Sun　Tzu's　antiquity　is
  furnished　by　the　archaic　or　wholly　obsolete　meanings　attaching　to
  a　number　of　the　words　he　uses。　　A　list　of　these；　which　might
  perhaps　be　extended；　is　given　in　the　HSU　LU；　and　though　some　of
  the　interpretations　are　doubtful；　the　main　argument　is　hardly
  affected　thereby。　　Again；　it　must　not　be　forgotten　that　Yeh　Shui…
  hsin；　a　scholar　and　critic　of　the　first　rank；　deliberately
  pronounces　the　style　of　the　13　chapters　to　belong　to　the　early
  part　of　the　fifth　century。　　Seeing　that　he　is　actually　engaged　in
  an　attempt　to　disprove　the　existence　of　Sun　Wu　himself；　we　may　be
  sure　that　he　would　not　have　hesitated　to　assign　the　work　to　a
  later　date　had　he　not　honestly　believed　the　contrary。　　And　it　is
  precisely　on　such　a　point　that　the　judgment　of　an　educated
  Chinaman　will　carry　most　weight。　　Other　internal　evidence　is　not
  far　to　seek。　　Thus　in　XIII。　ss。　1；　there　is　an　unmistakable
  allusion　to　the　ancient　system　of　land…tenure　which　had　already
  passed　away　by　the　time　of　Mencius；　who　was　anxious　to　see　it
  revived　in　a　modified　form。　＇30＇　　The　only　warfare　Sun　Tzu　knows
  is　that　carried　on　between　the　various　feudal　princes；　in　which
  armored　chariots　play　a　large　part。　　Their　use　seems　to　have
  entirely　died　out　before　the　end　of　the　Chou　dynasty。　　He　speaks
  as　a　man　of　Wu；　a　state　which　ceased　to　exist　as　early　as　473
  B。C。　　On　this　I　shall　touch　presently。
  But　once　refer　the　work　to　the　5th　century　or　earlier；　　and
  the　chances　of　its　being　other　than　a　bona　fide　production　are
  sensibly　diminished。　　The　great　age　of　forgeries　did　not　come
  until　long　after。　　That　it　should　have　been　forged　in　the　period
  immediately　following　473　is　particularly　unlikely；　for　no　one；
  as　a　rule；　hastens　to　identify　himself　with　a　lost　cause。　　As　for
  Yeh　Shui…hsin's　theory；　that　the　author　was　a　literary　recluse；
  that　seems　to　me　quite　untenable。　　If　one　thing　is　more　apparent
  than　another　after　reading　the　maxims　of　Sun　Tzu；　it　is　that
  their　essence　has　been　distilled　from　a　large　store　of　personal
  observation　and　experience。　　They　reflect　the　mind　not　only　of　a
  born　strategist；　gifted　with　a　rare　faculty　of　generalization；
  but　also　of　a　practical　soldier　closely　acquainted　with　the
  military　conditions　of　his　time。　　To　say　nothing　of　the　fact　that
  these　sayings　have　been　accepted　and　endorsed　by　all　the　greatest
  captains　of　Chinese　history；　they　offer　a　combination　of
  freshness　and　sincerity；　acuteness　and　common　sense；　which　quite
  excludes　the　idea　that　they　were　artificially　concocted　in　the
  study。　　If　we　admit；　then；　that　the　13　chapters　were　the　genuine
  production　of　a　military　man　living　towards　the　end　of　the　〃CH‘UN
  CH‘IU〃　period；　are　we　not　bound；　in　spite　of　the　silence　of　the
  TSO　CHUAN；　to　accept　Ssu…ma　Ch‘ien's　account　in　its　entirety？　　In
  view　of　his　high　repute　as　a　sober　historian；　　must　we　not
  hesitate　to　assume　that　the　records　he　drew　upon　for　Sun　Wu's
  biography　were　false　and　untrustworthy？　　The　answer；　I　fear；　must
  be　in　the　negative。　　There　is　still　one　grave；　if　not　fatal；
  objection　to　the　chronology　involved　in　the　story　as　told　in　the
  SHIH　CHI；　which；　so　far　as　I　am　aware；　nobody　has　yet　pointed
  out。　　There　are　two　passages　in　Sun　Tzu　in　which　he　alludes　to
  contemporary　affairs。　　The　first　in　in　VI。　ss。　21：
  Though　according　to　my　estimate　the　soldiers　of　Yueh
  exceed　our　own　in　number；　that　shall　advantage　them　nothing
  in　the　matter　of　victory。　　I　say　then　that　victory　can　be
  achieved。
  The　other　is　in　XI。　ss。　30：
  Asked　if　an　army　can　be　made　to　imitate　the　SHUAI…JAN；　I
  should　answer；　Yes。　　For　the　men　of　Wu　and　the　men　of　Yueh
  are　enemies；　　yet　if　they　are　crossing　a　river　in　the　same
  boat　and　are　caught　by　a　storm；　they　will　come　to　each
  other's　assistance　just　as　the　left　hand　helps　the　right。
  These　two　paragraphs　are　extremely　valuable　as　evidence　of
  the　date　of　composition。　　They　assign　the　work　to　the　period　of
  the　struggle　between　Wu　and　Yueh。　　So　much　has　been　observed　by
  Pi　I…hsun。　　But　what　has　hitherto　escaped　notice　is　that　they
  also　seriously　impair　the　credibility　of　Ssu…ma　Ch‘ien's
  narrative。　　As　we　have　seen　above；　the　first　positive　date　given
  in　connection　with　Sun　Wu　is　512　B。C。　　He　is　then　spoken　of　as　a
  general；　　acting　as　confidential　adviser　to　Ho　Lu；　so　that　his
  alleged　introduction　to　that　monarch　had　already　taken　place；　and
  of　course　the　13　chapters　must　have　been　written　earlier　still。
  But　at　that　time；　and　for　several　years　after；　down　to　the
  capture　of　Ying　in　506；　Ch‘u　and　not　Yueh；　was　the　great
  hereditary　enemy　of　Wu。　　The　two　states；　Ch‘u　and　Wu；　had　been
  constantly　at　war　for　over　half　a　century；　＇31＇　whereas　the　first
  war　between　Wu　and　Yueh　was　waged　only　in　510；　＇32＇　and　even　then
  was　no　more　than　a　short　interlude　sandwiched　in　the　midst　of　the
  fierce　struggle　with　Ch‘u。　　Now　Ch‘u　is　not　mentioned　in　the　13
  chapters　at　all。　　The　natural　inference　is　that　they　were　written
  at　a　time　when　Yueh　had　become　the　prime　antagonist　of　Wu；　that
  is；　after　Ch‘u　had　suffered　the　great　humiliation　of　506。　　At
  this　point；　a　table　of　dates　may　be　found　useful。
  B。C。　｜
  ｜
  514　　｜　　Accession　of　Ho　Lu。
  512　　｜　　Ho　Lu　attacks　Ch‘u；　but　is　dissuaded　from　entering　Ying；
  ｜　　　　the　capital。　　SHI　CHI　mentions　Sun　Wu　as　general。
  511　　｜　　Another　attack　on　Ch‘u。
  510　　｜　　Wu　makes　a　successful　attack　on　Yueh。　　This　is　the　first
  ｜　　　　war　between　the　two　states。
  509　　｜
  or　　｜　　C