Hi guys

For all Three Kingdoms fans, Cao Cao's commentary on Sun Tzu, in complex chinese characters (Big5 encoding)
http://www.agent-m.net/Book/2/O-1-014-3.htm
My favorite Cao Cao commentary is " 出空擊虛，避其所守，擊其不意 " or appear at voids (undefended places) and strike at enemy weakness, bypass what the enemy defends and attack him where he does not expect you... The essence of maneuver warfare...

Another Tang commentator on Sun Tzu...
http://www.agent-m.net/Book/3/O-1-023-3.htm

--------------
Index page:
http://www.agent-m.net/O-2-1.htm

Main page on military manuals and selected works presented in full (including Mo Tzu and Sun Bin):
http://www.agent-m.net/O-2-1-0.htm

Listings of military bibliographies from the classical dynastic histories and other historical works (some links are dead):
http://www.agent-m.net/Book/catalog/O-5-0.htm

--------------

The military section excerpted from the famous Tang work, the Tongdian, by famous scholar Du You... He breaks stuff down to concepts/ themes and cites historical battles to support his concepts, not unlike the Song military manual "bai zhan qi lue"...
http://www.agent-m.net/Book/3/O-1-026-1-m.htm

[All the above are in traditional Chinese characters.]

Jieming and Yun

Long lost and recovered Han book on siege warfare...《守法守令十三篇》, recovered together with Sun Tzu from the Yinqueshan grave in 1972...

http://www.agent-m.net/Book/O-4-002-01.htm

wonder if this refers to a trebuchet mounted on wheels??
為高耤車可以投五十步之內者，二百步而一，小回耤車五十步而一。

Siege crossbows/arcuballistas?
造鐖（機）弩三……四，造[糸弓]（弦）弩三，造鐖（機）弩二。

Sounds like Sun Tzu:
夫以治擊亂，以富擊貧，以能擊不能，以教士擊敺民。此十戰十勝、百戰百勝之道。

Sounds like Wu Qi's quote "夫總文武者，軍之將也" where a warrior general combines both civil and martial abilities:
兵者，以武為棟，以文為□；以武為表，以文……
以文為內。能審此三者，則知所以勝敗矣。武者所以凌（凌）適（敵）分死生也，……危
；武者所【□□】適（敵）也，文者所以守也。兵之用文武也


Yun, can you link this thread to the Three Kingdoms forum pls. Thanks.

WARHEAD, any interesting insights you can gleam from this Han work to to add to our body of knowledge on the Han military... ??

Good find.

Thanks!

Thanks Thomas,

A few terms I don't understand.

耤車 <-- what is this?

而一 <-- what is this?



What is the context that this was written in?

耤車 Ji2 Che1

The term first appeared in the book "Mozi's Defense of City Gate《墨子·备城门》".

It's a kind of mechanized defense machinery protected by external metal shield. One portion of it was buried onto the ground. It generally is capable of propelling charcoal fire and was operated by many people to defend against the enemy's siege forces. It's more akin to be like today's canon-shell artillery placed on city-wall and is a city-defense weapon.

Source: http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/3840625.html?si=2

藉车 见于《墨子·备城门》。藉车外部包铁，一部分埋在地下，是能够投射炭火的机器，由多人操纵用来防备敌方的攻城队。




為高耤車可以投五十步之內者，二百步而一，小回耤車五十步而一


"而一" (er2 yi1) means "once every".

"bu 步" means 'steps/feet' (a kind of unit measurement for length in ancient China).

It means that there are 'high' and 'low' Jiche Defense weapon. It has a range of 50 bu. The high jiche is deployed "once every 200 steps" (interval), while the small/low Jiche weapon is deployed 'once every 50 steps' on the city wall.

The Mozi text has the following passages mentioning or describing the Jiche or Jieche (藉 can be pronounced as either Ji or Jie, depending on the meaning):

城上二十步一藉车，当队者不用此数。
...

五十步一藉车，藉车必为铁纂。
...

城上三十步一藉车，当队者不用。
...

诸藉车皆铁什。藉车之柱长丈七尺，亓(其)貍者四尺，夫长三丈以上至三丈五尺，
马颊长二尺八寸，试藉车之力而为之困，失四分之三在上。藉车夫长三尺，四二
三在上，马颊在三分中。马颊长二尺八寸、夫长二十四尺以下不用。治困以大车
轮。藉车桓长丈二尺半。诸藉车皆铁什，复车者在之。
寇闉池来，为作水甬，深四尺，坚慕貍之。十尺一，覆以瓦而待令。以木大
围长二尺四分而早凿之，置炭火亓(其)中而合慕之，而以藉车投之。

These passages are very hard to interpret because certain technical terms like 马颊 and 夫 are not found anywhere else. But it seems clear at least that the Jiche/Jieche was mounted on city walls, with it main component being a tall column that was secured to the wall by burying 4/17 of its length. Two additional components, the 马颊 and 夫, were mounted on the exposed part of the column, and the entire device was covered in iron. The device was used to propel a hollow wooden ball containing burning charcoal at enemy soldiers attacking the walls. The idea was presumably that the sealed ball would break open on impact, setting fire to enemy soldiers and siege machines.