If our troops are no more in number than the enemy, that is amply
sufficient;
Wang Hsi’s paraphrase, partly borrowed from Ts‘ao Kung, is
權力均足矣. Another reading, adopted by Chia Lin and the _T‘u Shu_,
is 兵非貴益多, which Capt. Calthrop renders, much too loosely:
“Numbers are no certain mark of strength.”
it only means that no direct attack can be made.
Literally, “no martial advance.” That is to say, 正 “_chêng_”
tactics and frontal attacks must be eschewed, and stratagem
resorted to instead.
What we can do is simply to concentrate all our available strength,
keep a close watch on the enemy, and obtain reinforcements.
This is an obscure sentence, and none of the commentators succeed
in squeezing very good sense out of it. The difficulty lies
chiefly in the words 取人, which have been taken in every possible
way. I follow Li Ch‘üan, who appears to offer the simplest
explanation: 惟得人者勝也 “Only the side that gets more men will
win.” Ts‘ao Kung’s note, concise as usual to the verge of
incomprehensibility, is 厮養足也. Fortunately we have Chang Yü to
expound its meaning to us in language which is lucidity itself:
兵力既均又未見便雖未足剛進足以取人於厮養之中以并兵合力察敵而取勝不必假他
兵以助己 “When the numbers are even, and no favourable opening
presents itself, although we may not be strong enough to deliver
a sustained attack, we can find additional recruits amongst our
sutlers and camp-followers, and then, concentrating our forces
and keeping a close watch on the enemy, contrive to snatch the
victory. But we must avoid borrowing foreign soldiers to help us.”
He then quotes from Wei Liao Tzŭ, ch. 3: 助卒名爲十萬其實不過數萬耳
“The nominal strength of mercenary troops may be 100,000, but
their real value will be not more than half that figure.”
According to this interpretation, 取人 means “to get recruits,” not
from outside, but from the tag-rag and bobtail which follows in
the wake of a large army. This does not sound a very soldierly
suggestion, and I feel convinced that it is not what Sun Tzŭ
meant. Chia Lin, on the other hand, takes the words in a different
sense altogether, namely “to conquer the enemy” [cf. I. § 20]. But
in that case they could hardly be followed by 而已. Better than
this would be the rendering “to make isolated captures,” as
opposed to 武進 “a general attack.”