1. Unless otherwise mentioned, all dates in this Article are b.c.e.

2. This is not to say that manuscripts bearing military texts have not been previously discovered in China. The truly remarkable find of a tomb at Yinque shan 銀雀山yielded Han dynasty manuscript editions of the Sunzi bingfa 孫子兵法, Wei liao zi 尉繚子, Liu Tao 六韜, and the long lost Sun Bin bingfa 孫臏兵法. For an overview of the discovery of these texts and some initial observations see Luo Fuyi, “Linyi Hanjian gaishu” 臨沂漢簡概述, Wenwu 1974.2, 98–99, 101–2, 4–7; Xu Di, “Luetan Linyi Yinque shan Han mu chutu de bingshu canjian” 略談臨沂銀雀山漢墓出土的兵書殘簡, Wenwu 1974.2; and Yinqueshan Han mu zhujian zhengli xiaozu, ed. Yinqueshan Han mu zhujian 銀雀山漢墓竹簡 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1985)Google Scholar. More recently, in 1980., another military text, the He Lü 闔閭, was discovered in a Han dynasty tomb no. 247 at Zhangjiashan 張家山, Hubei 湖北. See Zhangjiashan 247 hao Han mu zhujian zhengli xiaozu, ed. Zhangjiashan Hanmu zhujian 張家山漢墓竹簡 (Beijing: Wenwu, 2001)Google Scholar.

3. Because the manuscripts in the Shanghai collection were purchased on the Hong Kong antiquities market, there was little physical evidence to date the manuscripts other than calligraphic similarity to other Warring States manuscripts with a known provenance. C-14 dating of the Shanghai manuscripts resulted in a 2257 ± 65 BP (306 ± 65 b.c.e.) date for the manuscripts which makes them likely contemporaries of manuscripts discovered at sites such as Baoshan 包山 and Guodian 郭店. See Chengyuan, Ma 馬承源, “Ma Chengyuan xiansheng tan Shangbo jian” 馬承源先生談上博簡 in Shang boguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu yanjiu 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書研究, ed. Mingchun, Liao 廖名春 and Yuanqing, Zhu 朱淵清 (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 2002)Google Scholar, 3.

4. The title of the manuscript is written in black ink on the back of slip 2. Citations to this manuscript and all others in the Shanghai corpus are based on the slip numbers found in Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書. 7 vols. (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2001–)Google Scholar. Unless otherwise stated, all citations of traditional Chinese works will be based on Wen Yuan ge si ku quan shu 文淵閣四庫全書 (Taipei: Taiwan shangwu, 1983–1986)Google Scholar and citations to dynastic histories will follow the Zhonghua shuju 中華書局 editions (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959).

5. Throughout this article I will refer to Cao Mie's Battle Arrays as a politico-military text to emphasize the fact that its contents are not solely restricted to discussions of strategic or tactical issues, but also include extensive analysis of issues related to domestic policies and other internal dimensions of statecraft. In fact, many other ‘military’ texts within the traditional received military canon, such as the Sunzi bingfa and Wuzi 吳子, could also be labeled politico-military texts. Li Xunxiang argues that such phenomena are not surprising considering the fact that many military leaders in pre-Qin China were not only generals, but also served as policy advisors to the government. See Xunxiang, Li 李訓詳, Xian Qin de bingjia 先秦的兵家 (Taipei: Guoli Taiwan daxue, 1991), 3–4.Google Scholar

6. The name Cao Mie 曹蔑 refers to a historical figure known in the received literature by the names Cao Gui 曹劌, Cao Hui 曹翽, Cao Mo 曹沫, or Cao Mei 曹昧. An examination of the Old Chinese reconstructions for these words reveals the potential for phonetic loaning, for example—劌 gui < * kwats, 翽 hui < * hwâts, 蔑 mie < *mêt, 昧 mei < *mats, 沫 mo < *mât. Most scholars, including the modern editor of the manuscript, choose to read the graph [蔑] as mo [沫]; however the use of [沫] as Cao Mie's personal name occurs only in Han dynasty texts, and therefore, seems to represent a later orthography. As such, I choose to retain the integrity of the manuscript orthography and use the original 蔑 graph as the personal name. For more on the textual connection between Cao Gui, Cao Hui, Cao Mo, and Cao Mei, see Li Ling, “Wei shenma shuo Cao Gui he Cao Mo shi tong yi ren” 為甚麽說曹劌和曹沫是同一人, Du shu 2004.9, 129–34. All phonological reconstructions of Old Chinese will be based on Axel Schuessler's Minimal Old Chinese. See Schuessler, Axel, Minimal Old Chinese and Later Han Chinese [:] A Companion to Grammata Serica Recensa (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2009).Google Scholar

7. The one exception would be the initial study by Asano Yūichi 淺野裕一, “<<'Cao Mo zhi chen >>’ de bingxue sixiang” 《曹沫之陳》的兵學思想, BSM (http://www.bsm.org.cn/show_article.php?id=882), accessed October 15, 2009.

8. See Chengyuan, Ma 馬承源, ed. Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (si) 上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書 (四) (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2004), 241–42.Google Scholar

9. The introduction and annotation accompanying this publication are somewhat misleading, in that most of the 45 slips which Li Ling refers to as ‘complete’ (zheng jian 整簡) are in fact broken slips that have been rejoined. The numbers given above reflect the proper number of complete/unbroken and rejoined slips as given by Chen Jian 陳劍. See Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (si); Chen Jian, “Shanghai zhushu <Cao Mo zhi Chen> xinbian shiwen (gao)” 上海竹書《曹沫之陳》新編釋文, (www.jianbo.org/admin3/2005/chenjian001.htm), accessed October 15, 2009.

10. See Hubei sheng Jing-Sha tielu kaogu du, ed., Baoshan Chu jian 包山楚簡. (Beijing: Wenwu, 1991)Google Scholar and bowuguan, Jingmen shi, ed., Guodian Chu mu zhujian 郭店楚墓竹簡. (Beijing: Wenwu, 1998).Google Scholar

11. If one were to account also for the missing segments of surviving fragments, this number could possibly be increased to roughly 2,100 graphs.

12. This manuscript contains two types of diacritic marker, the graph duplication marker “=” and the “L”-shaped marker. The latter is fairly consistently used throughout the manuscript to signify either the conclusion of a topic of discussion, or to indicate a shift in speaker during a dialogue. For more on the various types of ancient diacritics used in excavated manuscripts, see Dalun, Gao 高大倫, “Shi jiandu wenzi zhong de jizhong fuhao” 釋簡牘文字的幾種符號, in Qin Han jian du lun wen ji 漢簡牘論文集, ed. Gansu Sheng wenwu kaogu yan jiu suo 甘肃省文物考古研究所. (Lanzhou: Gansu ren min, 1989), 291–301Google Scholar; Xihua, Guan 管錫華, Zhongguo gu dai biao dian fu hao fa zhan shi 中國古代標點符號發展史 (Chengdu: Ba-Shu, 2002).Google Scholar

13. Relatively little is published regarding the physical condition of the Shanghai corpus when the bamboo slips arrived at the Shanghai Museum, so it is difficult to assess when, where, and why so many slips of this manuscript were damaged in this particular pattern.

14. Roughly ten such rearrangements were published on the websites www.jianbo.org and www.bsm.org.cn.

15. Chen Jian, “Shanghai zhushu <Cao Mo zhi Chen> xinbian shiwen (gao).”.

16. Xusheng, Ji 季旭昇, ed. 《Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (si)》 duben 《上海博物館藏戰國楚竹書(四)》讀本 (Taipei: Wanjuan, 2007)Google Scholar.

17. This is done by comparing the length of the ‘rejoined’ slips to that of the average length of the unbroken slips, and by confirming whether or not the location of the three binding notches corresponds to the other slips of the manuscript.

18. In general, scholars working with early Chinese manuscripts are reliant upon the information and photographs provided in large folio publications, yet before making a claim about the suitability of a slip rejoining based on the available photographs, one should always cross check the reported sizes of slips against the photograph. The Shanghai volumes provide three sets of photographs for each slip: one half sized, one enlarged, and one full size. While making my own measurements, I began to find discrepancies between the length recorded and the length of the slip in the full sized photograph. Below is a chart demonstrating the differences between the recorded length of slips and my own measurements of the ‘full sized’ photographs for the Cao Mie manuscript, as well as others in the Shanghai series.

19. This issue was raised in the rearrangements of Li Rui 李銳, “< Cao Gui zhi Zhen> chong bian shiwen”《曹劌之陣》重編釋文, BSM (www.bsm.org.cn), accessed on June 10, 2008; and Bai Yulan 白於藍, “Shangbo jian <Cao Mo zhi Chen> shiwen xinbian” 上博簡《曹沫之陳》釋文新編, BSM (www.bsm.org.cn), accessed on June 10, 2008. Their rearrangement of slip 8 has most recently been followed by GaoYouren高佑仁in Ji Xusheng, <Shanghai Bowuguan Cang Zhanguo Chu Zhushu (si)> duben, 165.

20. In December 2009, I conducted a personal inspection of the manuscript and confirmed the plausibility of most of Gao Youren's rejoinings. The only exceptions to this statement relate to Gao Youren's inclusion of the fragmented slips 15, 59, 63, and 64. These represent lower halves of bamboo slips on which binding markers have been cut, not on the right side of the slip as with other slips of the manuscript, but on the left side. The width of these slips is slightly greater than other slips making me skeptical of their relationship to the manuscript. The author wishes to thank Professors Edward Shaughnessy (University of Chicago) and Zhou Ya (Shanghai Museum) for providing the opportunity to examine the manuscript.

21. I make an extensive analysis of the “Opportune Moments” section of the manuscript in the article, “Opportune Moments in Early Chinese Strategic Thought: The Concept of ji 機 in the Warring States Period Manuscript Cao Mie's Battle Arrays,” in Chinese and Indian Warfare— from the Classical Age to 1870, Lorge, Peter and Roy, Kaushik, eds. (London: Routledge, forthcoming).Google Scholar

22. Indeed the majority of western language books dealing with early Chinese thought or statecraft rarely mention the potential contributions of Chinese strategic texts. See for example the thinkers and topics covered in, Schwartz, Benjamin I., The World of Thought in Ancient China (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ivanhoe, Philip J., Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, 2nd ed. (New York: Hackett Publishing Co, 2006)Google Scholar; Van Norden, Bryan W., Introduction to Classical Chinese Philosophy (Hackett Publishing Co., 2011)Google Scholar; Graham, A. C., Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China (New York: Open Court, 1989)Google Scholar; Chan, Wing-Tsit, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969).Google Scholar

23. By saying this, I am not implying that the text of Cao Mie's Battle Arrays was originally composed in Lu or that it accurately reflects a “true” work of Cao Mie. Nor am I arguing that the textual contents can only be understood through the lens of Lu's political history or that its theoretical contents are only applicable to small kingdoms. This is a Warring States Period text that was composed in the Chu script and likely buried in a Chu tomb. The author(s) of this text, however, did imbed the theoretical content of the treatise within what appears to be a circulating knowledge of Cao Mie's historical personage and the history of Lu. As the purpose of this article is to introduce the manuscript and its textual contents, I am providing this historical background of the key figures and kingdoms mentioned in the manuscript.

24. Cho-yun, Hsu, “The Spring and Autumn Period,” in The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Beginnings of Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Loewe, Michael and Shaughnessy, Edward L. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 553.Google Scholar

25. Zuo zhuan zhushu 左傳注疏, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.24a (“Zhuang gong” 莊公 8).

26. Zuo zhuan zhushu, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.29b (“Zhuang gong” 9).

27. Zuo zhuan zhushu, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.33b–35b (“Zhuang gong” 10).

28. Zuo zhuan zhushu, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 9.4b (“Zhuang gong” 24).

29. Zuo zhuan zhushu, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.33b–35b (“Zhuang gong” 10).

30. Zuo zhuan zhushu, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 9.3a–3b (“Zhuang gong” 23).

31. See Gongyang zhushu 公羊注疏, (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.24b–27a (“Zhuang gong” 13); and Shi ji, 86.2515–16. See also Lüshi chunqiu (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 19.20b–22a and Guanzi 管子 (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 7.10b–13a. The fact that the stone carvings of the Wu Liang shrine contain illustrations of Cao Mo seizing the duke of Qi is a testament to the prevalence of this particular strain of the Cao Mie biography during the Han dynasty. See Hung, Wu, The Wu Liang Shrines: The Ideology of Early Chinese Pictorial Art (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1989), 310–12Google Scholar, and Fig. 146.

32. The only other mention of the quantity of lands enfeoffed to the Duke of Zhou in Lu comes from the “Gao zi xia” 告子下 chapter of the Mengzi which states: 周公之封于魯，為方百里也. “That which the Duke of Zhou enfeoffed unto Lu was 100 li square.” See Mengzi 孟子 (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 12B.7b.

33. A version of this opening section was apparently circulating during the Tang dynasty (618–907 c.e.) as a lost text fragment (yiwen 逸文) ascribed to the Shenzi 慎子in the text Chuxue ji 初學記:

34. Most scholars believe that Chi Po 池舶 (OCM *d-lai prâk) refers to a figure named Shi Bo 施伯 (OCM *lhai prâk) recorded in the Guo yu 國語. According to the passage, Shi Bo was also an advisor of Duke Zhuang of Lu and therefore a contemporary of Cao Gui. See Guo yu (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 6.2a.

35. Laozi Dao de jing (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 59.28b.

36. Laozi Dao de jing (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 67.37b–38a. “I have three treasures which I support and preserve. The first is called compassion. The second is called frugality. The third is called ‘not daring to assume precedence over all under Heaven’” 我有三寶持而保之一曰慈二曰儉三曰不敢為天下先.

37. Mozi (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 9.1b. 命富則富命貧則貧命眾則眾命寡則寡命治則治命亂則亂命壽則壽命夭則夭命雖強勁何益哉？

38. Mozi (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 9.9a–9b. 天下之治也湯武之力也天下之亂也桀紂之罪也若以此觀之夫安危治亂存乎上之為政也則夫豈可謂有命哉！

39. Li Ling understood the graph yu {豫} (OCM *lah) to have a meaning similar to the word xu {敍} (OCM *s-laʔ), a category of military maneuvering just preceding the deployment of battle formations; likely to mean something similar to ‘call to ranks.’ Chen Jian, however, considers [豫] to represent the word she {舍} (OCM *lhaʔ), possessing a meaning similar to an encampment and by extension ‘military.’ He cites slip 24 of the Shanghai Zhou yi which contains the line 豫尓靈龜 while the received version contains the line 舍尓靈龜. Additionally, the “Zilu” 字路 chapter of the Lun yu contains the line 舉爾所知. 爾所不知, 人其舍諸 while the same line found on slip 10 of the Shanghai manuscript Zhonggong 仲弓 uses the graph [豫] in place of [舍]. See Ma Chengyuan, Shanghai bowuguan cang Zhanguo Chu zhushu (si), 255; Chen Jian, “Shanghai zhushu <Cao Mo zhi Chen> xinbian shiwen (gao),” note 14; see also Zhou Yi zhushu 周易注疏, “Yi” 頤 (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 5.21b, and Lun yu zhushu 論語注疏 (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 13.1b. I agree with Chen Jian that the meaning of [豫] lies somewhere between the kingdom 邦 and the battle array 陳, and thus I opt to apply a generic term of ‘forces’ to translate the graph.

40. This passage closely resembles a section from the “Tu guo” 圖國 chapter of the Wuzi 吳子 which reads:

41. Judging from the context this [俾(嬖)] grandee should correlate to the preceding penal grandee; however, the scribe used another character instead of [獄].

42. Chen Jian attempts to create a homogenous reading of this passage by understanding the graph yi [宜] (OCM *ŋai) as representing the word yi {義}, ‘just/proper’ (OCM *ŋaih). While phonologically this is certainly possible, I feel that this potentially obscures the meaning of the passage. In my opinion yi [宜] is parallel to fu [服] in slip 33 as the result of the lord being yi [義].

43. Determining the meaning of the graph zhi 廌 [OCM *dreʔ] in Warring States manuscripts is rather complicated. We do not have any other excavated source materials in which this graph is used independently prior to this time, but it frequently appears as a component of fa/fei 灋 [OCM *pap/pats], ‘to cast away,’ or ‘disregard.’ In Warring States manuscripts it is often understood to function as an auto-antonym representing either cun 存 [OCM *dz₌n], ‘to survive,’ or ‘exist,’ or as fa 灋/廢 ‘to disregard’ or ‘cast away. ’In this case, however, several scholars have opted to read the graph as representative of the word jian 薦 [OCM * ts₌ns], ‘to recommend.’ Though phonologically plausible, such a reading seems rather forced and the text can perhaps be better understood if the graph were read as cun 存 ‘exist.’

44. Liu tao (Siku quanshu 四庫全書 ed.), 3.5b–6a. See also, Sun Bin bingfa, slip 4 and slip 3. I follow the arrangement and numbering of the Yinqueshan Sun Bin bingfa manuscript slips found in Zhenze, Zhang 張震澤, Sun Bin bingfa jiaoli 孫臏兵法校理 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1984)Google Scholar.

45. Both Chen Jian and Gao Youren agree that the partially obliterated graph preceding [者] should be [死]. Supporting evidence comes from the same phrasing found in the line of slip 45 stating 死者弗收.