The Foundations of Orthodox Warfare

The concept of “orthodox warfare” (正兵, zhèng bīng) emerged as a cornerstone of classical Chinese military philosophy, particularly within the framework of Sun Tzu’s Art of War. Unlike unorthodox tactics (qí bīng), which rely on deception and flexibility, orthodox warfare emphasizes disciplined, large-scale engagements with well-trained troops. This approach was deemed essential when logistical challenges—such as blocked supply lines or an unyielding enemy—made unconventional strategies ineffective.

Historical records, including the Hundred Unusual Strategies (Bǎi Zhàn Qí Lüè), highlight that orthodox forces required meticulous preparation: elite soldiers, superior weaponry, clear chains of command, and methodical advancement. As the Tang Dynasty military treatise Questions and Replies Between Tang Taizong and Li Weigong asserts, “Without orthodox troops, how can one wage war over great distances?”

The Eastern Jin Campaign: A Case Study

A pivotal example unfolded in 416 CE, during the Eastern Jin Dynasty. Following the death of Later Qin emperor Yao Xing, political instability weakened the rival state. Seizing the opportunity, Jin general Liu Yu launched a northern campaign, appointing the renowned commander Tan Daoji as vanguard.

Tan Daoji’s strategy exemplified orthodox warfare:
– Methodical Advance: Instead of rapid strikes, Jin forces secured territories incrementally, ensuring stable supply lines.
– Moral Discipline: After capturing Luoyang and 4,000 prisoners, Tan rejected suggestions to execute captives as a show of strength. Citing the Confucian principle of “punishing tyranny to comfort the people” (伐罪吊民), he released them—a move that won local support and destabilized Later Qin’s morale.

This campaign underscored how orthodox tactics, when paired with ethical governance, could achieve lasting victories.

Cultural and Psychological Dimensions

Orthodox warfare transcended battlefield mechanics, influencing broader societal perceptions:
– Legitimacy and Ritual: Large, disciplined armies symbolized state authority, contrasting with “bandit” forces (a term often used disparagingly for rebels).
– Psychological Impact: The spectacle of organized troops could demoralize enemies, as seen when Jin’s display of strength prompted Later Qin defections.

However, the Hundred Unusual Strategies also warns against overreliance on orthodox methods. For instance, during the Three Kingdoms era, Zhuge Liang’s infamous “Empty Fort Strategy” (a ruse pretending weakness) succeeded precisely because it defied orthodox expectations—though historians debate its authenticity.

The Delicate Balance: Orthodox vs. Unorthodox

Sun Tzu’s axiom—”In battle, use the orthodox to engage, the unorthodox to win” (凡战者，以正合，以奇胜)—remains timeless. The Jin-Later Qin conflict demonstrated orthodox warfare’s strengths, while other historical episodes revealed its limitations:
– Guan Yu’s Downfall (219 CE): Despite initial success against Cao Wei at Fancheng, Guan’s neglect of rear defenses allowed Sun Wu to seize Jing Province. His orthodox frontal assault, though tactically sound, failed strategically due to complacency.
– Zhuge Liang’s Dilemma: Facing Sima Yi’s overwhelming force at Yangping, Zhuge’s feigned weakness (an unorthodox move) averted disaster—highlighting the need for adaptability.

Legacy and Modern Parallels

The principles of orthodox warfare endure in contemporary military doctrine:
– Logistical Focus: Modern armies prioritize supply chains, echoing Tan Daoji’s emphasis on securing routes.
– Ethical Warfare: The Geneva Conventions’ prohibitions against mistreating prisoners mirror Tan’s humanitarian policies.
– Hybrid Strategies: Nations blend orthodox (e.g., armored divisions) and unorthodox tactics (cyber warfare), much like ancient Chinese generals.

Yet, the core lesson remains: orthodox warfare is not about brute force alone. As Tan Daoji proved, its true power lies in the synergy of discipline, logistics, and moral legitimacy—a triad as relevant today as in the rice fields of 5th-century China.

Conclusion

From the siege of Luoyang to modern maneuver warfare, the art of orthodox combat teaches that victory often belongs not to the flashiest tactician, but to the commander who masters fundamentals. In Sun Tzu’s framework, zhèng bīng and qí bīng are two sides of the same coin—one providing stability, the other opportunity. As history shows, the greatest leaders know when to deploy each.