I was reading an article about historical figures that probably didn’t actually exist. Most of them seemed plausible enough; Robin Hood, Mulan, William Tell. Some less so; Confucius, Shakespeare, Homer.
But some caught me off guard, particularly Sun Tzu. The article opines, “… scholars currently know nothing about where The Art of War came from, only that it would randomly appear — usually on sewn-together bamboo slabs — for whatever military person or scholar needed it.”
I always assumed he was an actual general but then again history isn’t my strong suit. So was Sun Tzu a real person or not?
Obviously The Art of War was written by someone (it wasn’t just a miraculous gift from the gods to generals in need), and we might as well call that author, whoever it was, Sun Tzu. Likewise for Shakespeare and Homer as the authors of their works.
If one is to question anything about its authorship, it would be whether he was a general, not whether he existed.
An ancient book could also be an aggregate of multiple writers’ work, with authorship later assigned to one mythical guy. I don’t know the first thing about the Art of War, so I dunno if multiple authors is at all suspected in this case. Just offering an alternative to Chronos’s two options.
Shakespeare clearly existed as a single historical person, even if you don’t believe he wrote his plays.
The Homeric epics on the other hand existed for generations as oral poetry long before they were written down (and clearly contain a mix of bronze age cultrual reference, presumably from earlier oral tradition, and later iron age references, presumably from the time they were written down). So it is quite possible Homer could well have been a collection of scribes rather than a single historical person. The term Homer translates as hostage, so could have been referring to a group rather than an individual (the possibly the Homeridae) .
I know nothing about Sun Tzu but as a rough contemporary, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that the same goes for him.
Except we don’t know if Homer was the “Brother Grimm” of the Illiad and Oddessey , a well known oral poet at the time they were written down, or a collective name for a group of authors like the “bloomsbury set”
I would put it the other way around: He clearly existed, even if you don’t believe that he was an actor from Stratford-upon-Avon. Nobody would have remembered just some random actor: When people speak of Shakespeare, the person they mean is the author of the plays (and sonnets and so on).
As has been pointed out, many classic Chinese works are compilations of oral traditions and written works of others. Whether the credited author existed or not doesn’t matter as it’s the teaching and thoughts of the work that’s important. Even if Sun Tzu were proven to be a real historical figure, it’s not as if his work was written in a vacuum. He would have had advisers that added additional thoughts to this work and field commanders reporting what did and didn’t work in real life.
BTW, Tzu (子) in this context isn’t a proper name, but a title: Master.
Shakespeare was objectively an actual living person by that name who was born in Stratford-upon-Avon, lived in England, and wrote “Hamlet,” “As You Like It,” and all that stuff. He’s not at all analogous to Homer or Sun Tzu.
OK, put it this way: Did Mark Twain really exist? There was never anyone who was given that name, but somebody did use that name to write some famous books. If I refer to Mark Twain, it’ll be generally assumed that I’m referring to that someone. If it were to come to light that the author of those books wasn’t actually Samuel Clements, as is generally thought, but some other author, well, does that other author have any less of a claim to the pseudonym than Clements does?
Yes. Caesar Augustus is the man who performed the deeds attributed to Caesar Augustus, just as Mark Twain was the main who wrote the works attributed to Mark Twain, and William Shakespeare was the man who wrote the works attributed to William Shakespeare.
Both Mark Twain and Ceasar Augustus are historical figures who were born at a particular place/time, died at a particular place/time, and did some stuff that can be verified. They went by different names at different times, but we are confident they are the same person.
Likewise for Shakespeare, he was an actual historical figure. Even if you believe Shakespeare did not write “Shakespeare’s plays” (a bullshit classist, homophobic conspiracy theory IMO) that doesn’t change the historicity of Shakespeare. He was an actual historical person.
Homer on the other hand may have been an actual historical person, but could equally well have been a conglomeration of ancient oral poets or scribes.
