RICHARD J. SMITH
But Bannermen were not the only ones encouraged to avoid literary pursuits and concentrate on riding and shooting. The official military examinations, which paralleled, but did not come close to equalling in prestige, the civil service examinations, tested these and related skills almost exclusively, requiring only the reproduction of a hundred or so characters from one of three ancient military classics as a literary "test." At none of the three basic levels of examination did the literary exercise determine whether an individual would pass or not. Overall, there was simply no premium placed on the acquisition of knowledge concerning military history, strategy, tactics, and so forth.
Aside from a few so-called academies for Bannermen in Peking and other key locations, there were virtually no institutions that provided systematic military education for Chinese officers. Local "schools" for military examination graduates in the provinces provided much less educational breadth and depth than their civil service counterparts in the shu-yuan system; and many, if not most, of these schools were overseen by literary men who had little interest or expertise in military affairs. Private tutors were available to give military instruction to examination hopefuls, but the cost of equipment—bows and arrows, stones, swords, horses, and practice facilities—often put tutorial assistance beyond the financial reach of many individuals. By default, the most valuable form of military education in China was army service itself.
Contrary to accepted opinion, most Ch'ing officers were not military examination graduates. The reasons are not hard to find. In the words of Shen Pao-chen: In the consideration of military promotions, "those selected by examination are... put after those who began their career in the rank and file, or have risen because of military merit. The knowledge of military affairs among the former group cannot at all be compared with those from among the rank and file. Their spirit and bravery and ability to bear hardship cannot at all be compared with those who rise because of military merit. The reason is that what they learn is not of practical use." In short, military graduates who had not come up through the ranks were viewed by most of their peers as incompetents and outsiders. Ichisada Miyazaki notes: "The influential leaders in the army were generals who had worked themselves up from the ranks and had shown their mettle in actual combat. The army was a