Like
the Six Secret Teachings, the
Three Strategies is commonly attributed to
Jiang Ziya, also known as "the Taigong". However, four other theories on the origins of the work have been put forth. The first is that the text was actually written and compiled by later followers of the Taigong, rather than by the man himself. Another theory is that the man reported to have given the text to Zhang Liang, Huang Shigong, may himself have written the text. Conservative classical scholars have declared the book a forgery. The final view is that the text was written around the end of the
Former Han dynasty by a reclusive follower of the
Huang-Lao school of thought. Because of the absence of archaeological evidence, there is no consensus among scholars as to which of these theories is correct.
Traditional Perspective The Three Strategies achieved its place in the canon of Chinese military writings through its historical relationship with the early Han general
Zhang Liang. Its sudden, semi-legendary appearance is typical of many historical accounts from that period. According to the
Shiji, while Zhang was living as a fugitive after his failed assassination of
Qin Shihuang (in 218 BC), he met a nondescript old man who recognized him while they were both strolling across a bridge. The old man tested his virtue several times before finally providing him with
the Three Strategies and identifying himself with a yellow rock at the foot of Mount Gucheng (giving the treatise its received name, "Huang Shigong", meaning "Duke of Yellow Rock"). According to the Shiji, Zhang Liang then studied
the Three Strategies and used its teachings to assist him in his future military accomplishments. A somewhat tenuous source from the
Song dynasty claims that Zhang ordered that
the Three Strategies be entombed with him upon his death to prevent its transmission to the unworthy, and that the work was only rediscovered in the
Jin dynasty by grave robbers. Scholars who believe the traditional account of
the Three Strategies' transmission trace its origins directly back to the Taigong, assuming that it was written after
the Six Secret Teachings, after Jiang Ziya was enfeoffed as Duke of Qi. This theory assumes that the old man who gave the book to Zhang must have been a descendant of Jiang and/or a retired scholar of the recently conquered
state of Qi. His action of giving the book to a young fugitive known to have attempted the assassination of Qi's conqueror is explained as an understandable and appropriate gesture.
Alternative Perspectives An alternative interpretation to the traditional theory is that the work was the product of the Taigong's disciples, growing and evolving around a core of material dating from antiquity until finally being compiled and revised shortly before Qi's conquest by Qin, in 221 BC. A third theory is that, rather than having anything to do with the Taigong, Huang Shigong simply wrote the work himself shortly before giving it to Zhang Liang. Supposedly, this accounts for the book's nominal early-Han dynasty Daoist perspective. Another theory, historically identified with conservative literati in late Chinese history, is that the work is a forgery dating from the
Wei-
Jin period (or later). Typical condemnations by scholars associated with this theory are that the work's Daoist perspective is "empty", that its content is "brutal", and that its language is "rustic".
Most Probable Perspective? A final theory holds that
the Three Strategies dates from the late Western Han dynasty (206 BC – 9 AD), around the year 1 AD, and that it is a product of the now-extinct Huang-Lao school of Daoism. This theory assumes that the work transmitted to Zhang Liang was not the present
Three Strategies, but was actually
the Six Secret Teachings. (The work presently known as
the Three Strategies of Huang Shigong was supposedly known as
the Records of Huang Shigong until the
Sui dynasty, accounting for this confusion). According to this theory, the late composition date accounts for the numerous references to political circumstances (powerful families usurping power; government affairs in an age of peace; and, philosophical syncretism organized around Huang-Lao concepts) and the advanced use of characters found in the text. In the absence of contrary archaeological evidence, many modern scholars consider this final theory to be the most probable. ==See also==