Three Strategies of Huang Shigong

[1] As its title would suggest, the Three Strategies of Huang Shigong is organized into three sections, which can be interpreted as a hierarchy of importance or as simple indicators of position in the work.

The text contains almost no direct emphasis on battlefield strategy and tactics, instead focusing on logistical concerns: "concepts of government, the administration of forces; the unification of the people; the characteristics of a capable general; methods of nurturing a sound material foundation; motivation of subordinates and the soldiers; implementing rewards and punishments"; and, how to foster majesty via the balance between hard and soft administrative practices.

Legalist concepts present in the text include an emphasis on strengthening the state, the implementation of rewards and punishments through the strict and impartial enforcement of the law, and the assumption that power is best concentrated in a single, majestic sovereign.

The Three Strategies teaches that an army must adopt a low, passive posture when not directly engaged in action, to prevent becoming brittle, exposed, and easily overcome.

The text assumes that the employment of both hard and soft tactics must be used by a successful army, to achieve the desired levels of unpredictability and flexible deployment.

The Three Strategies achieved its place in the canon of Chinese military writings through its historical relationship with the early Han general Zhang Liang.

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.

[11] 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.

[12] 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.

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).