History

The author of Zhan Guo Ce has not yet been verified: it is generally deemed, after Zhang Xincheng, that the book was not written by a single author at one time. It is thought to have been composed by Su Qin and his peers before being obtained by Liu Xiang. Unlike most of the pre-Qin classics, the authenticity of Zhan Guo Ce, along with the Shijing, Mozi, Yulingzi and Gongsun Longzi had never been questioned since the Western Han period. The earliest to assert the texts were apocryphal scriptures was perhaps the compiler of the Annotated Catalogue of the Siku Quanshu, but he provided no warrant for it. In 1931, Luo Genze put forward an argument that the book was composed by Kuai Tong (蒯通) in his two papers based on six conclusions which he drew, a contemporary of Han Xin. Although this argument had been seconded by Jin Dejian (1932) and Zu Zhugeng (1937), but by 1939 it was refuted by Zhang Xincheng.

The six versions of written works from the School of Diplomacy were discovered by Liu Xiang during his editing and proofreading of the imperial literary collection. Those works of political views and diplomatic strategies from the School of Diplomacy were in poor condition, with confusing contents and missing words. Liu Xiang proofread and edited them into the new book under the title Zhan Guo Ce; it was therefore not written by a single author at one time.

Significant contents of Zhan Guo Ce were lost in subsequent centuries. Zeng Gong of the Northern Song Dynasty reclaimed some lost chapters, proofread and edited the modern version. Some writings on cloth were excavated from the Han Dynasty tomb at Mawangdui near the city of Changsha in 1973 and edited and published in Beijing in 1976 as Zhanguo Zonghengjia Shu (战国纵横家书, "Works from the School of Diplomacy During the Warring States Period)". The book contained 27 chapters, 11 of which were found to be similar to the contents in Zhan Guo Ce and the Records of the Grand Historian. That publication appeared in Taiwan in 1977 as the Boshu Zhanguoce (帛书战国策). The texts were written in between the style of Seal script and Clerical script. The transcript was probably composed around 195BC before its burial, as the text tend to avoid using the word bang (邦), the personal name of Emperor Gao of Han, to circumvent naming taboo.

Content

The Zhan Guo Ce recounts the history of the Warring States from the conquest of the Fan clan by the Zhi clan in 490 BC up to the failed assassination of Qin Shi Huang by Gao Jianli in 221 BC.

The chapters take the form of anecdotes meant to illustrate various strategies and tricks employed by the Warring States. With the focus thus being more on providing general political insights than on presenting the whole history of the period, there is no stringent year-by-year dating such as that found in the preceding Spring and Autumn Annals. Stories are sorted chronologically by under which ruler they take place, but within the reign of a single king there is no way to tell if the time elapsed between two anecdotes is a day or a year.

The book comprises approximately 120,000 words, and is divided into 33 chapters and 497 sections. The twelve dynasties the strategies pertain to are:

Literary criticism

The intellectual aspects have been disputed due to its stress on fame and profit and its conflicts with Confucian ideology. The book appears to overemphasize the historical contributions from the School of Diplomacy, devaluing the book's historical importance.

The book does not emphasize the historical facts or fiction, but appears to be an extensive collection of anecdotes with little bearing to the chronological order of chapter and narration. Since the 12th century, it has been widely debated whether the book should be considered a historical documentation from writer Chao Gongwu and Gao Sisun, and there have been attempts to categorize the book into a different genus. This lasted until 1936 where scholars like Zhong Fengnian demonstrated that the book was written as a handbook of diction from the School of Diplomacy, and not intended to be a compilation of historical facts.

Translations

• Crump, James I., Jr. (1970, 1996). Chan-Kuo Ts'e. Oxford: Clarendon Press; revised edition, University of Michigan Center for Chinese Studies.

编者

《战国策》只知编者是汉代的刘向，原作者直到现在也没有确定，大致上认为是非一时一地一人的作品。学者罗根泽认为，可能是蒯彻所作，罗根泽说：「《战国策》始作于蒯通（蒯彻）；增补并重编者为刘向；司马贞所见是否即刘向重编本不可知，今本则有残阙矣。」

本书随著战乱，也散逸不全，到了宋朝，曾巩又蒐罗阙文，加以重修。

题解

《战国策》的文章原有《国策》、《国事》、《短长》、《事语》、《长书》、《修书》等名称。西汉末年，刘向校录群书时在皇家藏书中发现了六种记录纵横家的写本，但是内容混乱，文字残缺。因此，战国策显然不是一时一人所作。刘向依照国别体分类，并加以编修。刘向只是战国策的校订者和编订者。而后高诱为之作注解。

北宋时，《战国策》散佚颇多，经曾巩「访之士大夫家，始尽得其书」，并加以校补，是为今本《战国策》三十三篇。，姚宏、鲍彪、吴师道皆有注本。

1973年，在长沙马王堆三号汉墓出土了一批帛书，其中一部类似于今本《战国策》，整理后定名为《战国纵横家书》。该书共27篇，其中11篇内容和文字与今本《战国策》和《史记》大致上相同。

体例

今本共33卷。东周策1卷，西周策1卷，秦策5卷，齐策6卷，楚策4卷，赵策4卷，魏策4卷，韩策3卷，燕策3卷、宋卫策1卷，中山策1卷，共497篇。

所记载的历史，上起前455年晋阳之战（稍提到前490年智伯灭范氏），下至前221年高渐离以筑击秦始皇。

名篇

• 苏秦以连横说秦（成语前倨后恭的出处）

• 冯谖客孟尝君（成语狡兔三窟、高枕无忧的来源）

• 赵且伐燕（成语鹬蚌相争，渔翁得利的来源 )

• 邹忌修八尺有馀（又称邹忌讽齐王纳谏)

• 秦王使人谓安陵君曰（又称唐雎不辱使命)

• 燕太子丹质于秦（又称荆轲刺秦王)

文学风格

《战国策》善于铺叙，长于叙事，选取曲折生动的故事情节，紧凑生动，富戏剧性，喜夸张渲染，善用排偶，捭阖谲诳，辩丽恣肆，又善用比喻与寓言，讽刺幽默，说服力强。

《战国策》亦善于描写人物，抒发情感，部分篇章深沉蕴藉，委婉动人。

评价

《战国策》一书反映了战国时代的社会风貌，当时士人的精神风采，不仅是一部历史著作，也是一部非常好的历史散文。它作为一部反映战国历史的历史资料，比较客观地记录了当时的一些重大历史事件，是战国历史的生动写照。它详细地记录了当时纵横家的言论和事迹，展示了这些人的精神风貌和思想才干，另外也记录了一些义勇志士的人生风采。《战国策》的文学成就也非常突出，在中国文学史上，它标志著中国古代散文发展的一个新时期，文学性非常突出，尤其在人物形象地刻画，语言文字的运用，寓言故事等方面具有非常鲜明的艺术特色。清初学者陆陇其称《战国策》「其文章之奇足以娱人耳目，而其机变之巧足以坏人之心术」。

《战国策》的思想内容比较复杂，主体上体现了纵横家的思想倾向，同时也反映出了战国时期思想活跃，文化多元的历史特点。《战国策》的政治观比较进步，最突出的是体现了重视人才的政治思想。《战国策》一书是游说辞总集，几乎所有纵横家谋士的言行都在此书。有三大特点：一智谋细，二虚实间，三文辞妙。

《战国策》一书对司马迁的《史记》的纪传体的形成，具有很大影响。《史记》有九十卷的史料直接取自于《战国策》的史料。但《战国策》许多记载并不可靠，司马迁在《苏秦传》后曰「世言苏秦多异，异时事有类之者皆附之苏秦」。《战国策》历来为研究者称赞其文学价值，但是对它的思想却是众说纷纭。这是由于该书与后世的儒家思想不符，过于追逐名利。而且过于夸大纵横家的历史作用，降低了史学价值。

注释