Portrayals of the intellectual scene of the early medieval Chinese “Sanguo” or “Three States” period (220–280) generally privilege major figures associated with the state of Wei, such as He Yan and Wang Bi, over those who made their mark in Shu (modern Sichuan) and Wu, the other two states contending for the right to rule “all under Heaven” after the demise of the Han dynasty. Michael Farmer sets out to redress this imbalance through a study of the Shu statesman and historian Qiao Zhou (c. 200–270). The book thus harbors a dual purpose, reflected in its title, for in presenting the life and thought of Qiao, it also seeks to illuminate the world of Shu intellectuals in early medieval China.

The study begins by surveying the major intellectual trends in the early history of Shu, paying special attention to the “prophetic-apocryphal” (chenwei) learning of the family of Yang Xu (or Yang Hou, second century CE), which considerably influenced the literati, including Qiao Zhou. Chapter 2 traces the Qiao family history and the early life and education of Qiao Zhou. The biography of Qiao in the Sanguo zhi preserves some of his writings (Sanguo zhi author Chen Shou studied under Qiao), and these form the core of chapter 3. This chapter focuses on Qiao's involvement in the establishment of the state of Shu; his memorial criticizing the emperor Liu Shan for indulging in “pleasure trips” (p. 56); his “Discourse on Enemy States” (Chouguo lun), which opposes Shu's futile military campaigns against Wei; and his call for surrender to Wei, for which posterity has judged him harshly. In this context, Farmer also introduces Qiao's Faxun (Model Teachings), whose extant fragments concern mainly political leadership, likely intended for the instruction of the heir-apparent, in whose household Qiao served for two decades.

Chapters 4–6 turn to Qiao's writings on the “classics,” ancient history, and local history, respectively. Each chapter starts with an introduction to the state of scholarship before Qiao and concludes with a discussion of his influence on later generations. According to Chen Shou, Qiao authored a Wujing lun (Discourse on the Five Canonical Texts). The twenty-eight surviving passages of this work deal with ritual practice, especially mourning rites. They show that Qiao was principally concerned with clarifying the “correct” meaning of certain rituals on the basis of what he considered superior historical textual evidence. In this respect, as Farmer suggests, he may be said to be rather “conservative” when compared with his contemporaries, who were mostly enamored with new “ethical-metaphysical interpretations of the canon” (p. 92). Qiao is probably best known for his historical work, Gushi kao (Investigations of Ancient History), in which he challenges the accuracy of the Shiji on specific points. Farmer argues that the work should not be viewed narrowly as a commentary on the Shiji, but as a more ambitious exercise in rectifying perceived errors in the available historical records. Finally, in chapter 6, Farmer assesses Qiao's contribution to the genre of local history, navigating deftly through a sea of textual uncertainties. Here, Qiao's innovative use of stories linked to particular localities (p. 131) and his sense of “regional pride” (p. 142) are highlighted. Besides the Sanguo zhi, Farmer makes extensive use of the Huayang guozhi by Chang Qu (fourth century CE), another famous son of the Shu region.

Farmer tells an engaging story, his research is meticulous, and the evident care and effort put into this study merit high praise. However, there is a tension between the two objectives of the book. While an outline of the influence of Qiao on later scholars may enhance our appreciation of his achievement, it does not shed much light on the intellectual landscape of early medieval China. On the other hand, the inclusion of a fair amount of background material and discussions of other figures and topics risks crowding the picture and blurring the portrait of Qiao. Did Qiao see himself primarily as a person of Shu? Did he push for surrender because he wanted to spare the land and its inhabitants the certain devastation of a Wei invasion? Or was his self-understanding shaped by Ru-Confucian ideals that transcend regional identities? I would have preferred an even more focused study of Qiao, with full translation of some of his writings, which would have added to our limited knowledge of early medieval Chinese “discourses.” However, preference does not amount to criticism. Farmer opted for a larger canvas, and the book before us should be recognized as a solid contribution to the study of early medieval Chinese intellectual history.