Wǔdài shǐ zuǎnwù 五代史纂誤
Compiled Errors in the History of the Five Dynasties by 吳縝 (Wú Zhěn, fl. late Northern Sòng)
About the work
A 3-juǎn kǎozhèng monograph identifying errors in Ōuyáng Xiū’s Xīn Wǔdài shǐ (KR2a0030). Companion to Wú Zhěn’s parallel Xīn Tángshū jiūmiù (KR2a0028, 20 juǎn) on the Xīn Tángshū. Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Dúshū zhì and Chén Zhènsūn’s Shūlù jiětí both record 5 juǎn; the Sòng shǐ Yìwén zhì records 3. The work was lost early; Sìkù editors reconstituted from 112 entries (out of about 200 recorded by Cháo Gōngwǔ) preserved in the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn — about 50–60% of the original.
Tiyao
By Wú Zhěn of the Sòng. Per Zhōu Mì’s Qídōng yěyǔ: Liú Xīzhòng 劉羲仲 (Dàoyuán’s son [Dàoyuán being Liú Shù 劉恕’s zì], also a historian) “picked at the Wǔdài shǐ’s errors and made the Jiūmiù, showed it to Sū Shì 蘇軾. Shì said: ‘In the past Ōuyánggōng’s history was just complete, and Jīnggōng [Wáng Ānshí] said to me, “Ōu wrote Wǔdài shǐ but not Sānguó zhì — improper; can you not undertake it?” I firmly declined. To compile the affairs of a thousand years — how could there be no small gain or loss in it? The reason I dared not accept Jīnggōng’s commission was precisely fear of having one’s tail picked by his sort.’ ” By this account it would be Liú Xīzhòng’s work. But Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Dúshū zhì, Chén Zhènsūn’s Shūlù jiětí both record 5 juǎn and ascribe to Zhěn; Sòngshǐ Yìwén zhì records 3 juǎn and also ascribes to Zhěn — so Zhōu Mì himself doubts the attribution.
This work after the Sòng Nándù was once cut along with the Xīn Tángshū jiūmiù at Wúxīng, attached to the Tang shū and Wǔdài shǐ end. Today Jiūmiù still has a printed text in transmission; this work is long lost. Only the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn preserves substantial citations. Gathered and arranged, the original sequence can still be recovered. Cháo Gōngwǔ recorded over 200 entries; testing shows only 112 — about half-or-more of the original is preserved, the gist intact.
Ōuyáng’s Wǔdài shǐ is yìlì-driven for bāobiǎn, with frequent kǎozhèng gaps. Like Sīmǎ Guāng’s Tōngjiàn kǎoyì on Jìnwáng’s three arrows entrusted to Zhuāngzōng; like Hóng Mài’s Róngzhāi sānbǐ on the failure to record ZhūLiáng’s light tax — these are the worst lacunae. As to Xú Wúdǎng’s annotation, ignorant of fact-checking, sparse to the point of jiǎnlòu (skimpy and crude). Zhěn one by one prises out the gaps and errors, all opening up and analysing — hitting on the disease’s root. Hence in the Sòng era it was much esteemed. Zhāng Rúyú’s Shāntáng kǎosuǒ further lists the jì and zhuàn’s mutually inconsistent items to establish the necessity of this work — not lightly to discount it as superficial criticism of the elders.
(The tíyào notes a few entries in the present text where the corruption Wú criticises is actually absent from the Xīn Wǔdài shǐ (e.g. Tang Mǐngzōng jì on Zhào Fèng’s resignation; Jìn Chūdì jì on the wild-goose shooting at Fántái; Zhōu Tàizǔ jì on jiǎchén misread as jiǎshēn) — perhaps later editors of the Wǔdài shǐ, after seeing Wú Zhěn’s note, silently corrected the original. Items where the jiù and xīn differ are also noted briefly for kǎozhèng purposes.)
Abstract
The Wǔdài shǐ zuǎnwù is the second of Wú Zhěn’s two kǎozhèng monographs on Ōuyáng Xiū’s historiographical work — companion to the Xīn Tángshū jiūmiù (KR2a0028). Lost early; the Sìkù-recovered text in 3 juǎn preserves 112 entries out of an original 200+, organised in the same critical-categorical manner as the Jiūmiù: factual contradictions between jì and zhuàn, dating errors, mistransliterations, character corruptions, etc.
The work was as much a critique of Xú Wúdǎng’s zhù (which the Sìkù compilers also find weak) as of Ōuyáng Xiū’s main text. Together with the Jiūmiù, it constituted a sustained Northern Sòng dissent against the Chūnqiū-style bāobiǎn historiographical method that Ōuyáng Xiū was importing into the zhèngshǐ genre — privileging kǎozhèng over moral judgement. The Sìkù compilers acknowledge this dissent and integrate it into their own canonical statement that the jiù and xīn Tang and Wǔdài histories must stand together as complementary documents.
The transmission history is unusual. Both Wú Zhěn works were re-cut at Wúxīng in Shàoxīng (1131–1162), attached to the Tang shū and Wǔdài shǐ end-papers. The Jiūmiù survived; the Zuǎnwù did not, but was substantially preserved in the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn citations and was reconstituted by the Sìkù editorial team alongside the Jiù Wǔdài shǐ recovery project of Qiánlóng 38–39 (1773–1774).
Translations and research
No translation. Cited extensively in Wú Rénchén’s 吳任臣 Shíguó chūnqiū 十國春秋 (Qing) — the standard premodern history of the Ten Kingdoms; Chén Shàngjūn 陳尚君, Wǔdài shǐ shū kǎo zhèng 五代史書考證 (Fùdàn Dàxué, 2010) — the principal modern study, working through Wú Zhěn entry by entry against modern editions of both Wǔdài zhèngshǐ; Wáng Pèngnǎn 王鵬南, “Wú Zhěn yǔ Sòngdài lìshǐ kǎozhèng zhī xíngchéng”, Shǐxué shǐ yánjiū 1989.4.