Excerpt from the Comprehensive [Perspectives on] Histor[iograph]y (Shi tong 史通)
The Six Schools of History (六家)
By Liu Zhiji
Translated by Devin Fitzgerald
Annotations and emendations by Maura Dykstra
自古帝王編述文籍，《外篇》言之備矣。古往今來，質文遞變，諸史之作，不恆厥體。榷而爲論，其流有六：一曰《尚書》家，二曰《春秋》家，三曰《左傳》家，四曰《國語》家，五曰《史記》家，六曰《漢書》家。今略陳其義，列之於後。
This section of the book will fully explain the sorts of texts and narrations that have come down from the kings and emperors of antiquity. However, from then until today, the nature of writing has changed and authoring history has been mutable in form. Discussing it tentatively, we can separate the forms into six different traditions: the first is the Book of Documents school, the second the Spring and Autumn Annals school, the third is the Zuo Zhuan school, the fourth the Guoyu school, the fifth the Records of the Grand Historian school, and the sixth is the Book of Han school. Now, I will outline their principles in the sections to follow.
The Book of Documents
《尚書》家者，其先出於太古。《易》曰：「河出《圖》，洛出《書》，聖人則之。」故知《書》之所起遠矣。至孔子觀書於周室，得虞、夏、商、周四代之典，乃删其善者，定爲《尚書》百篇。孔安國曰：「以其上古之書，謂之《尚書》。」《尚書璇璣鈐》曰：「尚者，上也。上天垂文?，布節度，如天行也。」王肅曰：「上所言，下爲史所書，故曰《尚書》也。」推此三說，其義不同。蓋《書》之所主，本於號令，所以宣王道之正義，發話言於臣下，故其所載，皆典、謨、訓、誥、誓、命之文。至如《堯》、《舜》二典直序人事，《禹貢》一篇唯言地理，《洪範》總述災祥，《顧命》都陳喪禮，茲亦爲例不純者也。
The school of the Book of Documents (lit. Exalted Documents) first emerged in high antiquity. The Book of Changes says, “The River gave forth the map, and Luo [writing] the documents, both of which the sages placed at their side.” Thus, we know that Documents began in the distant past. When Confucius read the documents in the Zhou palace, he obtained the institutional treatises of ages of Yao, the Xia, the Shang, and the Zhou. He extracted what was good and fixed it as the hundred sections of the Book of Documents. So it is that Kong An’guo noted, “The book that is the book of high antiquity is the Book of Documents.” Likewise, the Pearl and Jade Lock of the Book of Documents says, “That which is exalted is above. High Heaven sent down the signs, disseminating the rules. Thus, [the Exalted Book] is like the actions of Heaven.” [We should note,] however, if we push these three anecdotes [of Confucius, Kong Anguo, and the Pearl and Jade Lock], we see that they disagree in meaning [and so are suspect].
The substance of the Book of Documents is based on the orders and commands of [rulers] in order to transmit the proper righteousness of the way of kings through their speeches to their ministers. For this reason, the Book records the texts of institutions, royal plans, admonishments, grants, oaths, and edicts. Thus, we see why the two institutional treatises from Yao and Shun directly outline matters of human precedence, the Tribute of Yu only discusses geography, Grand Plan summarizes omens, and Guming outlines the rituals of mourning. (They are merely illustrated as examples, and therefore are not pure or comprehensive descriptions.)
又有《周書》者，與《尚書》相類，即孔氏刊約百篇之外，凡爲七十一章。上自文、武，下終靈、景。甚有明允篤誠，典雅高義；時亦有淺末恆說，滓穢相參，殆似後之好事者所增益也。至若《職方》之言，與《周官》無異；《時訓》之說，比《月令》多同。斯百王之正書，《五經》之別錄者也。
Furthermore, The Zhou Documents** are of the same type as those in the Book of Documents, so in addition to the one hundred or so sections of the Book, seventy one essays from the Zhou Documents were added. These spanned from King Wen and Wu down to Ling and Jing.These sections highlighted the just, sincere, and honest; making record of the elegant of the highest righteousness. Yet sometimes they also record the superficial and commonplace and include corrupted passages. These are probably sections that meddlers from later ages appended. For this reason, the words of Zhifang do not differ from the of the Offices of Zhou, and the sayings of Shixun are often the same as Yueling. Still, this is the right book for all kings, and another record in addition to the Five Classics.
**The phrase Zhou shu is sometimes used to refer to the Zhou sections of the Shang shu. In other cases, such as this one, it refers to a work also known as the 逸周書, or “Superfluous [sections of the ] Book of Zhou. Scholars have long assumed that this text contained documents contemporaneous with, but not compiled in, the Zhou section of the Shang shu (which is to say that they were edited out by the presumed compiler, Confucius). References to this work as one distinct from the Shang shu appear as early as the Warring States period, although it cannot be assumed that all of the documents within the work we have today are from that time, as many appear to be later additions from as far away in time as the Han dynasty. In Liu Xiang’s account of the text, for example, there are 45 chapters, while 60 exist in the work as it is known today. Liu seems to have had access to a version with even more chapters. Although the text purports to contain historical documents much like the Shang shu, its place outside of the Confucian canon and the fact that some of its contents do not agree with the philosophical tone of the Shang shu has resulted in a general lack of attention to the work in scholarship.
In the comparisons above, the sections Zhifang and Shixun are from the “Superfluous Book of Zhou,” and the two works to which they are compared are the Offices of Zhou and the Yueling sections of the Classic of Rites.
自宗周既殞，《書》體遂廢，迄乎漢、魏，無能繼者。至晉廣陵相魯國孔衍，以爲國史所以表言行，昭法式，至於人理常事，不足備列。乃删漢、魏諸史，取其美詞典言，足爲龜鏡者，定以篇第，纂成一家。由是有《漢尚書》、《後漢尚書》、《漢魏尚書》，凡爲二十六卷。至隋秘書監太原王劭，又錄開皇、仁壽時事，編而次之，以類相從，各爲其目，勒成《隋書》八十卷。尋其義例，皆準《尚書》。
After the collapse of the Zhou line, the form of the Documents was gradually abandoned. Coming to the Han and Wei, none were able to continue it. During the Jin, Kong Yan,** the Minister of Guanglin from Lu, believed that Official History should show words and deeds in order to highlight virtuous models and bring mankind to understand axiomatic principles. It was not enough to just record everything. He therefore selected from all of the Han and Wei histories and took their beautiful phrases and institutional discussions. He arranged those that could serve as a mirror and or plastron*** into ordered essays, combining them into a coherent whole. This is how he compiled the Han Book of Documents, the Latter Han Book of Documents, and the Han-Wei Book of Documents, totaling twenty-six fascicles. During the Sui, the secretary director Wang Shao also recorded the affairs of the time of Kaihuang and Lushou. He edited them and put them in order according to their types. Placing them according to their category, he made the Book of the Sui in eighteen chapters. If we search out the reasons for this organization, we see that it was based on the Book of Documents.
** Kong Yan (孔衍, 258-320) was a 22nd-generation descendant of Confucius who served in the Jin court.
*** A plastron is one of the common media used for oracle bone divination.
原夫《尚書》之所記也，若君臣相對，詞旨可稱，則一時之言，累篇咸載。如言無足紀，語無可述，若此故事，雖有脫略，而觀者不以爲非。爰逮中葉，文籍大備，必翦截今文，摸擬古法，事非改轍，理涉守株。故舒元所撰《漢》、《魏》等書，不行於代也。若乃帝王無紀，公卿缺傳，則年月失序，爵里難詳，斯並昔之所忽，而今之所要。如君懋《隋書》，雖欲祖述商、周，憲章虞、夏，觀其所述，乃似《孔子家語》、臨川《世說》，謂畫虎不成，反類犬也。故其書受嗤當代，良有以焉。
Fundamentally, the Book of Documents was to be a record. If when the minister and ruler met there were words worthy of praise, then the words from those times were gathered into chapters and stored. If their words had nothing worth noting, then their speech was not recorded. Even though these matters then have omissions, those who read it do not take it to be wrong. Coming into later ages, when documents have been complete, scholars had to cut and extract contemporary records and arrange them in imitation of ancient practices. This matter cannot be abandoned, for its principles protect the foundation. For this reason, Kong Yan’s Book of Han, Book of Wei, and others did not circulate in their day [so as to protect them.] If a ruler does not have annals and his vassals do not have biographies, then there will be no order to his age, and it will be difficult to detail ranks and local government. These matters were neglected in the past, but are important in the present. Just as Wang Zhao’s Book of the Sui, which although it wants to be heir to the descriptions of the Shang and Zhou and reveal the governing principles of the Xia, when we examine what it is, then it is more like The Private Sayings of Confucius and Wang Liuyi’s New Words on Our Age. It’s as though he wanted to draw a tiger, but ended up with a dog. Thus, we can see that there are good reasons behind the scorn his book has received in our day.
The Annals
《春秋》家者，其先出於三代。案《汲冢瑣語》丁時太事，且爲《夏殷春秋》。孔子曰：「疏通知遠，《書》敎也。」「屬辭比事，《春秋》之敎也。」知《春秋》始作，與《尚書》同時。
The precedent for the Spring and Autumn school [likewise] emerged during the three ages of antiquity. According to the Marginal Comments of the Ji Family, by the reign of Taiding there was The Spring and Autumn Annals of the Xia Dynasty. Confucius said, “The teachings of the Book instruct for wide understanding of the past and the future… the teachings of the Spring and Autumn annals is that careful use of language can be used to compare events.” From this, we know that the Spring and Autumn Annals began to be composed at the same time as the Book of Documents.
《瑣語》又有《晉春秋》，記獻公十七年事。《國語》雲：晉羊舌肸習於春秋，悼公使傳其太子。《左傳》昭二年，晉韓宣子來聘，見《魯春秋》曰：「周禮盡在魯矣。」斯則春秋之目，事匪一家。至於隱沒無聞者，不可勝載。又案《竹書紀年》，其所紀事皆與《魯春秋》同。《孟子》曰：「晉謂之乘，楚謂之檮杌，而魯謂之春秋，其實一也。」然則乘與紀年、檮杌，其皆春秋之別名者乎！故《墨子》曰：「吾見百國春秋」，蓋皆指此也。
Marginal Comments also notes The Spring and Autumn Annals of the Jin, which records events from the seventeenth year of Duke Xian. The Guoyu says Yang Shexi of the Jin learned from the SprIng and Autumn Annals. Duke Ai had him teach them to his heir. The Zuozhuan records that during the second year of Zhao, Han Xuanzi from Jin [went to Lu] to investigate. In the Spring and Autumn Annals of Lu it notes that he found “the Rites of Zhou are entirely [preserved] in Lu.” From this then we know that the title of Spring and Autumn Annals is in fact not a single school. Those that have vanished and been lost must be innumerable, as in seen in the example of the Bamboo Chronicles, which records things in the same manner as the Spring and Autumn Annals of Lu. Furthermore, Mencius noted that “In Jin they call it A Vehicle, in Chu they call it is the Timeless Demon, and in Lu they call it the Spring and Autumn Annals. In fact, these are all the same.” If this is so, then the Vehicle, Chronicle, and Timeless Demon, are all different names for the Spring and Autumn Annals. For this reason, Mozi could say, “I have seen the Spring and Autumn Annals of all the states.” Clearly, he was referring to these.
逮仲尼之修《春秋》也，乃觀周禮之舊法，遵魯史之遺文；據行事，仍人道；就敗以明罰，因興以立功；假日月而定曆數，籍朝聘而正禮樂；微婉其說，志晦其文；爲不刊之言，著將來之法，故能彌歷千載，而其書獨行。
As for Confucius editing the Spring and Autumn Annals, he considered the old laws of the Zhou Rites and respectfully followed the writings passed down in the History of Lu. He based them on events that occurred, but followed the humane way. Therefore, the losses [he described] illuminated punishments and the reasons for success was rooted in the establishment of meritorious deeds. By using days and months, he fixed the calendar, and by recording court audiences, he rectified rituals and music. He was subtle in his discourse, hiding his ambition in the shadows of his prose. He did this in order to make words which were unpublishable become the author the laws of future ages. Thus, it was able to endure through countless ages, and stands alone.
又案儒者之說春秋也，以事繫日，以日繫月；言春以包夏，舉秋以兼冬，年有四時，故錯舉以爲所記之名也。茍如是，則晏子、虞卿、呂氏、陸賈其書篇第，本無年月，而亦謂之春秋，蓋有異於此者也。
According to the Confucians’ discussions of the Spring and Autumn Annals, events were tied to days, and the days were tied to months. So, when the title makes mention of “Spring,” this also includes summer. When they lifted up “Autumn” this also included winter. Since the year has four seasons, they used their names to refer to all of the things recorded over that period. This being the case, the ordered chapters and books of Yanzi, Yuqing, Lushi, and Lu Jia, all of which do not have months and years, which are called Spring and Autumn Annals, differ from the meaning of the original.
至太史公著《史記》，始以天子爲本紀，考其宗旨，如法《春秋》。自是爲國史者，皆用斯法。然時移世異，體式不同。其所書之事也，皆言罕褒諱，事無黜陟，故馬遷所謂整齊故事耳，安得比於《春秋》哉！
When it came to the Grand Historian authoring Records of the Grand Historian, he began it with the basic annals of the son of heaven. Examining its principles, we can see it is like the standard set by the Spring and Autumn Annals. After this, everything which has been called “Court History” has used this principle. But time moved onward and with the passing of generations the forms have not been the same. All of the events recorded in court histories are terse in form, with both praise and taboo, there is nothing they omit. Thus, when Sima Qian referred to an orderly narrative, how could there be anything better than the Spring and Autumn Annals?
The Zuo Tradition
《左傳》家者，其先出於左丘明。孔子既著《春秋》，而丘明受經作傳。蓋傳者，轉也，轉受經旨，以授後人。或曰傳者，傳〈平。〉也，所以傳示來世。案孔安國注《尚書》，亦謂之傳，斯則傳者，亦訓釋之義乎。觀《左傳》之釋經也，言見經文而事詳傳內，或傳無而經有，或經闕而傳存。其言簡而要，其事詳而博，信聖人之才羽翮，而述者之冠冕也。
The school of the Zuo Tradition first came from Zuo Qiuming. After Confucius edited the Spring and Autumn Annals, Qiuming received the text and composed the Tradition. The word Zhuan (translated above as Tradition), also means to turn, to revolve. As in: to receive the guiding principle of the texts and then turn to pass it on to students. Some also say that Zhuan means to spread evenly outward. As in: to disseminate to be revealed to later ages. According to Kong An’guo’s commentary on the Book of Documents explanation of Zhuan, the term means ‘to explain.’ Seeing as the Zuozhuan explains a classic, the discourses are in the classic’s text while the details of events are in the zhuan. Sometimes, the zhuan omits them, but the classic has them. Sometimes the classic omits them, but they are preserved in the zhuan. Its language is simple and essential, but describes matters in a detailed and complete way. I believe it supplemented the talents of the sage, and ranks highest among narrative forms.
逮孔子云沒，經傳不作。於時文籍，唯有《戰國策》及《太史公書》而已。至晉著作郎魯國樂資，乃追採二史，撰爲《春秋後傳》。其書始以周貞王續前傳魯哀公後，至王?入秦，又以秦文王之繼周，終於二世之滅，合成三十卷。
After the death of Confucius, the classic and zhuan (commentary) were never done again. During this time, there were only texts like the Strategies of the Warring Domains and Records of the Grand Historian. Coming to the Jin dynasty, the Attendant of Writings from Lu, Le Zi, made selections from Strategies of the Warring Domains and Records of the Grand Historian and compiled A Later Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals. The work began with King Zhen of the Zhou, continued where the Zuo Tradition ended with Duke Ai of Lu and recorded until Wang Nan entered Qin. It also followed the succession of King Wen of Qin succeeding the Zhou, ending with there eradication after two generation. Altogether, it is thirty chapters.
當漢代史書，以遷、固爲主，而紀傳㸦出，表志相重，於文爲煩，頗難周覽。至孝獻帝，始命荀悅撮其書爲編年體，依《左傳》著《漢紀》三十篇。自是每代國史，皆有斯作，起自後漢，至於高齊。如張璠、孫盛、干寶、徐廣、裴子野、吳均、何之元、王劭等，其所著書，或謂之春秋，或謂之紀，或謂之略，或謂之典，或謂之志。雖名各異，大抵皆依《左傳》以爲的準焉。
The histories of the Han, especially those of Sima Qian and Ban Gu, had annals and commentaries in addition to tables and essays. Because of their superfluous texts, it is difficult to read them in their entirety. During the reign of Emperor Xiaoxian, Xun Yue was ordered to combine these two texts into an annal modeled on the Zuo Tradition. He wrote the Records of the Han in thirty chapters. After this, the court history of every period has been done like this. Beginning with the late Han down unto the Qi. The books authored by the likes of Zhang Fan, Sun Sheng, Gan Bao, Xu Guang, Pei Ziye, Wu Jun, He Zhiyuan, and Wang Shao have been called Spring and Autumn Annals, Records, Outlines, Treatises, or Essays. Although the names differ, they all take the Zuo Tradition as their standard.
The Discourses of the States
《國語》家者，其先亦出於左丘明。既爲《春秋內傳》，又稽其逸文，纂其別說，分周、魯、齊、晉、鄭、楚、吳、越八國事，起自周穆王，終於魯悼公，別爲《春秋外傳國語》，合爲二十一篇。其文以方《內傳》，或重出而小異。然自古名儒賈逵、王肅、虞翻、韋曜之徒，並申以注釋，治其章句，此亦《六經》之流，《三傳》之亞也。
The school of the Discourses of the States also emerged from Zuo Qiuming. It is also referred to as the Inner Tradition of the Spring and Autumn Annals. It investigates the various writings and compiles accounts left over from the period [i.e. those not found in The Annals or in the Zuo Tradition]. It is divided according to events in the eight states of Zhou, Lu, Qi, Jin, Zheng, Wu, and Yue. It begins with King Mu of the Zhou and ends with Duke Dao of Lu. Another is called The Outer Discourses of the States’ Tradition of the Spring and Autumn Annals, in twenty one sections. Its text is similar to the Inner Tradition, but there are many cases of slight variation. From antiquity, famous scholars like Jia Kui, Wang Su, Yu Fan, Wei Yao have added their commentaries and analyzed the text. These are in the tradition of the six classics, but less important than the three traditions.
曁縱橫互起，力戰爭雄，秦兼天下，而著《戰國策》。其篇有東西二周、秦、齊、燕、楚、三晉、宋、衞、中山，合十二國，分爲三十三卷。夫謂之策者，蓋錄而不序，故即簡以爲名。或云，漢代劉向以戰國游士爲之策謀，因謂之《戰國策》。
Later, when schools schemed in contention and all of the states warred for superiority, All Under Heaven became the possession of Qin. The Strategies of the Warring States were authored, and it’s thirty-three separate chapters described the twelves states of the Eastern and Western Zhou, the Qin, Qi, Yan, Chu, three Jin, Song, Wei, and Zhongshan. It is probably titled Bamboo Slips because they are records with no preface. It is because they are simple that they were named thusly. Some others say that in the Han Liu Xiang gave them the name Strategies of the Warring States because they constituted the strategies of the wandering philosophers of the Warring States.
至孔衍，又以《戰國策》所書，未爲盡善。乃引太史公所記，參其異同，删彼二家，聚爲一錄，號爲《春秋後語》。除二周及宋、衞、中山，其所留者，七國而已。始自秦孝公，終於楚、漢之際，比於《春秋》，亦盡二百三十餘年行事。始衍撰《春秋時國語》，復撰《春秋後語》，勒成二書，各爲十卷。今行於世者，唯《後語》存焉。按其書《序》云：「雖左氏莫能加。」世人皆尤其不量力，不度德。尋衍之此義，自比於丘明者，當謂《國語》，非《春秋傳》也。必方以類聚，豈多嗤乎！
Kong Yan, on the other hand, believed that the composition of the Strategies of the Warring States was not well executed. He drew upon the records made by the Grand Historian to collate their similarities and differences. He edited the works and made a single record, which he titled Afterword to the Spring and Autumn Annals. He eliminated the records of the two Zhou, Song, Wei, and Zhongshan, leaving the text with records of only seven states. Beginning with Duke Xiao of the Qin and going until the conflict between Chu and Han, he compared it to the Spring and Autumn Annals, making a history of events for over two hundred and thirty years. When Yan began, he was compiling the Discourses of the States of the Spring and Autumn Annals, at the same time, he also compiled Afterword to the Spring and Autumn Annals. He made these two books, both of which were ten chapters long. Today, only the Afterword still exists. According to his preface, he claimed that ”Even Zuo Qiuming could not add anything to this work!” People believed he overestimated his ability and virtue. Searching out Yan’s meaning in this statement, I believe he was comparing himself to Zuo Qiuming’s Discourses of the States, not his Tradition of the Spring and Autumn Annals. He must have been grouping these two according to form. Otherwise this would be too laughable a comparison!
當漢氏失馭，英雄角力。司馬彪又錄其行事，因爲《九州春秋》，州爲一篇，合爲九卷。尋其體統，亦近代之《國語》也。
When the Han line lost control, hereos of an age locked horns. Sima Biao recorded their matters in the Spring and Autumn Annals of the Nine Prefectures. Each prefecture had a chapter, and the book was nine chapters long. Looking at it’s form, we can also see that it approximates the Discourses of the States.
自魏都許、洛，三方鼎峙；晉宅江、淮，四海幅裂。其君雖號同王者，而地實諸侯。所在史官，記其國事，爲紀傳者則規模班、馬，創編年者則議擬荀、袁。於是《史》、《漢》之體大行，而《國語》之風替矣。
After the Wei established their capital in Xuchang and Luoyang, the three kingdoms emerged. When the Jin established themselves in the Jianghuai region, the state divided. Although their lords all declared themselves kings, they had not more land than a marquis. The historians who recorded court events made annals and records likes those of Ban Gu and Sima Qian. They made chronologies modeled on Xun Yue and Yuan Hong. At that time, the form of the Records of the Grand Historian and the Book of Han became popular, and the style of the Discourses of the States was replaced.
The Records of the Historian
《史記》家者，其先出於司馬遷。自《五經》間行，百家競列，事迹錯糅，前後乖舛。至遷乃鳩集國史，採訪家人，上起黃帝，下窮漢武，紀傳以統君臣，書表以譜年爵，合百三十卷。因魯史舊名，目之曰《史記》。自是漢世史官所續，皆以《史記》爲名。迄乎東京著書，猶稱《漢記》。
The school of the Records of the Grand Historian first came from Sima Qian. After the five classics began to circulate, the hundred schools competed with each other. The traces of events became mixed up, and errors came in from beginning to end. Qian gathered up the court histories and interviewed the people of their schools. Beginning from the Yellow Emperor and ending with Emperor Wu of the Han, he made annals and biographies that brought together the ruler and the ruled. He composed tables to list timelines of the nobles. It was altogether three hundred chapters. Because of the precedent of the Scribe of Lu, he called it the Historical Record (Record of the Grand Historian).** After this, the Historian officials of the Han continued it, naming their works Historical Record. In the Eastern Han, they called it the Han Record.
** Here Liu remarks that the word for the office “scribe” in the Zhou period is the same character that is often translated as “Historian” in Records of the Grand Historian, and he attributes the name of the second to the precedent of the first. Interestingly, however, the Records of the Grand Historian were not so named until centuries after the work was composed by Sima Qian. The earliest known title of the work is the 太史公書, which translates to Book of the Gentleman of the Office of the Grand Historian/Astrologer and mentions the character shi explicitly in the context of Sima Qian’s office.
至梁武帝，又敕其羣臣，上自太初，下終齊室，撰成《通史》六百二十卷。其書自秦以上，皆以《史記》爲本，而別採他說，以廣異聞；至兩漢已還，則全錄當時紀傳，而上下通達，臭味相依；又吳、蜀二主皆入世家，五胡及拓拔氏列於《夷狄傳》。大抵其體皆如《史記》，其所爲異者，唯無表而已。
In the reign of Emperor Wu of the Liang,** he ordered his officials to compose a history beginning from the Great Beginning and ending with the House of Qi.*** When it was compiled they called in the Comprehensive History. It was 620 chapters. Everything it recorded before the Qin was based on the Records of the Grand Historian, but it also collected other accounts to encompass other records. Going through the two periods of the Han, it recorded the annals and biographies from that period. The prior sections linked to the later sections, and the entire text corresponded. The Kingdoms of Wu and Shu were put into the section on hereditary houses, and the Five Outlander Tribes as well as the Tuoba family were put into the Biography of Outlanders. It was basically the same in form as the Records of the Grand Historian. The only difference was that it did not have tables.
** The Liang, one of the Southern dynasties during the Northern and Southern Dynasties period.
*** The Qi empire was the dynasty directly before the Liang
其後元魏濟陰王暉，又著《科錄》二百七十卷，其斷限亦起自上古，而終於宋年。其編次多依於放《通史》，而取其行事尤相似者，共爲一科，故以《科錄》爲號。皇家顯慶中，符璽郎隴西李延壽抄撮近代諸史，南起自宋，終於陳，北始自魏，卒於隋，合一百八十篇，號曰《南》、《北史》。其君臣流別，紀傳羣分，皆以類相從，各附於本國。凡此諸作，皆《史記》之流也。
After this, the Wei Prince of Jiyin Yuan Hui[ye] composed the Record of Categories in two hundred and seventy chapters. It took high antiquity as its upper limit and ended during the Song. Its editorial order was modeled on the Comprehensive History, and it culled from sources which recorded similar things and put them into a single category. Thus it was named the Record of Categories.
During the Xianqing reign of our dynasty the minister of seals, Li Yanshou from Longxi, copied all of the histories from recent ages. He started in the south with the Song and ended with the Chen, and in the north he began with the Wei and ended with the Sui. Altogether, there were 108 chapters, and he called them the Northern Histories and the Southern Histories. He separated the rulers and officials by kind, and divided them into annals and biographies. Each was in a section according to their type and appended to the history of their state. All of these compositions are in the tradition of the Records of the Grand Historian.
尋《史記》疆宇遼闊，年月遐長，而分以紀傳，散以書表。每論國家一政，而胡、越相懸；敍君臣一時，而參、商是隔。此其爲體之失者也。兼其所載，多聚舊記，時採雜言，故使覽之者事罕異聞，而語饒重出。此撰錄之煩者也。況《通史》以降，蕪累尤深，遂使學者寧習本書，而怠窺新錄。且撰次無幾，而殘缺遽多，可謂勞而無功，述者所宜深誡也。
Investigating limits of the Records of the Grand Historian, we find it vast and expansive, reaching into distant times. It is divided into biographies and annals, and spread into charts. Its discussions of the politics of the states are separated by a great distance, and when it describes the officials and rulers of a period, they are not unified in space. This is the weakness of this form. Furthermore, bringing together all it records, much of it comes from old records and occasionally gathers form miscellaneous accounts, which causes the reading of it to have few facts and many rumors, but with many explanations being given. This is what is bothersome about this record. Moreover, after the Comprehensive History, accounts have been more mixed and confused, but scholars have peacefully studied this book and been negligent in reading new records. They compile countless accounts, but most become lost. It can be said that they labor without merit, and so compilers should take this as a warning.
The Han History
《漢書》家者，其先出於班固。馬遷撰《史記》，終於今上。自太初已下，闕而不錄。班彪因之，演成《後記》，以續前編。至子固，乃斷自高祖，盡於王莽，爲十二紀、十志、八表、七十列傳，勒成一史，目爲《漢書》。昔虞、夏之典，商、周之誥，孔氏所撰，皆謂之「書」。夫以「書」爲名，亦稽古之偉稱。尋其創造，皆準子長，但不爲「世家」，改「書」曰「志」而已。自東漢以後，作者相仍，皆襲其名號，無所變革，唯《東觀》曰「記」，《三國》曰「志」。然稱謂雖別，而體制皆同。
The school of the Book of Han came from Ban Gu. Sima Qian’s Records of the Grand Historian ends with Emperor Wu of the Han. From the Taichu reign down, there were no records. Owing to this, Ban Biao wrote the Later Records to continue the previous account. His son Gu named a book the Book of the Han, and recorded from Han Gaozu until Wang Mang. He had twelve annals, ten essays, eight charts, and seventy biographies. It the past, the Institutions of Yu and the Xia, the Grants of the Shang and Zhou, and the compositions of Confucius were all called Books. For this reason, he investigated the great names of antiquity and called it the Book. In seeking out its inspiration, we see it is based on Sima Qian. He just took out the “Hereditary Houses” essays and changed the “Book” into “Essays.” From the Eastern Han on, authors continues this and inherited the name without any change. Only the Dongguan was called an “Account” and only The Three Kingdoms was called a record. But although the names were different, there form was the same.
歷觀自古，史之所載也，《尚書》記周事，終秦穆，《春秋》述魯文，止哀公，《紀年》不逮於魏亡，《史記》唯論於漢始。如《漢書》者，究西都之首末，窮劉氏之廢興，包舉一代，撰成一書。言皆精煉，事甚該密，故學者尋討，易爲其功。自爾迄今，無改斯道。
Examining the records of history since antiquity, the Book of Documents records the affairs of the Zhou, ending with King Mu of the Qin; The Spring and Autumn Annals is a record of Lu and ends with Duke Ai;The Bamboo Annals do not go to the end of Wei; and the Records of the Grand Historian only discuss the early Han. Only The Book of Han made a single book to hold forth a single dynasty. It records the rise and fall of the Liu family, investigating from the beginning to the flight to the eastern capital. The writing is precise and the accounts are complete, thus scholars using them for research easily achieve results. From then until today there has been no change to this way of writing history.
於是考茲六家，商榷千載，蓋史之流品，亦窮之於此矣。而朴散淳銷，時移世異，《尚書》等四家，其體久廢，所可祖述者，唯《左氏》及《漢書》二家而已。
This investigation of the six schools has discussed thousands of years, and the various streams of history have been explored herein. The simple practices of the past have been lost, and things have changed with the times. The Book of Documents and the other four schools have been abandoned for ages. The only two that can still be seen in use are the schools of Master Zuo and the Book of Han.