修史过程

《大越史记全书》的编纂，可说是继承了越南人官方修史的传统。此一传统，可追溯至陈朝时期黎文休编撰《大越史记》及后黎朝时期潘孚先编纂《大越史记续编》。

至于《大越史记全书》的编修，可以分成四个阶段：

第一阶段

黎圣宗洪德十年（1469年），圣宗皇帝下令吴士连撰修《大越史记全书》，吴士连便是在前人的基础上，编《大越史记全书》。内容分为外纪五卷，自鸿庞氏至十二使君（公元967年）；本纪十卷，自丁先皇（公元968－979年）至黎太祖（公元1428年），共十五卷。修史的经过，据《大越史记全书·纂修大越史记全书凡例》：「是书之作，本黎文休、潘孚先《大越史记》二书，参以北史、野史、传志诸本，及所传授见闻，考校编辑为之。」

至于黎圣宗下令修史的原因，据后黎朝另一位史家范公著说，是「迨圣宗淳皇帝，禀睿智之资，厉英雄之志，拓土开疆，创法定制，尤能留意史籍。乃于洪德十年间，命礼部右侍郎兼国子监司业吴士连，纂修《大越史记全书》」。简言之，就是黎圣宗锐意「拓土开疆，创法定制」，因而下令修史，从前代中学习。

与黎文休《大越史记》不同，吴士连把越南历史的起点推前至鸿庞氏、蜀氏时期，将之列入「外纪」当中。对此，中国大陆学者叶少飞、陆小燕分析认为，鸿庞氏及蜀氏两篇外纪是吴士连采集越地故事传说集《岭南摭怪》内容，并借鉴中国史籍《旧唐书》的编纂方法，效法司马迁《史记·五帝本纪》，以炎帝神农氏为越南国史起源，以「体现越地文明之兴」。

第二阶段

黎玄宗于景治三年（公元1665年），命范公著增加本纪实录五卷，始自黎太祖（公元1428年），至莫氏篡位（公元1532年）；另外又增本纪续编三卷，自黎庄宗（公元1533年）至黎神宗（公元1662年）。

黎玄宗这次下令修史的背景，据范公著说，是皇帝「深知夫史乃正当时之名分，示来世之劝惩。」当时郑氏把持统治大权，皇帝明白到「夫史乃正当时之名分」，便藉助修史来强调黎氏王朝的正统性。

第三阶段

黎熙宗正和十八年（公元1697年），黎僖增补本纪续编一卷，内容从黎玄宗至黎嘉宗德元二年（公元1662－1675年），共十三年事。这亦是最后一次修订本。

这修史的时候，整个黎氏朝廷上下，已对郑主握有大权的事实，毫无多大的异议。在黎僖等所呈上的《大越史记续编序》中，提到皇帝与郑主「赞襄治化，振作文风，深惟史记之中，明是非而公好恶，森乎华衮斧钺之荣严，寔为万世衡鉴。乃于事几之暇，特命臣等订考旧史，讹者正之，纯者录之。……又蒐猎旧迹，参诸野史，类编自玄宗穆皇帝景治之初年，至嘉宗美皇帝德元之二年，凡十有三载之事实。」

第四阶段

自从黎僖追加本纪续编一卷之后，后黎朝国史馆再未进呈新续的本纪卷目。但是后黎朝及其以后的西山朝都未停止本纪的续编工作，只是皆未进行刻印。

景兴二十八年（1767年），黎显宗以文官阮俨、阮伯璘为总裁，续修永治元年以来的国史，俟进呈之后刻印颁行，但未能如愿。景兴三十六年（1775年），黎显宗再次命阮俒、黎贵敦、武檰为总裁，续编自永治元年（1676年）以来的百年历史。但直至后黎朝灭亡，都未能进呈付刻，仅有抄本存世。

牛军凯根据现存的诸多续编抄本的时间节点，认为景兴三十四年（1773年）可能是景兴三十六年（1775年）阮俒等人续修国史的时间下限，景兴三十四年之后的内容是西山朝时期的史官完成的。越南学者根据续编中没有对西山朝侮辱性的贬低称呼，也认为后期的续编是由西山朝史官吴时任于1797年主笔完成的。

流传情况

正和十八年（1697年），后黎朝第一次刊刻完整的《大越史记全书》，其中包括外纪五卷，本纪十卷，实录五卷，续编四卷，共二十四卷。史称「内阁官板」或「内阁官本」，是《大越史记全书》最早的刻本。

西山朝时期，史官吴时任刊刻了其父吴时仕编修的《大越史记前编》，自鸿庞氏至黎太宗立国，史称「北城学堂本」。阮朝嗣德年间，国子监依据内阁官板进行翻刻，是为「国子监本」。

日本明治十七年（1884年），日本学者引田利章在东京埴山堂主持刊印了《大越史记全书》，时间下限依然是德元二年（1675年），俗称「引田利章本」。

1986年，陈荆和在日本东京主持点校《大越史记全书》，并刊印出版，俗称「陈荆和校合本」。该点校本在越南汉喃研究院所藏5种续编抄本基础上，增加了永治元年（1676年）至昭统三年（1789年）的五卷内容。

2013年，西南师范大学出版社和人民出版社联合进行的《域外汉籍珍本文库》项目据内阁官本影印出版，列《域外汉籍珍本文库·第四辑·史部》第二、三册。2015年12月，该项目又出版了标点校勘本《大越史记全书》。该点校本以法国巴黎亚洲学会藏全本越南内阁官本为底本，参考了西山朝景盛八年的北城学堂本、阮朝嗣德年间的国子监本、陈荆和校合本及其他相关版本。永治元年（1676年）以后的续编部分，则利用越南、法国等地新发现的资料，在陈荆和校合本的基础上，进行了深入整理。

注释

History of compilation

During the Fourth Chinese domination, many valuable books of Đại Việt were taken away by the Ming dynasty including Lê Văn Hưu's Đại Việt sử ký (大越史记, Annals of Đại Việt), the official history of the Trần dynasty and the most comprehensive source of the history of Vietnam up to that era. However, the contents of the Đại Việt sử ký and Lê Văn Hưu's comments about various historical events was fully collected by the historian Phan Phu Tiên in writing the first official annals of the Lê dynasty after the order of the Emperor Lê Nhân Tông in 1455. The new Đại Việt sử ký of Phan Phu Tiên was supplemented the period from 1223 with the coronation of Trần Thái Tông to 1427 with the retreat of the Ming dynasty after the victory of Lê Lợi. Phan Phu Tiên's ten-volume work had other names such as Đại Việt sử ký tục biên (大越史记续编序, Supplementary Edition of the Annals of Đại Việt) or Quốc sử biên lục.

During the reign of Lê Thánh Tông, who was an emperor famous for his interest in learning and knowledge, the scholar and historian Ngô Sĩ Liên was appointed to the Bureau of History in 1473. Under the order of Thánh Tông, he based on the works of Lê Văn Hưu and Phan Phu Tiên to write the Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư which was compiled in 15 volumes (quyển) and finished in 1479. In compiling the Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư, Ngô Sĩ Liên also drew elements from other books such as Việt điện u linh tập (Compilation of the potent spirits in the Realm of Việt) or Lĩnh Nam chích quái (Extraordinary stories of Lĩnh Nam) which were collections of folk legend and myth but still considered by Ngô Sĩ Liên good sources for history because of their reliable system of citation. This was the first time such sources were used in historiography by a Vietnamese historian. Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư was finally completed in 1479 with the accounts that stopped by the coronation of Lê Thái Tổ in 1428. According to Lê Quý Đôn, Ngô Sĩ Liên also compiled an historical text about the reigns of Thái Tổ, Thái Tông and Nhân Tông named Tam triều bản ký (Records of the Three Reigns).

In 1511, the royal historian Vũ Quỳnh reorganized Ngô Sĩ Liên's work in his Việt giám thông khảo by adding the account about Thánh Tông, Hiển Tông, Túc Tông and Uy Mục, which was called Tứ triều bản ký (Records of the Four Reigns). Other historians continued to revise Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư and also add the supplemental information about the reign of the Lê dynasty, notably the 23-volume Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư tục biên (Continued Compilation of the Complete Annals of Đại Việt) was published under the supervision of Phạm Công Trứ in 1665 while the "Nội các quan bản" edition, the most comprehensive and popular version of Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư, was printed in 1697 during the Chính Hòa era by efforts of the historian Lê Hi.

Edition

The original 15-volume version of Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư or the Hồng Đức edition (1479), that was named after the era name of Lê Thánh Tông, only existed in form of handwritten manuscript and hence is only partially preserved to this day. The Đại Việt sử ký tục biên or the Cảnh Trị edition (1665), that was the era name of Lê Huyền Tông has a better status of conservation but the most popular and fully preserved version of Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư until now is the Chính Hòa edition (1697) which was the only woodblock printed version of this work. Therefore, the Chính Hòa version is considered the most important historical text about the history of Vietnam from its beginning to the period of the Lê dynasty and has been often reduced, revised and corrected by later historians for contemporary needs. Today, a complete set of the "Nội các quan bản" edition is kept in the archives of the École française d'Extrême-Orient in Paris, France. This edition was translated into Vietnamese in 1993 by the Institute of Hán Nôm in Hanoi.

Contents

The format of Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư was modeled after the famous Zizhi Tongjian (资治通鉴/Tư trị thông giám, Comprehensive Mirror to Aid in Government) of the Song scholar Sima Guang, which means historical events were redacted in chronological order like annals. Ngô Sĩ Liên separated his book and the history of Vietnam into Ngoại kỷ (Peripheral Records) and Bản kỷ (Basic Records) by the 938 victory of Ngô Quyền in the Battle of Bạch Đằng River. This chronological method of compilation is different from the official historical texts of Chinese dynasties which had the layout divided in biographies of each historical figures, an approach which was initiated by Sima Qian in the Records of the Grand Historian. In record of each Vietnamese emperor, Ngô Sĩ Liên always started with a brief introduction of the emperor which provided an overview about the reigning ruler of the record. In listing the events, the historian sometimes noted an additional story about the historical figure who was mentioned in the event, some had extensive and detailed stories, notably Trần Quốc Tuấn or Trần Thủ Độ. Some important texts were also included in the original form by Ngô Sĩ Liên such as Hịch tướng sĩ or Bình Ngô đại cáo.

Historical perspectives

Comparison with Lê Văn Hưu

While Lê Văn Hưu set the starting point for the history of Vietnam by the foundation of the Kingdom of Nam Việt, Ngô Sĩ Liên took a further step by identifying the mythical and historical figures Kinh Dương Vương and his son Lạc Long Quân as the progenitor of the Vietnamese people. Because of the lack of historical resources about Kinh Dương Vương and Lạc Long Quân, some suggests that Ngô Sĩ Liên's explanation of the Vietnamese people's origin was a measure to extend the longevity of the Vietnamese civilization rather than a literal point of departure. From the very beginning of his work, Ngô Sĩ Liên had another difference to Trần scholars in regard to the Hồng Bàng dynasty, that was while the Trần dynasty scholars only mentioned the Hồng Bàng dynasty as a symbol of excellence in the history of Vietnam, Ngô Sĩ Liên defined it the first Vietnamese dynasty which reigned the country from 2879 BC to 258 BC and thus predated the Xia dynasty, the first dynasty of China, for more than 600 years. However, Ngô Sĩ Liên's account for that long period was so brief that several modern historians challenged the authenticity of his chronology for the Hùng Vương, kings of the Hồng Bàng dynasty, and speculated that Ngô Sĩ Liên created this specific chronology mainly for the political purpose of the Lê dynasty.

Like Lê Văn Hưu, Ngô Sĩ Liên treated the Kingdom of Nam Việt as a Vietnamese entity, an opinion which was challenged by several Vietnamese historians from Ngô Thì Sĩ in eighteenth century to modern historians because the kings of Nam Việt were of Chinese origin.

In their comments on the defeat of Lý Nam Đế by Chen Baxian which led to the Third Chinese domination in Vietnam, Lê Văn Hưu criticized Lý Nam Đế for his lack of ability while Ngô Sĩ Liên remarked that the Will of Heaven was not yet favour with the Vietnamese independence.

Other arguments

Different than Lê Văn Hưu who saved his prior concern for the identity of the country from China, Ngô Sĩ Liên, according to O.W. Wolters, Ngô Sĩ Liên took the Chinese historiography as the standard in assessing historical events of the history of Vietnam. In commenting one event, the historian often cited a passage from Confucianist classics or other Chinese writings such as the Book of Song in order to rhetorically support his own statements.

From his Confucianist point of view, Ngô Sĩ Liên often made negative comments on historical figures who acted against the rule of Confucianism. For example, despite his obvious successful reign, the Emperor Lê Đại Hành was heavily criticized in Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư for his marriage with Dương Vân Nga who was the empress consort of his predecessor. One researcher even speculated that since Ngô Sĩ Liên had a bias against this emperor, he decided to attribute the famous poem Nam quốc sơn hà to Lý Thường Kiệt instead of Lê Đại Hành who was considered by several sources the proper author of the Nam quốc sơn hà. Other decisions of the rulers which did not follow the moral and political code of Confucianism were also criticized by Ngô Sĩ Liên such as the coronation of six empresses by Đinh Tiên Hoàng, the marriage of Lê Long Đĩnh with four empresses or Lý Thái Tổ's lack of interest in Confucianist classics study. Especially in the case of the Trần dynasty, Ngô Sĩ Liên always made unfavourable remarks on the marriages between closely related members of the Trần clan. The only short period during the reign of the Trần dynasty that Ngô Sĩ Liên praised was from the death of Trần Thái Tông in 1277 to the death of Trần Anh Tông in 1320 while the historian denounced many actions of the Trần rulers such as the ruthless purge of Trần Thủ Độ against Lý clan or the controversial marriage between Trần Thái Tông and the Princess Thuận Thiên.

Beside its historical value, Đại Việt sử ký toàn thư is also considered an important work of the literature of Vietnam because Ngô Sĩ Liên often provided more information about the mentioned historical figures by the additional stories which were well written like a literary work. From various comments of Ngô Sĩ Liên, it seems that the historian also tried to define and teach moral principles based on the concept of Confucianism. For example, Ngô Sĩ Liên mentioned for several times the definition of a Gentleman (Quân tử) who, according to the historian, had to possess both good qualities and righteous manners, Ngô Sĩ Liên also emphasized the importance of the Gentleman in the dynastic era by pointing out the difference between a Gentleman and a Mean man (Tiểu nhân) or determining what would be the effectiveness of the example of such Gentlemen.