本文旨在探討宋代馬令、陸游二家《南唐書》之比較，要點有四：一、記三主：馬氏為金陵三主作「書」五卷，陸氏則為立「本紀」三卷。後者將三主列入《南唐紀》，即承認南唐為合法政權。二、錄臣民：馬氏作「列傳」二十四卷，以載南唐臣民。陸書則有「列傳」十五卷，包括「單傳」、「合傳」、「類傳」、「附傳」和「四夷傳」；前四類用以記人物之生平，「四夷傳」是為外族所作傳記。三、譜世系：馬書有〈建國譜〉及〈世裔譜〉；陸書則無此例。四、論史事：馬書論贊之繁瑣，令人生厭。陸書僅十一篇，以嚴謹、客觀著稱。要言之，足證陸書優於馬書，但後者亦具保存史料之功，故二書始終並行於世，相輔相成。
This paper examines the contrast between Mă Lìng's And Lù Yóu's ”The History of South Tang” in the Sòng dynasty. Mr. Mă's and Mr. Lù's ”The History of South Tang” are distinguished by the following features: 1. Mr. Mă wrote 5 volumes of Shū for recording the monarchal life stories. Mr. Lù wrote Běn-Zhuàn in 3 volumes. His so-called Běn-Zhuàn was biographies of emperors in ancient Chinese history books. 2. Mr. Mă wrote 24 volumes of Liè-Zhuàn for recording the people's life stories. There are 15 volumes of Liè-Zhuàn in Mr. Lù's ”The History of South Tang”. It includes Dān-Zhuàn, Hé-Zhuàn, Lèi-Zhuàn, Fù-Zhuàn and Sì-Yí-Zhuàn in his book. The former ones are biographies of people, but the latter one is biographies of the minority nationality. 3. Mr. Mă wrote ”Jiàn-Guó Pŭ” and ”Shì-Yì Pŭ” in his book. But there is no sample in Mr. Lù's ”The History of South Tang”. 4. There are a lot of commentaries in Mr. Mă's book. They are very minute and complicated. Mr. Lù made 11 comments on the history of South Tang. He made an impersonal comment on each historical incident. All these features exemplify Mr. Lù's ”The History of South Tang” is better than Mr. Mă's one. But the latter preserved our historical materials. For this reason, Mr. Mă's and Mr. Lù's ”The History of South Tang” exist simultaneously.
