nntsuzu/KFTT huggingface dataset:
English: However, Hoshino had little doubt about the work except the parts which were obviously wrong such as the period of Rise and Fall of the Minamoto and the Taira families, or the period until the fall of the Taira family in 1185, and MINAMOTO no Yoriie's abdicating the post of shogun.
Japanese: しかし、星野は源平盛衰記の時代、つまり1185年の平家滅亡までや、源頼家の将軍職退位など、あまりにも明らかな部分以外にはほとんど疑いを抱いていなかった。
English: It would have been as a warning against this that Katsuro HARA came out with "The Nature of Azuma Kagami and Its Worth as a Historical Material."
Japanese: 原勝郎が『吾妻鏡の性質及其史料としての價値』を表したのはそれに対する警鐘だったのだろう。
English: Katsuro HARA recognized the value of Azuma Kagami as a historical material 'mainly in the facts related to the legal system of Shugo, Jito and others.'
Japanese: 原勝郎は、史料として吾妻鏡の価値は「主として守護地頭其他の法制に關係ある事實」にあるとする。
English: He says that most of them were written records of the various families related to Mandokoro and Monchujo, so it is unlikely to be politically misrepresented.
Japanese: それらの多くは政所や問注所に關係ある諸家の筆録、その他の記録であろうし、それらに政治的曲筆が入り込む可能性は少ないだろう。
English: Kuniji YASHIRO seems to have had a grudge against "Azuma Kagami," because he criticized it severely as if he was possessed by a vengeful ghost of MINAMOTO no Yoriie, continuing the warnings of Katsuro HARA.
Japanese: 八代国治は『吾妻鏡』に恨みでもあるのだろうか、源頼家の怨霊が乗り移ったのだろうか、と思いたくなるぐらい『吾妻鏡』を語気強くこき下ろすが、これもまた原勝郎の警鐘の続きである。
English: Even 15 years after Katsuro HARA came out with "The Nature of Azuma Kagami and Its Value as a Historical Material" in 1898, there seemed to be a great tendency to regard Azuma Kagami as absolute truth.
Japanese: 原勝郎が1898年（明治31年）に『吾妻鏡の性質及其史料としての價値』を表してから15年経っても、まだ当時の歴史学会には吾妻鏡絶対主義とでもいうような風潮がかなりあったのだろう。
English: Like Hara, Kuniji YASHIRO also considered that as a first-class historical material concerning the history of a struggle for political power, it is hard to believe "Azuma Kagami."
Japanese: その八代国治は、『吾妻鏡』の価値について、原と同じように政権闘争史に関する史料としては、一等史料として信用し難いとする。
English: On the other hand, most of the work consists of diaries, records and documents of Shogunal Mandokoro, Monchujo, and people related to these offices, and also of diaries of court nobles in Kyoto, and the compilation work was clumsy and barely revised.
Japanese: その一方で、幕府政所、問注所、及び之に関係せる者等の日記、記録、文書、及び京都公家の日記などの資料よって編纂した部分が大部分を占め、その編纂も幼稚で余り斧削を加えていない。
English: Therefore it would probably be a great original historical document, if misrepresentations in writing, forged documents, and intended praises were carefully eliminated.
Japanese: 従って、曲筆、偽文書、意図的な顕彰を注意深く取り除けば、鎌倉時代の根本資料として恐らくは之に比敵するものはあるまいとする。
English: Kuniji YASHIRO's study was being conducted from Meiji to the early Taisho periods, and "A Collection of Historical Materials on the Medieval Legal System" edited by Shinichi SATO and Yoshisuke IKEUCHI after WWII in 1955 describes 'how difficult it was to criticize the errors mentioned above and eliminate inadvertence,' according to Kuniji YASHIRO.
Japanese: その八代国治の研究は明治から大正の初期にかけてのものだが、戦後1955年の佐藤進一・池内義資編の『中世法制史料集』の態度は、八代国治いうところの「上述の誤謬を糾し、粗漏を除き」という作業が如何に難しいかを物語っている。
English: He also claimed that 'when we can't identify the corresponding material, we don't transcribe from Azuma Kagami at all, instead we wait for a future study.'
Japanese: そこでは「対応資料の見出せない場合には一切吾妻鏡を採録せず、後日の研究を俟つことにした」とする。
English: It is agreeable that Shinichi SATO and others were so careful, considering the dispute that arose after the compilation of "A Collection of Historical Materials on the Medieval Legal System" in the conference concerning the establishment of 'Shugo and Jito,' which was introduced in the article on 'intended praises' above.
Japanese: 先に顕彰記事に関して紹介した「守護・地頭」設置に関わる学会での論争が、『中世法制史料集』編纂より後に起こったものであることを考えれば、佐藤進一らが慎重になったのも頷ける。
English: It was Fumihiko GOMI who accomplished a great achievement in his recent study of "Azuma Kagami," introducing his stance on "A Collection of Historical Materials on the Medieval Legal System," he claimed that "Azuma Kagami" still contains an abundance of laws.
Japanese: 近年『吾妻鏡』の研究で大きな仕事をしたのは五味文彦であるが、五味文彦は『中世法制史料集』の態度を紹介しながら、それでも『吾妻鏡』は、実に豊かな法令を含んでいるという。
English: According to Fumihiko GOMI, when they succeed in making an estimate of the source material, the ways the compilation was done and the errors were made will be revealed naturally.
Japanese: 五味文彦は、原史料の見通しをつけることができれば、編纂のありかた、誤謬のあり方も自然にわかってくるだろう。
English: And then, as Kuniji YASHIRO stated in the end of his book, we should be able to extract useful information from it as source material of the Kamakura period.
Japanese: そうすれば八代国治がその著書の最後に述べたように、鎌倉時代の根本資料として有益な情報を抽出出来るはずだとする。
English: Although some points like Yashiro's conjectures about chronology will certainly be revised by Fumihiko GOMI, he examined and illustrated in greater detail the compilers of "Azuma Kagami," who were, according to Kuniji YASHIRO, descendants (Mori and Nagai) of Hiromoto OE, an official of Mandokoro and Monchujo, a descendant of Yukimasa NIKAIDO, descendants (Ota and Machino) of Yasunobu MIYOSHI.
Japanese: 八代の編年などの推定などいくつかの点は、確かに五味文彦らによって修整はされるが、八代国治が『吾妻鏡』の編纂者達を政所と問注所の吏員である大江広元の子孫（毛利、長井）、二階堂行政の子孫、三善康信の子孫達（大田、町野）ではないかとした点を、五味文彦は更に詳細に証明していった。
English: And then he figured out the author of the written record in his own way which became the foundation for the work.
Japanese: そして「原史料の見通し」、ベースとなる筆録の著者を独自の方法で割り出す。
English: Fumihiko GOMI's study could be said to have been developed from Yashiro's conclusion in his book: 'not only does it not lose its value as source material for the Kamakura period, but there is also no comparative work,' changing his study and conjecture more concretely.
Japanese: 五味文彦の研究は、八代がその著書の結びとした「鎌倉時代の根本資料として価値を失わざるのみならず、恐らくは之に比敵するものあらざるべし」という方向で、更に具体的に研究と推論を発展させたものといえるだろう。
English: It is often considered that the original manuscript of Azuma Kagami in the Kanazawa Library was passed to the Gohojo clan in Odawara, and then to Ieyasu TOKUGAWA, but it is now thought that Azuma Kagami was quickly scattered and lost and was an incomplete work in the Muromachi period, so most of them were probably passed down in the form of abridged or incomplete books consisting of volumes of several years worth of volumes.
Japanese: 吾妻鏡は金沢文庫にあった原本が、小田原の後北条氏の手に渡り、それが徳川家康の手に渡ったと思われやすいが、現在の研究では、吾妻鏡は早くに散逸し、室町時代には既に揃いの完本の形では伝えられておらず、断片的な抄出本や、数年分の零本の形で伝わるものがほとんどであったのかもしれない。
English: They were collected, revised and enlarged to 42 or 43 volumes, and among them the Hojobon line was handed to Ieyasu TOKUGAWA, the Yoshikawabon line to Hiroaki MIGITA (Sueaki SUE), and more missing volumes were added, restoring it to a set of 51 or 48 volumes.
Japanese: それらを集めて、42巻とか43巻とかまでに収集と補訂が行われたものが北条本系では徳川家康、吉川本では右田弘詮（陶弘詮）の手に渡り、そこで更に欠損分の収集が行われて、51巻あるいは48巻という形に復元されていった。
English: The lines, divided into two groups (Hojobon and Kurokawabon), inherited the manuscript copied from Kanazawa Library during the period of Oei (1394 to 1427), while Yoshikawabon belonged to a quite different line.
Japanese: またその系譜は2グループあり、北条本、黒川本は応永年間（1394～1427年）に金沢文庫本により書写されたものの系統を引き、吉川本はそれとはまったく別系統となる。
English: The most likely compiler Tokitsura OTA (MIYOSHI in Monchujo) also served the Ashikaga clan's Muromachi bakufu as 'a senior vassal with full knowledge of precedent.'
Japanese: 編纂者の候補として最も有力な太田時連（問注所の三善氏）は「武家宿老故実者」として足利氏の室町幕府にも仕えている。
English: His diary "A Record of Einin Three Years" was handed down in the Ota family, and then inherited by Kaga no zenji, former Governor of Kaga Province, Junko MACHINO in the Muromachi period.
Japanese: その日記『永仁三年記』は太田の家に伝えられ、やがて室町時代に加賀前司町野淳康が継承したという。
English: That is why "Azuma Kagami" is divided into two groups of text, the one owned by the Kanazawa Library and the one Tokitsura OTA kept at hand, and it is conjectured that the latter was brought to Kyo with Tokitsura OTA, moved to the other house just like the diary written in Muromachi period, and then might have become the foundation of Yoshikawabon.
Japanese: それらのことから『吾妻鏡』には金沢文庫に収められたものと、太田時連が手元に所持したものの2つがあり、太田時連とともに京に行ったものが、その日記同様に室町時代に他家の所持に移り、吉川本の元となったのかもしれないと推測される。
English: The original text of "Enlarged New Edition of Summa Japanese History" published in 1933 is called Hojobon, which is the most widely circulated version of the text now, being regarded as the manuscript owned by Gohojo clan.
Japanese: 現在もっとも一般的なテキストである1933年（昭和8年）の『新訂増補国史大系』の底本となるものは北条本と呼ばれ、後北条氏が所蔵していた写本とされていた。
English: It is said that the manuscript was given to Josui KURODA by Ujinao HOJO in the negotiations for the surrender of Odawara-jo Castle at the besiegement of Odawara by Hideyoshi TOYOTOMI in 1590, and later in 1604 Josui's son Nagamasa KURODA presented it to Ieyasu TOKUGAWA.
Japanese: それを1590年（天正18年）の豊臣秀吉の小田原攻めにおいて、北條氏直が小田原開城の交渉において折衝にあたった黒田如水に贈ったものを、後の1604年（慶長9年）に如水の子黒田長政から徳川家康に献上されたと。
English: However, a doubt about this view arose because Ieyasu had already begun to prepare to publish old typographic books in 1603, and it is conjectured that in 1603 he had already got 32 bundles of kozo (paper mulberry), 10 bundles of kozo to which Shuzenji paper was added, and a bundle of Shuzenji paper only, which came to 43 bundles all together.
Japanese: しかしながら、家康による古活字本開版の準備が1603年（慶長8年）には始まっていることから、この説には疑問もあり、楮紙の古い料紙の32冊と、楮紙の古い料紙に修善寺紙を用いた補入が施されている10冊、修善寺紙のみの1冊の計43巻を家康は1603年（慶長8年）以前に一括して手に入れていたと推定される。
English: As well as Kurokawabon (Wagaku Kodan-shobon), those original 32 volumes seem to have been copied from the ones owned by the Kanazawa Library in 1404, and then recopied during the Bunki era (1501 to 1504).
Japanese: その元になる32冊は黒川本（和学講談所本）と同様に、応永11年に金沢文庫本から書写したものを更に文亀年間（1501～1504年）に書き写したものと見られている。
English: When he was preparing to publish old typographic books, it is assumed that he ordered copies of the missing eight volumes (which were almost all blank) including the ones presented by Nagamasa KURODA in the same format as the manuscript which he had already had until then, making 51 volumes and using it as an original text to publish in 1605.
Japanese: それにより古活字本開版の準備をしていた処に、黒田長政献上のものを含むめて、不足分8冊（白紙に近い紙）をそれまで入手していたものと同じ書式で書き写させて51冊とし、これを1605年（慶長10年）印行の底本としたのではと現在では推定されている。
English: There are 3 kinds of old printed books, and the most famous one, called the Fushimi book, was printed and published in 1605, and the title on the front and center fold of paper says '東鑑' (Azuma Kagami) and the title inside the book says 'New Azuma Kagami,' containing postscript written by Seisho Jotai, who is regarded as the father of restoration of Sokoku-ji Temple.
Japanese: その古活字本には3種類あるが、最も有名なものが1605年（慶長10年）印行の伏見版であり、外題・版心には「東鑑」、内題には「新刊吾妻鏡」とあり、相国寺の中興の祖とされる西笑承兌（せいしょうじょうたい）の跋文がある。
English: After Ieyasu died, the original text was held in the Momijiyama Library in the Edo-jo Castle, and is now owned by the National Archives of Japan, being designated as an Important Cultural Properties.
Japanese: 原本は家康没後、江戸城内の紅葉山文庫に収蔵され、現在は国立公文書館蔵で、重要文化財である。
English: Although "Enlarged new edition of Summa Japanese History" used the Hojobon as an original text, Yoshikawabon was also used for collation purposes.
Japanese: 尚、『新訂増補国史大系』はこの北条本を底本としながらも、吉川本も校合に用いられた。
English: It has the stamp of Wagaku-kodansho Onko-do which was owned by Hokinoichi HANAWA, who compiled "Classified Documents" (a collection of basic historical texts).
Japanese: 元は『群書類従』を編纂した塙保己一（はなわほきのいち）の和学講談所温古堂の蔵印がある。
English: In the end of the table of contents, it says, 'Copied from the manuscript owned by the Kanazawa Library on August 25, 1404,' so it seems to have been recopied from the one owned by the Kanazawa Library.
Japanese: 目録の終わりに「応永11年甲申（1404年）8月25日金沢文庫御本書之」とあり、1404年（応永11年）に金沢文庫本から書写したものを更に書写したものと推定される。
English: However there are slight differences from the Hojobon, so it is assumed that both of them were not copied from the Hojobon, but from the old manuscript made in 1404.
Japanese: ただし、北条本とは僅かに異なる処もあり、北条本からの書写ではなく、共に1404年（応永11年）の古写本からの書写であると見られている。
English: It is estimated to be a work made during the Tenbun era (1532 to 1555) from a genealogy in the opening page, and it contains the entries of three years which were not included in the contents table (or Hojobon) either, therefore as well as Yoshikawabon, the manuscripts seem to have been collected, revised, and enlarged more after the Tenbun era in the Shimazu family too.
Japanese: 巻首にある系図からは天文(元号)年間（1532～1555年）と推定され、更に冒頭の目録に無い3年分（北条本にもない）が含まれていることなどから、吉川本同様に島津家においても天文年間以降、更に収集と補訂が行われて成立したと見られている。
English: The Shimazubon presented to the bakufu is missing now, but it contained many accounts which were not included in the so-called Hojobon owned by the Tokugawa family, therefore the differences were published in the wood block printing book of "The Omitted Portion of Azuma Kagami" or "The Omitted Edition of Azuma Kagami" in 1668.
Japanese: 幕府に献上された島津本は現在は行方不明であるが、徳川家所蔵の所謂北条本に欠けていた部分を多く含み、その差分が『吾妻鏡脱漏』または『東鑑脱纂』として1668年（寛文8年）に木版で出版された。
English: Among the likely compilers, we can see the name of Yukisada NIKAIDO, but the documents of Nikaido has a record that "Azuma Kagami," which was handed down in the family, was transferred to the Shimazu family.
Japanese: 尚、『吾妻鏡』編纂者と推測されるものの中に二階堂行貞が居るが、二階堂文書には、その家に伝わった『吾妻鏡』を15世紀末（推定）に島津家に譲り渡したとの記録が残っている。
English: The Moribon has a hand written colophon dated March 11, 1596 by Hoshuku Sochin of the Daitoku-ji Temple, and it was handed down in the Mori clan.
Japanese: 毛利本には1596年（文禄5年）3月11日付けの大徳寺の宝叔宗珍の書写奥書があり、毛利藩に伝えられた。
English: Although it belongs to the same line as the Shimazubon, it was copied before the Shimazubon and is not a transcription from it.
Japanese: 島津本と同系ではあるが、島津本よりも書写年は古く、そこからの転写ではない。
English: It was collected by Hiroaki MIGITA (Sueaki SUE), a member of the Sue clan, main vassal of the Ouchi clan.
Japanese: 大内氏の重臣陶氏の一族、右田弘詮（陶弘詮）によって収集されたものである。
English: Hiroaki MIGITA could get 42 volumes of the copied manuscript around 1501, and hired a few amanuenses to make copies which he treasured.
Japanese: 右田弘詮は、1501年（文亀元）頃、その写本42帖を手に入れることが出来、数人の筆生を雇い書き写させて秘蔵した。
English: He ordered copies of them to be made in the same format as the first copied book and made 47 volumes in total, and then wrote a volume of chronology and a contents table, creating 48 volumes in total.
Japanese: これを最初の書写と同じ形式で書き写させて全47帖とし、その目次も兼ねて年譜1帖を書き下ろし全48帖とした。
English: As to the fall of the Ouchi clan whom Hiroaki MIGITA served later, it was transferred to Motoharu KIKKAWA, a son of Motonari MORI, and it has since been handed down in the Kikkawa family.
Japanese: それがその後右田弘詮が仕えた大内氏の滅亡とともに、毛利元就の子、吉川元春の手に移り、以降吉川家に伝えられた。
English: Although it has three years of missing accounts, it contains the whole "The Omitted Portion of Azuma Kagami," and other than this there are hundreds of daily entries which exist only in the Yoshikawabon.
Japanese: 記事に3年分の欠損はあるが、島津本の『吾妻鏡脱漏』部分を全て含み、それ以外にも日の単位で数百箇所が吉川本のみにある。
English: As already mentioned, the differences between Hojobon and Shimazubon in "The Omitted Portion of Azuma Kagami," mainly deal with accounts of prayers and ceremonies, and can also be applied to the differences between Hojobon and Yoshikawabon.
Japanese: 北条本と島津本の差分『吾妻鏡脱漏』のその差分は祈寿祭礼に関する記事が多いと既に述べたが、北条本と吉川本の差分についても同様である。
English: Taking these things into consideration, Hidematsu WADA claimed in 'A Study on Old Manuscripts of Azuma Kagami' that a manuscript in the Kanazawa Library, the source of Hojobon and Kurokawabon, is a simplified book, and Yoshikawabon would have been based on the version which was being edited before it.
Japanese: それらのことから和田英松は「吾妻鏡古写本考」において、北条本や黒川本の源流である金沢文庫本は節略本であり、吉川本はそれより前の編集途中の版をベースとした写本であろうとしたという。
English: And Kuniji YASHIRO considered Yoshikawabon to be superior in its value as historical material compared with the Hojobon because it makes people think of the previous phase of the work before it was simplified an enlarged.
Japanese: そして八代国治は、節略増補、つまり編纂途中で斧削を加える前の段階を思わせる吉川本の史料価値は北条本に勝るとする。
English: Basically Azuma Kagami is a historical material of great value, but it has some parts missing over a three year period around the time of MINAMOTO no Yoritomo's death.
Japanese: 吾妻鏡は基本的には価値の高い史料であるが、源頼朝の死亡時期に、3年以上の記事がないなど欠落している箇所もある。
English: As to the missing parts, a plausible rumor circulated during the Edo period that Ieyasu TOKUGAWA hid the part in question because the last days of MINAMOTO no Yoritomo were miserable so he thought 'we shouldn't put dishonor to a famous general.'
Japanese: それに対して、江戸時代に徳川家康が、源頼朝の最期が不名誉な内容であったため、家康が「名将の恥になるようなことは載せるべきではない」として該当箇所を隠してしまったという俗説がまことしやかに流布している。
English: As mentioned before, such conjecture started from the supposition that the complete original text of Azuma Kagami in the Kanazawa Library was transferred to the Gohojo clan in Odawara, therefore Ieyasu TOKUGAWA should have had the whole text.
Japanese: そうした憶測は先に述べたように、吾妻鏡は金沢文庫に完本であった原本が、小田原の後北条氏の手に渡り、それが徳川家康の手に完本の常態で渡っていたのではという想像から始まっている。
English: Nihon Montoku Tenno Jitsuroku is a history compiled in Japan during the Heian period, and is the fifth among the six Rikkokushi (National Histories of Japan, six historical compilations chronicling the mythology and history of Japan between the Nara and Heian periods).
Japanese: 日本文徳天皇実録（にほんもんとくてんのうじつろく）は、平安時代の日本で編纂された歴史書で、六国史の第五にあたる。
English: It covers the eight years of the reign of Emperor Montoku from 850 to 858.
Japanese: 文徳天皇の代、嘉祥3年（850年）から天安(日本)2年（858年）までの8年間を扱う。
English: According to the preface, in 871 Emperor Seiwa ordered FUJIWARA no Mototsune, MINABUCHI no Toshina, MIYAKO no Yoshika, and OE no Otondo to compile it.
Japanese: 序文によれば、本書の編纂は清和天皇が貞観(日本)13年（871年）、藤原基経、南淵年名、都良香、大江音人らに編纂を命じた。
English: After the deaths of Toshina and Otondo (both died in 877), SUGAWARA no Koreyoshi joined in 878, and in 879, he, Mototsune, and Yoshika completed the compilation.
Japanese: 年名と音人（共に877年没）の死後、元慶2年（878年）に菅原是善を加え、基経・良香との3人で翌年879年に完成成立させた。
English: Also, according to "Literary Drafts of the Sugawara Family," SUGAWARA no Michizane, the son of SUGAWARA no Koreyoshi, is said to have written the preface on behalf of his father.
Japanese: なお、『菅家文章』によれば、菅原是善の子菅原道真が父に代わって序文を執筆したとされている。
English: In China, which Japan took as a model, the official history of a dynasty was compiled after it had fallen by the succeeding dynasty.
Japanese: 日本が範とした中国においては、正史はある王朝が倒れた後に、新たな王朝が前代の王朝の歴史をまとめるという形で作られている。
English: In contrast, veritable records originally only recorded the deeds of each emperor.
Japanese: これに対して実録とはもともとある皇帝一代ごとに、その事蹟を書き記したものであった。
English: Except for the first Rikkokushi (Nihon Shoki, The Chronicles of Japan), and the second (Shoku Nihongi, The Chronicles of Japan, Continued), all National Histories of Japan were concerned only with recording the reigns of each successive emperor.
Japanese: 日本の正史は、日本書紀はともかく、続日本紀以降は「むしろ一つの王朝の歴代の君主の統治記録としての性格」を持っていた。
English: The fact that these records of Emperor Montoku used the title 'veritable records' in such a way can be seen as a direct imitation of the 'veritable records' of China.
Japanese: こうした流れをくむ文徳実録が「実録」という書名を採用したことは、日本の史書が中国の実録を模していったことの表れであるとされる。
English: This is due to the fact that previous National Histories had only recorded the biographies of officials up to the fourth rank, but this one expanded that up to the fifth.
Japanese: これは従前の国史が官人の卒伝を四位までとしたのに比し五位にまで拡大していることによる。
English: It describes in detail the transitional period from the Konin-Jogan culture to the Jogan culture, and among the Six National Histories it contains the most human-like biographies.
Japanese: 「弘仁・貞観文化」から「貞観文化」への過渡期を詳述し六国史の中ではもっとも人間臭い伝記を収めている。
English: Shoku Nihon Koki is a history compiled in 869 during the Heian period in Japan, and is the fourth of the Six National Histories (Rikkokushi).
Japanese: 続日本後紀（しょくにほんこうき）は、日本の平安時代の869年に成立された歴史書で、六国史の第四にあたる。
English: It covers the 18 years of the reign of Emperor Ninmyo, from 833 to 850.
Japanese: 仁明天皇の代、天長10年（833年）から嘉祥3年（850年）までの18年間を扱う。
English: The compilation was begun in 855 on the Imperial order of Emperor Montoku, and completed in 869.
Japanese: 文徳天皇の勅命により斉衡2年（855年）編纂が開始され、貞観11年（869年）に完成した。
English: It is one of the main historical sources for the period of the shift from direct rule by the emperor to the regency, and describes the emperor's deeds.
Japanese: 天皇の動静の記録を詳述し天皇親政から摂関政治へうつる時代の根本史料である。
English: The compilation of this book was begun in 855 by FUJIWARA no Yoshifusa, TOMO no Yoshio, HARUZUMI no Yoshitada and Toyomichi YASUNO.
Japanese: 本書の編纂は文徳天皇の斉衡2年（855年）、藤原良房、伴善男、春澄善縄、安野豊道により始められた。
English: Yoshifusa's brother FUJIWARA no Yoshimi later joined the compilation effort but passed away before the work was completed, Yoshio was exiled due to the Otenmon incident (an event centering around the destruction of the main gate of the Imperial Palace in Kyoto), and Toyomichi was appointed as the Vice-governor of Shimosa.
Japanese: その後、良房の弟・藤原良相が加わるが完成前に逝去、善男は応天門の変で流罪、豊道の下総介赴任などがあった。
English: However, because no one else was provided to help, only FUJIWARA no Yoshifusa and HARUZUMI no Yoshitada remained as compilers in the end.
Japanese: だが、編纂者の追加が行われなかっために最終的には藤原良房と春澄善縄の２名のみが編纂者として残った。
English: Therefore, it is said that their views are strongly reflected in the text, Yoshifusa's in editorial policy, and Yoshitada's in description.
Japanese: このため、編纂方針については良房の、記述については善縄の意向が強く反映されたと言われている。
English: The 'Shoku' in the title of this fourth book Shoku Nihon Koki means 'continued,' so it can be seen as a direct continuation of the third book Nihon Koki (Later Chronicle of Japan), but in contrast to that third book, which covers the reigns of four emperors, and the second book Shoku Nihongi (Chronicle of Japan, Continued) which covers the reign of nine, this fourth book covers only one, Emperor Ninmyo
Japanese: 本書の「続日本後紀」という書名は、「日本後紀」に続くという意味であるが、「続日本紀」は九代、「日本後紀」は四代と複数の天皇の治世を対象としているのに対し本書は、仁明天皇一代の歴史である。
English: As the reign of Emperor Ninmyo was in a time of peace after the reigns of Emperor Saga and Emperor Junna, and as nothing big occurred except the Jowa Incident, this book is said to have more detailed descriptions of court ceremonies, etc., but less material related to politics.
Japanese: 本書の対象とした仁明朝は、嵯峨・淳和両朝の後を受けた太平の世であり、「承和の変」以外大きな事件は無かったために、宮中行事などは詳しいが、政治関係の記事は少ないとされる。
English: According to one theory, it was written to emphasize the legitimacy of Prince Tsunesada's demotion from Crown Prince and the raising of Prince Michiyasu(Emperor Montoku) as the new Crown Prince in 'the Jowa Incident'.
Japanese: 一説には「承和の変」における皇太子恒貞親王の廃止と新皇太子道康親王（文徳天皇）擁立の正当性を主張するために書かれたとも言われている。
English: In the points of emphasizing the emperor's actions and reflecting the authentic style of the National Histories, it greatly influenced later works such as Nihon Sandai Jitsuroku (Veritable Records of Three Reigns of Japan).
Japanese: 天皇の挙動を重視し実録的性格を国史に反映させた点で後の、日本三代実録等に大きな影響を与えた。
English: It is said that abridged manuscripts were circulating in the late Heian period, and that the oldest of these (from the Hoen era) was supplemented by using text from Ruiju Kokushi (Classified National History).
Japanese: 平安時代後期には抄本が流布していたとされ、最古の写本である保延年間のものは、類聚国史から本文を補っている。
English: Furthermore, as the complete text was not available when the Six National Histories were transcribed by the Sanjonishi family, and commentaries and other writings were sometimes incorporated into the text which had pages out of order due to binding errors, many mistakes and omissions were made that are still present in the current printed editions.
Japanese: また、三条西家の六国史書写の段階でも、善本が入手できず、また、旁書などを本文に反映させた際、誤脱、錯簡などが生じ、現行の刊本もその影響を受けている。
English: The existing text consists of 20 volumes, and succeeding the other shikyo (now lost), it annalistically covers 150 years and the reigns of 15 Emperors, from Emperor Gotoba's accession to the throne in 1183 to Emperor Godaigo's exile on Oki island, and ends with his coming back to Kyoto in 1333.
Japanese: 現在のものは二十巻からなり、「四鏡」（現在亡失）を継承して、寿永3年（1183年）の後鳥羽天皇の即位から元弘3年（1333年）後醍醐天皇が隠岐に流され、その後、京都に戻るまでの、15代150年の事跡を編年体で述べている。
English: It takes the format of the author taking notes on the tales of a 100-year-old Buddhist nun on a visit to the Seiryo-ji Temple in Sagano. (However, as the nun appears only in the first scene in the existing text, there is an opinion that, as in the other shikyo, there once existed a scene at the end where the nun appeared.)
Japanese: 嵯峨野の清凉寺へ詣でた100歳の老尼が語る昔話を筆記した体裁をとっている（ただし、現存の本においては尼は最初の場面だけの登場になっていることから、当初は他の「四鏡」と同様に尼が登場する最後の場面が書かれた部分が存在していたとする説もある）。
English: The two texts are especially different around the middle section (from Emperor Gosaga's accession up to the period of his cloistered government).
Japanese: 両者の違いは物語の中盤あたり（後嵯峨天皇の即位後からその院政期）の記述が大きく違っているところにある。