Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms
non-fiction work by Cui Hong
The Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms, also known by its Chinese title Shiliuguo Chunqiu (simplified Chinese: 十六国春秋; traditional Chinese: 十六國春秋; pinyin: Shíliùguó Chūnqiū; Wade–Giles: Shihliukuo Ch'unch'iu) is a Chinese biographical historical work of the Sixteen Kingdoms compiled by the Northern Wei official Cui Hong between 501 and 522. It became one of the chief sources for the compilation of the Book of Wei and Book of Jin.
Parts of the book went missing from the early Tang dynasty and did not survive intact. It originally contained 100 volumes, a preface and a chronological table. By the time of the early Song dynasty, many of them were lost and only about 20 volumes remained, which were quoted extensively by Sima Guang, compiler of the Zizhi Tongjian. There are two extant versions dating from the late Ming dynasty, the edition by Tu Qiaosun containing 100 volumes, and the one by He Tang containing 16 volumes, reprinted in the Hanwei Congshu, a compilation of histories. Tu's edition was published for the third time in 1781. Also there is a 100 volumes edition together with a chronological table from the mid-Qing dynasty by Tang Qiu, taken from the edition by He Tang and from other materials.
The public source identifies “Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms” as non-fiction work by Cui Hong. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Spring, Autumn and Annals.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms”, the useful work is to connect “non-fiction work by Cui Hong” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1150382. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1781.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms primary sources, Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms archive and Spring research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Spring and Autumn Annals of the Sixteen Kingdoms” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.