裴松之所大量徵引的《吳書》，其作者也是陳壽認為「篤學好古，博見羣籍，有記述之才」的韋昭。該書之人物書寫與其國族本位的關係如何，係屬本文探討的重點。主要以孫氏君主、漢末英雄、孫吳諸臣：計三個區域為觀察範例，舉隅的歷史人物主要有孫堅、孫權、陶謙、趙咨、沈珩、馮熙、鄭泉、魯肅、虞翻等。藉由與陳壽《三國志》為參照，很明顯《吳書》身為官修國史而自有其天生的限制，這點與曹魏官史王沈《魏書》頗為類似，必須替本國君臣隱惡揚善，侷限了人物之型塑朝多面向書寫的可能性，政權內部的負面事蹟與矛盾、衝突記載較少，或者往往被淡化。然而，或為使國人更津津樂道於國史，又或為了該書的政治宣傳目的，不少個傳頗有「增其美」的跡象、乃至於失真的傾向，因而涉及了文學的閥域。政治意識型態與史傳的文學性之間也頗有其相輔相成的地方，《吳書》中有許多內容相當豐富的人物個傳，實則難脫國族本位的色彩。

The WuShu, numerously cited by Pei SongZi, was authored by Wei Zhou, who was considered “diligent in study, ancient-loving, well-read and talented in recording.” by Chen Shou. This essay will thus focus on the correlations between the narratives of character writing and national parochialism in the book, and will mainly approaches in three perspectives. In reference to Chen Zhou’s Sanguozhi, it is obvious thatWushu itself, as an official history, somehow was restricted inherently. It carried out duties of covering up vice while praising morality, and thus limited the possibilities of figuring different aspects of characters. The negative deeds, contradictions and conflicts of inner regime were less recorded, orsomehow simplified. However, whether its purpose was making the state people be proud of their own history or spreading it as a political propaganda, we can see in many biographies the characters were so much beautified that even distract the truth. According to the narrative tendency mentioned above, it’s the field of fiction that it stepped into. There are also similarities along with compliments between political ideologies and the literariness of history. And despite how abundant contents of biographies are there in Wushu, however, the context cannot beinterpreted without the perspective of national parochialism.