Kojiki-Den [古事記傅] volume 1, Explanation by Itwse (006)
(I can not clearly discovered the above. By the way, I said a guessable hypothesis, besed on the both meanings of the introduction of Kojiki and the tracks that two records was edited.)
Moreover, he ask me, “The thing of the editing Kawashima-No-Miko was orderd is recorded on Syoki, and the things about the editing in 714 (Wado 7) and Syoki are recorded on Shokki, but we’re not able to find the record about the editing Kojiki. When considering the above, I say that the record isn’t a important public matter, but I think of the record as a personal small matter. it seems in which the Jindaiki and other of Syoki take it as one of references, so it seemed, in that time, the such one amoung a lot of records (they don’t have large value). In contrast, Syoki contains all the valuable records and gather from many records, therefore, it has no lack, then it is inconparable with Kojiki. Why you can regared this record as important as that record?”
Indeed, there are a such opinions which judge Kojiki as one of records referred by Syoki, and Syoki entirely refer the record, therefore Syoki has very enough contents.
In fact, because Syoki has taken many matters from various traditions, and even has been written the date of those matters, so the record has no lack, therefore, it is able to agree, and needless to say, that Kojiki has not some parts Syoki having.
However, if I say that the point of Kojiki is being superior to Syoki, I say, “because there was not a text, in ancient times, and there had been only the handing down with oral, hence it would certainly not be like the words of Syoki, but like the words of Kojiki.