自清末以來，乾嘉學者章學誠(1738-1801)逐漸受到學界之重視，有別於其生前飽受冷落之景況，在學術史上是一頗為有趣之現象。本文所探討之二篇佚文，乃見於大陸學者倉修良所編之《文史通義新編》一書中，原為實齋致同時學者曹學閔、錢大昕之書信，然刊布以來，未為學者所重。本文認為，欲理解實齋《文史通義》一書撰述之過程，此二篇佚文可提供頗大之助益，值得加以介紹。就二篇佚文撰述時間及內容加以考述，可確定其撰年為乾隆三十七年，為實齋成學過程中極為關鍵之一年；而就其內容觀之，實齋於乾隆三十七年始撰《文史通義》之著述大旨亦可得其梗概。文中對《文史通義》與《校讎通義》二書關係亦重加探討，並就民國以來討論此一問題之各種說法加以評述，希望對二書之關係得到正確之認識。

Since the latter period of Qing Dynasty, the Qianjia scholar Zhang Xue-cheng (1738-1801) who was ignored during his life received more and more attention by the academic world. It is a rather interesting phenomenon. These two scattered articles were collected in the Newly Compiled Wen-shih Tung-I, which is originally the collection of letters that Zhang Xue-cheng Wrote to the scholars Cao Xue-min and Ch’ien Ta-hsin. It is a pity that these two articles were not greatly noticed. In my opinion, they help us to understand the process that Zhang wrote Wen=shih T’ung-I. These two articles are worth introducing. The first finding on these two scattered articles is that they were written in 1772 and this year is the crucial moment of the academic life of Zhang. We could also describe what the main ideas are when Zhang started to write Wen-shih Tung-I at that time. Secondly, the relation between Wen-shih Tung-I and Chiao-ch’ou Tung-I is discussed in the article again, and various kinds of statements to this question since the founding of the Republic has been commented, too. I hope that these questions could have a correct understanding this time.

章學誠; 佚文; 文史通義; 校讎通義; 乾嘉學術

Zhang Xue-cheng; Scattered articles; Wen-shih T'ung-i; Chiao-ch'ou T'ung-i; Qianjia scholarship