清朝末年開辦的京師大學堂，與中國現代學科規範的建立與學術發展關係極大。大學堂籌措成立的時候，傳統學問正遭受強烈挑戰，西學的承納已勢在必然。作為重要的國家建制，大學堂的課程規畫在在竑映了當時「中學」與「西學」爭持互動的境況。「文學」，由於其植質與民族文化的資多元素互相依存，被界定為「中學」的一部分也理所當然；然而，在現代新式大學中，這門傳統的學問卻又成為必不可少的一個學科。重新考察京師大學堂創設的構思過程，正能幫助我們了解「文學」的在介入「中西學」的爭持時，其內容和存在模式究竟遭逢了那些考驗、以何種形態出現。本文主要的考對象為京師大學堂於光緒二十四年、二十八年、二十九年出現的三個章程，據此探討在中國學術轉型的情勢下「文學」如何被措置，最後進佔學術體制的一個重要的位置。

　　　　　The Imperial University, the first comprehensive university in China, appeared in the Late Qing ear when the Guangxu emperor started his reformation program in 1898. the university survived subsequent political turmoil, and became one of the most important educational and academic institutions in China. In the time before and since its establishment, a variety of opinions and arguments on the orientation of the future development of China’s education system have been deliberated by many prominent scholars, education specialists, and government officials. The emergence of modern academic disciplines was very much related to these deliberations, which were scrutinized and concretized in the three Charters of the Imperial University written in 1898, 1902, and 1904. This paper examines in detail the three Charters and related discussions, directed at an exposition of “literature” or “wen” as an academic discipline in modern China. The paper first reviews the placement of literature“ in the program outlined by the first Charter of 1898. it finds, by making reference to other writings of Liang Qicha梁啟超, the designer of the first Charter, that ”literature“ was regarded as something basic in education, but not salient enough to be a discipline for advanced study when compared with other more “pragmatic” subjects. In the second Charter of 1902 drafted by Zhang Baixi張百熙, “literature” acquired its place in higher education in modern China. A department of “cizhang xue,” the equivalents of the study of literature, was delineated in the undergraduate program. The importance of literary study was further enhanced in the third Charter of 1904 written by Zhanag Zhidong張之洞. All subject syllabi of the program of Chinese literature were elucidated with meticulous effort. Hence a working model of literary study can be discerned. It comprises the study of famous writers and their works, the study of literary history, and the study of literary criticism. This paper notes in its conclusion that the political and intellectual reformist, Liang Qichao, was not an advocate of modern literary study, where as the apparent conservative, Zhang Zhidong, actually turned out to be promoter of “literature” as an academic discipline in the modern sense.