司馬遷《史記》的出現，不論從體例、內容還是思想方面觀察，在當時都可說是一種新史學或新學術，司馬遷也一向被認為是中國古代偉大的史學家。司馬遷對史學有其自我的認識，這個認識與他的史學史意識或學術史意識有密切關係。在司馬遷的時代，「史學」與「史學史」的辭彙都還沒出現，就語境而言，討論他的史學史論述與史學史意識未免唐突古人，但是作為分析思想的語言工具，卻又不得不然。本文爬梳《史記》中有關史學史的論述，探討其中反映的司馬遷的史學史意識，焦點集中在司馬遷如何看待史官傳統、史籍流傳、「春秋」的經義與史義、以及自己著作的學術定位等問題上，並於結論中指出司馬遷史學史論述與史學史意識的特點與形成因素。

Sima Qian (ca. 145 or 135-86 BC) has always been regarded as a great historian of ancient China. The emergence of his ”Records of the Grand Historian” can be said to have represented a new historiography and a new learning at the time in terms of style, content, and method of thinking. As a great historian, Sima Qian had his own distinctive notion with regards to historiography, and this understanding was intimately related to his discourse and consciousness on the history of historiography. In Sima Qian's age, the terms for ”historiography” and the ”history of historiography” had yet to appear, so in terms of language, a discussion of his discourse and consciousness on the history of historiography may be rather inappropriate for his era. However, as a linguistic tool for analyzing a person's thought, we as modern scholars may have no other choice. The present study combs through discourses in ”Records of the Grand Historian” related to the history of historiography in an attempt to probe Sima Qian's consciousness on the subject. The focus is on how Sima Qian regarded the tradition of historiographers, the circulation of historical texts, the classical and historical meaning behind ”The Spring and Autumn Annals”, and the academic standing of his own writings. The conclusion of the study points out the unique elements and formation of Sima Qian's discourse and consciousness of historiography.