就中國法（律）史研究而言，解嚴（1987）一事有助於文學院的研究風向甚鉅，因而「唐律研讀會」對中國法史研究貢獻不小。另一方面，法學院在1996年以後的中國法史研究發展，明顯不振，而文學院在此時適巧可填補這一現象，進而維繫中國法史研究於不墜。至於臺灣法（律）史研究，在解嚴之後，明顯趨於活潑，尤其臺大法學院的研究趨勢，令人注目。整體說來，臺灣法史研究不如想像那樣呈現「顯學」，此由博士論文偏少，而有後繼無力之感。展望未來，希望文學院持續中國法（律）史研究風尚，法學院則有待加強；而臺灣法（律）史研究也希望在博士論文方面，能有更傑出的研究成果展現。

As regards the historical study of Chinese Law, the lifting of Martial Law (1987) has contributed to the relevant research of the Colleges of Liberal Arts. “Seminar on the Tang Legal Code” has helped a lot in this development. On the other hand, since 1996, the study of Chinese Law history in law schools has declined significantly. The advance in this field in the Colleges of Liberal Arts timely filled up the gap and kept this historical study of Chinese law alive. As for the historical studies of law in Taiwan, it has become very dynamic since the lifting of Martial Law. The National Taiwan University College of Law has been most admirable in this research field. However, generally speaking, the historical studies of law in Taiwan not as “magnificent” as it looks like due to the shortage of Ph. D. dissertations in this area. And there is no sign of improvement in the foreseeable future. Looking into the future, hopefully Colleges of Liberal Arts will continue this research trend in the historical studies of Chinese Law and the law schools have to catch up. On the other hand, we hope there will be more people devoting into the historical study of Taiwan Law and writing more Ph. D. dissertations in this field.