在20世紀40年代，徐佛蘇《國難歌史及詩史》和姚伯麟《抗戰詩史》相繼出版，二書同屬以「詩史」為名的長編舊體詩集。兩部作品在古典形式以外，都雜揉了鮮明的現代特徵。對於古典詩歌形式所遭逢的時代挑戰，徐、姚皆視格律為舊體詩（格律詩）創作的基本要件，以此劃分與「新詩」（自由詩）的差異。徐佛蘇更以恪守嚴格為寫作方針，但二者的出版形式和傳播模式，卻已大量藉助報刊和新式出版的力量。對於詩歌創作的自我定位言，二人都有不崇古、不薄今的信念，甚至有超邁杜甫、白居易等前賢的時代自信。二部作品在最後出版時皆以「詩史」為題，在國難情境下，上揆傳統古典詩學的「觀風」與「諷諭」等傳統，展現積極涉入世變的詩學姿態。就「詩史」這一詩學理念的實踐與展演上，此二部作品在敘事與抒情二端間，更加側重書寫之「歷史性」與「敘事性」，但二部作品對於詩歌敘事功能自身的侷限，不約而同選擇「著者自注」的形式，通過補注、序跋等其他形式補強自身的敘事功能，冀以達致「詩史」以詩補史之闕的理論訴求。二十世紀舊體詩所展現的現代脈絡是重層而多線並進的，此二部作品作為被忽視的個案，正呈現舊體詩歷經「詩國革命」的挑戰後，對自身書寫傳統的調整與變創。

The National Calamity Song and Poetry-history 《國難歌史及詩史》 by Hsu, Fo-su (1879-1943) and Anti-Japanese War Poetry-histor y 《抗戰詩史》 by Yao Bo-lin (1877-1953) published in the 1940's were both classified as ＂Shishi＂ (Poetry-history 詩史). In addition to the classical form, the two collections also added some modern features. For the review of the form of classical poetry, Hsu and Yao both took rhyme as the basic element to differentiate between the ancient style and ＂free poetry＂ system, and Hsu, Fo-su even strictly abided the metric rules of classical poetry, while their poems had relied the power of newspaper and modern publication power to publish and disseminate. On their self-positioning, they didn't worship the classic, nor looked down on modernity, they had confidence that the poetry of their generation could go beyond Du Fu, Li Bai and other predecessors. When the two collections were published, they both used poetry-history as title, and still adhered to the collection of folks and allegory tradition when the country was facing difficulties. Comparnded to solve the problem of lacking of narrative ability in traditional Chinese poetry style. They used annotations, prefaces and postscripts to compliment narrative function, trying to achieve the purpose of documenting history with poetry. There were many lines of poetics in the twentieth century, and the value of these two collections lies in showing the adjustment and creation after the ＂Poetry Rebellion＂ in the Chinese world.