歷史工作不外追求真相。然則，真相之描述不能離開觀點，此乃造成真相呈現上 的永非客觀性。真相之客觀描述不存在，也因此對同一事件，經由各方面主觀的詮釋，成為 歷史工作之必然。事件之詮釋，少不了人事時地物的描述。然而本文指出在建築的範疇中， 人、事、時、地、物，均有先天上的不可確定性與無法再呈現性。關於歷史建築，我們對於 其形貌、設計人、建築物完成的時間、建築物的風格、建築物的環境，均有不能確定與不能 重建的困難。史家所指常是出於權宜與便利，而建築史的重現工作只是一種期許，實務上亳 無可能。建築史工作原來只是一作為了自圓其說的人工製品。由此筆者呼籲由更寬廣的範疇 、更多元的觀點、並重過程與結果、以及正視外來語翻譯問題來做為本地建築史工作者共同 努力的目標。

　　　　　History and historical work is nothing but the pursuit of truth through which an event will be represented objectively. The description of an event, however, cannot evade any viewpoint resulting in the nonobjectivity on a representatio nof that event. Therefore, varied interpretations turn out to be welcome. Such an interpretation cannot avoid the inclusion of who, what when, where, and which. The author here points out the inherent uncertainty and impossibility of presenting these issues in architectural history. As regards historical building, we not only remain uncertain of its form, its designers, the time of its first appearance, its style and its original environment, but also we realize we can go on further with it. The historical resurrection is not a real projection but an expectation. Architectural history ends with a premeditated artifact for self-explanation. Thus, the author urges the promotion of the level of historical studies by means of expanding the definition of history, accepting a pluralistic viewpoint, utilizing a broader research scope, emphasizing both process and consequence, and reinforcing Chinese translation of terms.