This paper is a critical appraisal of Qian Mu’s study of Qing intellectual history, focusing on his well-known book entitled Zhongguo jinsanbainian xueshushi (A history of Qing scholarship during the recent three hundred years). Attention is given to several basic questions: What incentive did Qian Mu have in mind when he embarked on writing this history of Qing scholarship? How did he handle his sources? Did he argue reasonably and logically? What was the form of his historical exposition? Would his admission of anti-Manchu prejudice affect his thinking and interpretation on Qing scholars? Generally, would his study of Qing scholars represent a high-level craft as an intellectual historian? Qian’s intellectual history basically follows the traditional xuean style of writing. Hence, it is mainly a collection of short intellectual biographies from Huang Zongxi to Kang Youwei with annotated commentaries. Each chapter begins with a brief biographical note before highlighting principal ideas and thoughts, showing little transition of ideas and thoughts from one period to another. In general, Qian’s views of early Qing scholars had few, if any, differences from his predecessor, Liang Qichao, who had written the exactly same titled book. The interpretations of middle-period Qing scholars, however, show a sharp contrast between Qian and Liang, mainly because of Qian’s strong preference for Neo-Confucianism. He showed virtually no tolerance for those who criticized Zhu Xi, whom he considered the greatest Confucian scholar next only to Confucius himself. On the other hand, Liang praised the empirical research of mid-Qing scholars, which he cherished as the source of modern Chinese scholarship. As for the late Qing period, Qian had no respect whatsoever to the rise of New-text Con扣cianism and condemned its application to political reform, which he denounced as arbitrary and farfetched. He thus held Kang Y ouwei in great contempt. In Qian's opinion, Kang's arbitrariness and inconsistency delivered such a fatal blow to traditional Chinese scholarship that later scholars would have to start all over again. On the contrary,的the principal disciple of Kang, Liang honored the New-text movement as the force that had enlightened a new generation of scholars. The different conclusions drawn from the studies of the same subject made manifest the contrast in personal background and ideology between the authors.