在孝文帝的漢化努力之下，北魏洛陽時期成為魏晉南北朝歷史上非常重要的一個階段，並催使北魏與南朝齊、梁正式進入政權正統與文化正統之爭。北魏的富強與高度的文化自信，更驅使北朝人士深具歷史統一的責任感，進而形成對於南方文化的兩種態度。此兩種態度則微妙地以截然不同的方式展現在北魏洛陽時期最重要的兩部文史地理著作中：分別是楊衒之《洛陽伽藍記》與酈道元《水經注》。楊衒之是激烈的歷史主義者，站在洛陽古都的地理優勢與漢化正統政權的繼承關係及血緣文化的合理性，對南方採取侵略性與攻擊性的對立姿態；酈道元則以山水美學為基調，超越當代歷史的包袱，將高度提升至周、漢的版圖架構，以全國自然山水美感為觸發點，反而對南方文化表現出嚮往與寬容的懷抱。《洛陽伽藍記》與《水經注》在歷代學術傳統中時常為學者所並提相論，如《四庫全書總目提要》論及《洛陽伽藍記》時即云：「其文穠麗秀逸，繁而不厭，可與酈道元水經注肩隨」。但是這些討論的重點，大都僅及於文辭章句的層面。而本文將《洛陽伽藍記》與《水經注》置於南北朝文化的衝突與交融的研究網脈之中，兩書相互對襯映照之下，企求呈現出嶄新豐富的意涵。

Under the sinifying endeavor of Emperor Xiaowen, the Luoyang period of the Northern Wei Dynasty had become an important phrase in the history of Wei-Jin and Northern-Southern Dynasties. The period witnessed the contestation over political and cultural orthodoxies between the Northern Wei, on the one hand, and the Southern Qi and Liang, on the other. The wealth and power of the Northern Wei, as well as its superb confidence in cultural superiority, resulted in a strong sense of responsibility for historical unification on the part of the Northern literati. Concomitant with this development was the emergence of two contrasting views on the culture of the Southern Dynasties. These views found their subtle yet perfect embodiments in two famous historical-geographical works: Yang Xuanzhi 's Luoyang Qielanji ( The Buddhist monasteries of Luoyang ) and Li Daoyuan's Shuijing zhu ( Commentary on the book of waterways ). A radical historicist, Yang Xuanzhi took for granted the cultural-political orthodoxy of the sinified regime based in the ancient capital of Luoyang. Accordingly he presented an aggressively opposing view against the Southern Dynasties. By contrast, Li Daoyuan was able to transcend the contemporary historical burdens by focusing purely on the aesthetics of the landscapes. Therefore, Li was able to take on a much broader view which not only encompassed the whole territories of the Chou and the Han times, but also displayed cultural tolerance and even admiration towards the Southern Dynasties. In traditional records and scholarship, such as in the Siku quanshu zongmu tiyao ( Complete Library of the Four Treasuries: General Catalog with Abstracts ), Luoyang Qielanji and Shuijing zhu are often mentioned in the same breath, but the emphasis is consistently placed on their similar artistic rhetoric. In this paper, I propose to study them in the context of the cultural conflicts and assimilations between the Northern and the Southern Dynasties. In doing so, I wish to bring forth a new perspective on the two works by highlighting the significance of their differences.