《春秋》學的發展，至中唐時啖助、趙匡、陸淳三人形成一個新《春秋》學派，此學派以啖助為主，經由趙匡的修正，再由陸淳加以會整及推展。其中，趙匡與啖助的論點大同中猶有小異，而陸淳則以啖說為主。啖助與趙匡思想間的「小異」主要見於「經之大意」及「傳之取捨」兩方面。啖助以「救時之弊、革禮之薄」為孔子作《春秋》之用意，但趙匡修正啖助重性情之說，一方面反對復夏的政教觀，另一方面重新肯定周禮的存在價值。至於「三傳取舍」方面，啖助解經的方式，是藉由會通三傳、博采諸注，並以己意加以判斷取捨而成，以達到重現經旨的通儒目標；趙匡則在啖助的基礎上再加以闡述，更加確立了義例的取捨架構。此外，趙匡主張三傳傳承皆不可考，所以認為《左氏》非邱明所作，亦非受經於孔子。趙匡的損益反映了其對啖助學說的反省與引申，透過此一闡述磨合的過程，可看出此一學派發展演變的軌跡，並得以對唐代《春秋》學的研究有更深入瞭解。

A new school of Chunqiu theory was developed until mid-Tang Dynasty by Dan-Zhu, Zhao-Kuang, and Lu-Chun. The major thinking of this school came from Dan-Zhu, revised by Zhao-Kuang, and then formed a comprehensive section by Lu-Chun. Although the viewpoints of Zhao-Kuang and Dan-Zhu looked similar, there were differences between them. Besides, the explanation of Lu-Chun mostly followed that of Dan-Zhu. The differences between the thinking of Dan-Zhu and Zhao-Kuang can be seen in two aspects, the meaning of Jing and the points of view of Zhuan. Dan-Zhu stated that the purpose of writing Chunqiu by Confucius was rescuing the age and reforming the custom. However, Zhao-Kuang gave a different point of view. He opposed reestablishment of the concepts of policy and education in Xia Dynasty. On the other hand, he complimented the existence of Zhou Courtesy. As for the Zhuan, in order to represent the essential of Jing, the approach of explaining Jing by Dan-Zhu was to comprehend three Zhuan, widely introduce all notes, and then make a decision by himself. Based on the explanation of Dan-Zhu, Zhao-Kuang added more extensions and reinforce the rules of Zhang writing. In addition, Zhao-Kuang believed the evolution of three Zhuan could not be retroactive. Thus, he thought Zuozhuan was neither done by Qiu-Ming, nor educated by Confucius. The comments of Zhao-Kuang proposed his reviews and statements for Dan-Zhu's theory. Through this process, we could understand the development of this school and further to get insight into the study of Chunqiu theory.