黃宗羲在《明儒學案》中對顏鈞、何心隱以及泰州學派的經典描述，長期以來主導著晚明思想史研究的立論基調，在許多場合還扮演著最基本的文獻依據的角色。本文以〈泰州學案〉中的顏鈞傳記為主要考察對象，依據新近面世的各種相關原始資料，詳細檢討黃宗羲如何通過抽取、曲解和竄改已有的文獻記載，重新模塑出顏鈞學有所宗、急公好義的歷史形象。 從晚明以來，顏鈞、何心隱等不少泰州學派的學者在思想內涵、政治際遇、行事風格等各方面都遭到質疑和批評，而黃宗羲在〈顏鈞傳〉中採取的書寫策略，則是在掌握相關文獻極為有限的情況下，既為了反駁已有的不利成說的影響，也是應對清初思想界批判陽明學的現實需要。

Used as an indispensable sourcebook for the study of Ming Confucianism and the intellectual history of the Ming dynasty, Mingru Xuean (明儒學案, Case Biographies of Ming Confucians) by Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲 (1610- 1695) is not invariably authentic. To illustratethis, the present paper focuses on textual problems in the biography of Yan Jun 顏鈞 (1504-1596). Huang Zongxi’s selective account of the Tai Zhou School 泰州學派 in Mingru Xuean effectively reformed its image. Consequent1y, most researchers take Huang’s portrayal for granted and do not probe into the validity of the information presented. In this paper, a thorough textual study of the content of Yan Jun’s biography is conducted, along with analysis of the reference sources which Huang Zongxi used for this biography. Based on many original historical documents, this paper shows how the original texts were misrepresented, distorted, and even falsified. Furthermore, this paper discusses Huang Zongxi’s motivations for deviating from historical facts. While Huang Zongxi was compiling Mingru Xuean, much criticism prevailed against the Wang Yangming School 陽明學 and the Tai Zhou School. As a result, Huang’s biography of Yan Jun was calculated in content, with a desire to thereby defend the Tai Zhou School.