章學誠在錢穆先生的學術生命中有著重要的地位。錢先生曾說：「我可以告訴諸位，我學歷史有許多聰明是欣賞章氏而來的，他能從無問題中間發現問題」。可是錢先生對章學誠的論述並非一成不變，而是有著變化。這變化明顯見於錢先生對章學誠「浙東學術」的論述。對於章學誠提出的「浙東學術」，錢先生認爲這是章學誠自述其學術淵源，在其早期的著作如《國學概論》和《中國近三百年學術史》對此並無異議，可是後來卻反對此說。所以本文主要透過錢先生對章學誠「浙東學術」的前後轉變作爲切入點，將錢先生對此的前後論述加以比較，從中探索這轉變所涉及的不同問題，繼而窺探錢先生學術思想的轉變。概括而言，錢先生對章學誠「浙東學術」的轉變，與錢先生對陽明學、對章學誠的學術主旨及對中國學術發展的認識有關。最後筆者認爲《中國近三百年學術史》雖然是錢先生論述清代學術史的專著，但是在某些問題上，例如對章學誠的論述，并不能視爲錢先生定論之作。

Zhang Xuecheng is a significant figure in Qian Mu's academic career. Qian once commented that he drew upon many important points from Zhang, because Zhang is able to find out many academic issues that are often neglected by other researchers. However, Qian Mu did not blindly follow Zhang's road. He further developed and innovated many academic points, such as the questions concerning "East ZheJiang School" put forward by Zhang.With regard to the issue of "East-ZheJiang School" study, Qian is of the view that Zhang, by such effort, is intended to recount his own academic origin. Qian agreed such view in his early works such as Introduction to Chinese Studies (《國學概論》) s and Chinese Academic History of the Past Three Hundred Years (《中國近三百年學術史》. However, in his later works Qian disagreed with Zhang on this question.This paper will focus on the shift of Qian Mu's academic points on the issue abovementioned. This paper will conduct contrapuntal reading the texts that Qian Mu wrote in different period of times and try to come to conclusive opinions on the relevant issues. Generally speaking, the transformation of Qian Mu's view is related to his understanding of YangMing School and Zhang Xuecheng, as well as his understanding on the development of Chinese academic development.Finally, the book Chinese Academic History of the Past Three Hundred Years is a monumental work of Qian Mu in his study of Qing dynasty academic history. However, with regard to certain issues, such as the comment on Zhang Xue Cheng, for instance, this book cannot by regarded as a conclusively work of Qian Mu on these topics.