本文以漢、宋學問題中較少人討論的學術歸趨這一面向為核心，比較陳澧與朱次琦對朱子的論述，以釐清二人的學術特質，檢視關於漢宋調和的論述。經由對二人心目中朱子形象的分析，可見二人雖無漢、宋門戶，但他們看待朱子的角度，包括朱子學術的重心、精神、治學方法，及評價朱子於學術史上的定位、解釋朱子與乾嘉學術的關係等，都有極大的差異。因為二人是分別立足於漢學／鄭玄、宋學／朱子，從不同的窗口望出，以致視野各異，因此，將陳、朱二人籠統地歸入漢、宋兼采或調和的大框架中，是有待商榷的，而今日相當普遍的，對晚清漢宋調和風氣之論述，亦有再深入分梳的必要。筆者以為，晚清時期漢、宋不再強烈對峙，並非因為雙方立場的讓步或標準的轉換，而在於調整態度，並將對方收編於自己的系統之內，但其立場與堅持，就在此調整的過程中益形顯現。然而，立場與主觀意識，不必然等同偏見與意氣之爭，陳澧與朱次琦對異說的寬大胸懷與包容態度，乃承清初以來，以門戶之爭為患的訓誡，在乾嘉學術的基礎上，進一步深化與實踐的結果，為漢、宋學在晚清的新面貌。

This study compares the views of Chen Li (陳澧) and of Zhu Ciqi (朱次琦) on Zhu Xi (朱熹) according to their different intellectual orientations, an aspect that has seldom appeared in discussions on the Han-Sung learning debate. This comparison between the different intellectual characteristics of these two scholars gives us a better understanding of compromises that were made in this debate. Their differences include evaluations of Zhu Xi’s intellectual center, spirit, method of inquiry and his place in history, as well as the relationship between Zhu Xi and Qianjia(乾嘉) scholars. These differences arose since, of these two men, one based his views on the Hang Learning tradition stemming from Zheng Xuan (鄭玄) and the other from the Song Learning tradition of Zhu Xi. Thus the commonly held view that these scholars were part of a late Qing compromises between the two schools should be reassessed, as should the general view of the structure of this reconciliation. Although the confrontation between Han and Song learning was not as intense as it had been, this was due not to basic changes in criteria or position, but rather to adjustments in attitude that enabled each side to incorporate aspects of the other in its own system. The comparison thereby clarifies the attitude and position of each. Chen Li and Zhu Ciqi both benefited from lessons learned from the Qianjia period and displayed great tolerance towards each other’s school, which is a new feature of the late Qing debate between Han and Song learning.