史學分類中有史評的出現，大抵首見於宋晁公武《郡齋讀書志》。而後清朝官方《四庫全書總目》列為第十五類，則成為定式。自來正史第一類，歷代均有撰述，綿延不絕，已有廿五史傳承長遠，包吞千有的豐富遺產。至唐劉知幾撰《史通》出，彈射古籍，臚列得失，則有千錘百鍊百代不易之效，其中尤於編年紀傳正史居多。然一因史評論文較諸他類相對寡少，另因其於史學進化大有功效，故而本文擇正史、史評兩類首冊之《史記》、《史通》，各分析其於前代墳籍之批評得失，釐正其是非對錯，以正視聽，聊備觀覽。文中主從《史記》之史學批評分析入手，略陳史公述史「寓論斷于敘事」的高妙手法，頗有隱喻褒諱，引人遐思，自決訟獄的優勝之處；及至《史通》出而糾舉古史，則風格迥異，論評明銳且極為犀利，乃至論者多以「工訶古人，傷於苛刻」為病，然其書貫穿古今，洞悉利病，又多後人所遠不逮。文中直陳其論述批評《史記》之處多則，藉以概觀兩書之間得失，並非必然述者多非，評者盡對，而期以往還研討之間能曲盡兩大史家之述評有不為人知之幽微處，則是本文目的之所求。

In this study, two pioneering classics-Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji) and Generality of Historiography (Shitong)-as the ＂official history＂ and ＂historical review＂ types of literature are selected for analysis of their criticism on previous classic books. The essay starts with an analysis of the historical critique of Shiji, briefly commenting on Sima Qian's (or Taishi-gong) masterly skill of ＂putting judgment within narrative＂, which has been regarded as an excellent work. Then came Shitong arguing against the predecessor's records of history. It adopted a quite different style, and commented in an incisive and highly scathing approach, and hence many commentators criticized it ＂intending to reproach the predecessor, and being too harsh＂. But the book is hardly measured up to in later generations, considering its ability to penetrate throughout history and give insight to the pros and cons. A number of Shitong's critiques on Shiji are listed in the essay to give an overview of the merits and demerits of the two books, but it seems the narrative may not be all wrong and the commentator completely right. The essay aims to elaborate on the abstruse and delicate points of the two great historians' comments that are rarely known by engaging in meticulous study and discussion.