章太炎論史，特重典章制度之學，一方面他深受荀子與杜佑的影響，對典章制度在中國歷史上的重要性尤為注意，另一方面他在近代新史學的浪潮之下，希望借闡述典章制度「發明社會進化之理」。他的制度史研究，將此學視為國粹的具體表現，既繼承了乾嘉樸學的考史之風，對於歷代制度之具體內容多有考證，實事求是，不蹈空言；同時復能擺脫餖飣之學的視野狹隘與瑣碎之失，以歷史演變的整體視角出發，研精覃思，通過對於制度沿革之論述，別其良莠，總結出可為今世借鑒效仿者，以期學以致用。民國建立之後，一系列的政壇亂象讓章太炎對代議政治幾乎絕望。在回答章士釗應當如何醫治議會之弊病時，他主張恢復古代的科道制，用給事中彈劾官吏，用御史監督政府，希望以此替代議會的職能，並且能避免後者的流弊，此番言論，堪稱他借研究典章制度以致用的具體表現。此論一出，頗引起社會上的關注，但回應者中，反對之聲並不比認同之辭少，時人多本專制與民主勢不兩立的立場，認為決不可將帝制時代的制度行於今世，並極力描繪科道制在歷史上的黑暗面。然章太炎的典章制度之學，在近代中國絕非空谷足音。沈家本、陳天倪、鄧之誠、賀昌群、錢穆等人，或與章太炎有一面之雅，或在論學上極相契合，或對章氏著作頗為推崇。他們對待中國古代制度，也與章氏相似，希望從中國歷史自身脈絡出發，探討各項制度的因革損益、利弊得失。

Influenced by Xun Zi and Du You, Zhang Taiyan particularly emphasized the evolution of institutions in Chinese history. In response to modern historiography, Zhang also intended to elucidate the laws of social evolution through institutions. Treating institutional history as a concrete manifestation of national essence, Zhang not only inherited the evidentiary scholarship of the Qing, but also went beyond the narrow concerns of scholastic research with broad attention to actual social change. Extremely disappointed at the representative government due to the series of political crises after the founding the Republic, Zhang Taiyan proposed, in reply to Zhang Shizhao's inquiry, the restoration of the Supervising Secretaries and Censors as a substitute for the malfunctioning parliament. Such a proposal by Zhang invited many criticisms which maintained that the corrupt imperial institution could not be applied in contemporary democracy. But Zhang's approach to institutional history, far from unique in modern China, inspired quite a few reformist few scholars, such as Shen Jiaben and Chen Tianni, who wanted to discuss the pros and cons of institutions from the China's own historical context.