季本是王陽明弟子，與陽明多數弟子學問進路不同，季本十分強調經典的重要，他先後注釋了《易》、《詩》、《春秋》、《四書》等書，而《春秋私考》則是他對《春秋》看法的總集。前人對《春秋私考》最大的批評是其不信《左傳》，常常「鑿空杜撰」，認為此書價值極低，因此相關的研究也付之闕如。本文透過爬梳《春秋私考》批評《左傳》的脈絡，從其基本立場而發，闡述季本對《春秋》「書例」的特殊運用方式，並論其由《春秋》「不書」進而發展出「默證」之說，並探求季本由事理、情理及霸者的理想典型所發展出的史事真偽判定模式。最後綜合以上各點，一方面論述季本許多匪夷所思的判斷並非「中風病鬼」的囈語，而是尊經態度的極度展現。另一方面也討論季本之說的限制及在《春秋》學史中的意義。

Ji Ben was one of Wang Yangming's students, but his academic style was very different from that of other disciples. Ji Ben put great emphasis on the classics, and he annotated many of them, including the Yijing, the Shijing, the Chunqiu, and the Four Books. The Chunqiu sikao (Private Studies of the Chunqiu) expresses his views on the Chunqiu (Springs and Autumns Classic). Since Ji Ben did not adopt the commentary of the Zuozhuan (Zuo's Commentary on the Springs and Autumns Classic), most scholars have strongly criticized him. Thus, they have underestimated the value of this book, resulting in a lack of critical research on it. In this essay, I use the Chunqiu sikao's criticisms of the Zuozhuan to investigate Ji Ben's unique use of the writing protocols in the Chunqiu. I explain how Ji Ben develops an ＂argument from silence＂ out of the Chunqiu's practice of ＂not recorded＂, and I explore Ji Ben's method of distinguishing the true from the false in history. Thus, I argue that instead of being sophistry, some odd decisions made by Ji Ben are the result of a certain attitude of respecting the classics. I also discuss the limitations of Ji Ben's theory and its significance in the history of research on Chunqiu.