本文探討吳�撉v史趨向的變化軌跡，以他的代表作：《朱元璋傳》的問世與改寫 為例證，解釋他如何經歷政治抉擇，經過「思想改造」，治史趨向有所變化的意義。本文論 證，吳�曈怐鴐偶悃M經濟問題而進行《朱元璋傳》的前身：《明太祖》 (又名《由僧缽到皇 權》 ) 之撰寫； 而後隨其思想的轉變、學習馬克思主義之進展，屢次改寫，使其釋論力求 符合「馬克思主義經典作家」的論述。但將吳�撉瑤蚼z觀點，與其他中國馬克思主義史家 ( 特別是早在一九四九年以前即皈依馬克思主義的史家 ) 做對比，即可發現， 導引他的論述 的理論依據，是毛澤東的理論觀點。一九四九年後的中國史壇，像吳�曈o種歷經「思想改造 」而寫史立說的史家，不在少數。如果能對類似處境的史家做更多的個例探討，我們對中國 馬克思主義史學的發展脈絡、理論傳統的曲折流變及其意義，可以有更清楚的認識。

　　　　　As a Chinese intellectual, Wu Han is known for his participation in the political activities of the 1940s, as well as for his tragic death during the Cultural Revolution. It is the aim of this paper to show how his four different editions of A Biography of Chu Yuan-chang reflect Wu Han's evolution from a "perit bourgeois historian" to a Marxist historian. The author puts forward that, after the original version of the Biography, his Ming T'ai-tsu (or otherwise titled Yu Seng-po tao Huang-ch'uan [From Monk's Bowl to Imperial Power]) in 1943 as a means of supporting himself, the book was rewritten five years later, and retitled A Biography of Chu Yuan-chang. After 1949, now an intellectual within the Communist establishment, Wu again undertook the task of rewriting his book, respectively in 1954 and 1964, claimed that his final revision would be based on the basic doctrines of Marxist-Leninism. The author argues that the theoretical framework of Wu's 1950s and 1960s editions of the Biography is in fact based on the teachings of Mao Tse-tung. Wu differs here clearly from other Chinese Marxist historians such as KuoMo-jo, Lu Chen-yu, Fan Wen-lan, and Ho Wai-lu, whose Marxist historical writings preceded 1949, and were based on the historical interpretations of Marx or of early Marxists thinkers like Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg or Stalin. The author finally suggests that the theoretical tradition of Chinese Marxist historiography had come to include a distinct new doctrine: that of Maoist historiography.