鑒於中國古典歷史小說與歷史著述間存在著密不可分的史稗血緣關係，歷史小說創作的虛實理論之爭亦可溯源至此。故本文的論述宗旨在於，以錢鍾書與海登‧懷特（HydenWhite，1928-）所言之歷史敘述所具備與表現之虛構性觀點出發，並以《左傳》為歷史敘述典籍之範例，繼而以歷史小說創作之虛實論爭觀點為參照，將二者加以比較，試圖找出史傳敘事與歷史小說在虛構表現的審美差異與轉化。希望藉由考索史籍中虛構敘述的價值意涵，揭示歷史小說的虛實論爭所欲闡發之審美意蘊。而本文的結論則在於提出，對於「虛」、「實」意涵的詮解，若能跳脫現象面的認知而提升至精神層次的思考，則「虛」、「實」之於歷史著述與歷史小說的體現，非但不會彼此妨礙而不相容，反而能互為溝通聯繫，達至將形式面的虛實手法表現轉化為對價值面的美善精神追求的最高目的。

In view of the fact that between China classical historical novel and the historical writings has inseparable Shi Bai the blood relationship, the historical novel creation struggle of actual situation theory may also trace to the source hence. Therefore this article elaboration objective lies, (Hyden White) says the historical narration by Qian Zhongshu and Hayden White to have with the performance fictionalizes the viewpoint to embark, and take "Zuo-Zhuan " model of as the historical narration matter ancient book, subsequently actual situation of debate viewpoint take the historical novel creation as the reference, compares the two, attempts to discover the history and biography to narrate is fictionalizing the
performance with the historical novel the esthetic difference and the transformation. The hope because of tests in the rope historical records to fictionalize the narration the value meaning,the revelation historical novel actual situation debate wants to explain the esthetic implication.