縱觀漢晉至清代中興觀念的演變，「晉元中興」的敘事模式在在昭示著當朝及後世對於王朝賡續與復興的熱切企盼，最終形成談中興必稱光武、談光武必涉晉元的對舉局面。相比「光武中興」，中古中興觀念的轉捩點發生在東晉開國，而「晉元中興」得以成立的根本前提，卻是唐初虞世南（558-638）對臣下之功與人主之功的區分。「衰晉」的歷史評價，使得「晉元中興」只能在繼統（即「業」）的意義上勉強成立；而對「功」特別是光復中原的強調，則催生了另一類中興鑒戒的分途。「晉元中興」雖已固化為中興敘事的標準範式，卻由於東晉未能實現光復中原而走向中興典範的反面，特別成為南宋及明末引以為戒的「另類」中興。

From the Han and Jin periods to the Qing Dynasty, the narrative mode of the Jinyuan Restoration showed the eagerness for the continuation and revival of the dynasty at that time and beyond. Consequently, as long as it involved restoration, it had to mention Guangwu, and as long as it involved Guangwu, it had to mention Jinyuan. However, a turning point of the concept of restoration in Medieval China took place with the founding of the Eastern Jin Dynasty. The Jinyuan Restoration was based on the distinction of the Ministers’ exploits and the Emperor’s exploits by Yu Shinan in the early Tang. The historical evaluation of “Weak Jin” made the Jinyuan Restoration “true” in the meaning of the system that followed. But, the emphasis on exploits, especially on the recovery of the central plains led to another restoration warning example. Although it had been fixed in the standard narrative mode, the Jinyuan Restoration turned into the opposite of the restoration model’s expectation because of its failure in recovering the central plains, which was taken as a warning in the South Song and late Ming Dynasties.