過去對明末張溥（1602-1641）《漢魏六朝百三家集》百篇題辭，或歸於文獻，或納入文論，對百篇題辭意蘊之「言」及潛寄之「不言」，少見關注；至於其大量史論，亦罕論及。然細審作者身處、遭際與相關述作，發現百篇題辭與史論，雖分屬不同體裁，敘寫對象亦不相涉，題辭卻頗有向其史論借鑑痕跡，實包藏微妙內在繫聯與特殊呼應關係：聚焦對人、對事深度省思，同時傳達鑒前毖後的資鑑意涵。總賅而言，百篇題辭透顯作者的史論意蘊，堪稱別有託寓的醒世之言及自惕之詞。因此，轉換不同視角，領略作者藉此為文士做「史論」之意圖，並刻意凸顯個人身處困境之省思，則百篇題辭於文學史上，將因而有重新定位的契機與價值依歸之可能。

Historically seen as general texts or texts implying a theory of literature, the One Hundred Pieces of Inscription (baipien tici 百篇題辭)of the book “Hanwei liuchao baisanjia ji 漢魏六朝百三家集,” written by Zhang Pu, a scholar during the late period of Ming dynasty, has got less attention in terms of its significances as well as hidden messages. And this is the same case for Zhang’s commentaries on history (Shilun 史論). But, given Zhang’s background and his academic works, it can be proved that even though there are differences between baipien tici and Shilun in terms, not only of literary form, but of the objects to which these two works aim to talk, the former seems to receive something from the latter, say, a deep reflection on human affairs, or how history functions as a reference to the future, and in this sense a connection, or even a correspondence, between both is able to be constituted. In short, baipien tici can be seen as alerting its readers and even Zhang himself, as it manifests both Zhang’s idea of history and how Zhang thinks about his own future when facing challenges. In this regard, it will be possible to re-situate baipien tici as deserving much more appreciation in the history of Chinese literature.