清代学者万斯同认为元代太庙祭礼有一些新异之处，有些则有违古礼。其实，荐佛事、祭品的蒙古色彩与祭仪中嵌入的“烧饭”礼等方面也具有鲜明的时代特色，而这些内容万氏都没有提到；至于改汉地通行的“栗木神主”为金制神主，则是受了喇嘛教的直接影响；元代宗庙神主的位向与位次排列亦有一定历史与经典依据，万氏的指斥也有片面之处。至于大都的“烧饭园”与“官祭场”则是元代帝室与蒙古族权贵从事家祭的特殊场所。通过以上考述，不仅可以澄清某些误识或偏见，而且能从一个重要角度寻绎蒙、汉传统的交互影响及其所呈现的独特面貌。 Wan Sitong, a scholar of the Qing Dynasty, thought there were some new differences between the imperial temple sacrificial ceremonies in the Yuan Dynasty and some of which violated the ancient ceremony. In fact, the Buddhist art and sacrificial offerings are also featured in the Mongolian color and the “burning rice” ceremony embedded in the sacrificial ceremonies. However, none of these contents are mentioned in the article. As for the “chestnut god” For the gold gods, is subject to the direct impact of Lamaism; Yuan Dynasty Temple Lord God’s position and rankings also have some historical and classical basis, Wan’s denouncement also has one-sided place. As for most of the “burning rice garden” and “official sacrificial field” is the Yuan Dynasty royal house and the Mongolian elite as a special sacrificial offering place. Through the above examination, not only some misunderstandings or prejudices can be clarified, but also the Mongolian and Han traditional interactions and their unique appearances can be found from an important point of view.