When People's Republic of China made its appearance on Oct. 1, 1949, an era of socialism came into its existence for the first time in the country. As a result, its social culture was full of a new wave of change, and the literary society of the country had to face change in its quality. The change meant that the people in the literary society, adopting Marxism and Maoism, began to study and write literary works. In editing literary history, the most conspicuous argument was: How fast they write literary histories in a new viewpoint, following the demand of college literary history course. Comprehensively examining literary histories which emerged during the 1950-60s, I find that there are three-phase transition: single or two/three-person collaboration, group edition in which teachers and students took part together, and collaboration of professional scholars in which more than 10 scholars participated. Succeeding to my previous research which examines the literary histories of the beginning of twentieth century, this paper seeks to examine the changes of editors' viewpoints and of editing system by taking a look at Chinese literary histories published during 1950-60s. For this purpose, I compare differences and similarities in editions of diachronic style literary history published in this period, and then both analyse and compare Chinese Literary History(1958) edited by the 1955 entrance students of Chinese Department in Peking University (北京大學中文系文學專門化1955 級集體編著 『中國文學史』), Chinese Literary History(1962) by Literature Institute of Chinese Social Academy(中國社會科學院文學硏究所中國文學史編寫組 『中國文學史』). Chinese Literary History(1962) by You Guoen, Wang Qi, Xiao Tiaofei, Ji Zhenzhun, Fei Zhen'gang(游國恩·王起·蕭滌非·季鎭準·費振剛 主編『中國文學史』). In modern China where political arguments and struggles were quite severe--particularly during the 1950-60s when politics taught literature, literary worldview of historical materialism following Marxism and Maoism became dominant. On this basis, they evaluated and judged the ancient Chinese literature in terms of class, people, reality, and reformation. But applying crude theories to literature, they produced immature, one-sided, and mechanical judgment of literature. Yet this tendency is considered as an inevitable process of history.