上海图书馆藏《傅青主手批杜诗》题跋应系翁同龢真迹,翁氏“谛审知为青主先生评点”的鉴定结论不能轻易否定。《杜集书录》的质疑证据不足,而《杜集叙录》疑翁跋中“戊子”为“戊戌”之误,亦值得商榷。傅山对杜甫《偶题》等三首诗真伪的质疑有助于推动杜诗辨伪学研究。傅山对杜诗艺术和杜甫性格的批评反映了其对宋代以来崇杜之风的反省精神和不愿奉清朝正朔的遗民心态。傅山评诗以“味”为中心,为清代流行的神韵说和性灵说开启了先声,具有重要的诗学史价值。 Shanghai Library possession of “Fu Qing master hand Du Fu,” the inscriptions should be tied Weng with the authentic track, Weng’s “Judgment of the Supreme Judge as” the appraisal conclusions can not be easily rejected. There is insufficient evidence to question the Duji Shulun, and the mistakes in “Du Jishulu” recorded in “Ba Wu” and “Wuzu” as “Wuxu” are also debatable. Fu Shan’s questioning on the authenticity of the three poems such as Du Fu’s “Couplet” can help to promote Du Fu’s study of falsification. Fu Shan’s criticism of Du Fu’s poetic art and Du Fu’s personality reflected his reflections on the style of worshiping the Du Fu since the Song Dynasty and the mentality of his descendants who did not wish to be honored during the Qing Dynasty. Fu Shan ’s poem “QI” is the center of poem, which opened the forerunner to the popular charm sayings and spiritual demeanor in the Qing Dynasty. It has an important poetic history value.