受清末至民初逐漸形成，並廣泛爲學人強調的科學精神及方法之影響，今人對清代《尙書》學的關注，集中於與辨僞相關的成就，而忽略晚清《尙書》學可能的多面性，尤其是持論與辨僞相反的，對《尙書》古文諸篇之辨眞相關著作。本文試圖回到清代的學術背景，考察《尙書》學的發展，並以成書時間較晚、資料蒐羅較齊備的洪良品爲例，分析其對古文諸篇的辨眞理論，同時與辨僞者之重要論點及考辨方法相比較，一方面打破既有看待清代《尙書》學的視野，而以較寬廣的角度，探討《尙書》學於晚清的發展情形；一方面藉由雙方論證方法之比較，提供觀察辨眞及辨僞觀點的另一個視角。二者皆有助於吾人對清代學術史的建構與解讀。

Contemporary Sang-shu(尙書）research，affected by the scientific spirit and method emphasized by scholars from the beginning of the Republican period，has tended to focus on the fruits of )*an-w,*(辨僞).This has unfortunately led to a relative ignorance of the possible diversity present in late Qing dynasty Sang-shu studies，especially the works concerning bian-zhen(辨県)，which take the opposite view of bian-wei. To approach this lack in scholarship，this paper attempts to return to the background of the Qing intellectual environment to observe the development of Sang-shu studies. I take Hong Liang-pin!s(洪良品）works as my main example since they were completed later and integrate numerous materials. I then compare them with bian-wei works. In this way， I hope to break through the recent views of Qing dynasty Sang-shu studies， and see its development from a wider angle to provide a new point of view from which to observe the bian-zhen and bian-wei debate. Together this will help us better construct and understand Qing intellectual history.