《中国书画》杂志2003年第2期上发表的陆昱华先生《读<中国书法史·两汉卷>献疑》一文,对拙著的研究方法及对人文的关怀作了赞扬,但是对拙著在名物制度方面认为有四个地方可以商榷。我一向认为撰写论著必须要处处能经得起读者的推敲和质疑,所以每下笔总要求言必有据,深思熟虑。对于他能提出不同看法,表示欢迎,但对他所列的依据和发表的见解,我认为或是因未见前人的考释,或以当今的观念去理解古代名物,或援引较后的记载而忽视了更早的文献,都并不正确。今逐一简略地答复批评如下: Lu Yuhua, published in Chinese Calligraphy and Painting Magazine, No. 2, 2003, presented his article with “Doubts about the History of Chinese Calligraphy and the Two Han Dynasties” and praised my research method and care for humanity. However, There are four areas that can be discussed. I always think that the writing must be everywhere can withstand the reader’s scrutiny and questioning, so every time the total demand must be based on data, thoughtful consideration. I welcome the fact that he can make a different point of view. However, I do not think he can understand the ancient names either because he did not find out his predecessors or used his concepts to refer to his later evidence. Ignoring the earlier literature is not correct. Here is a brief summary of the criticisms: