修史，主要在保存史料。長久以來，多將《清史稿》的疏漏舛訛等缺點歸咎於《清史稿》的倉卒成書，未遑審訂。其實，民國三年(1914)，北洋政府在原國史館的基礎上，正式設立清史館，仿照《明史》，繼承傳統正史體例，大規模啟動修史工程。民國十六年(1927)，完稿問世。前後歷時十四年，動員百餘人；將《清史稿》的缺失，歸僧於倉卒成書，似是剛非，缺乏說服力。 清史稿，有已刊的《清史稿》，還有清史館檔中未刊的清史稿，因此，已刊《清史稿》並不等於清史館。清史館檔的主要內容，除了現刊《清史稿》排印本的原稿外，還含有大批未刊紀、志、表、傳內容不同的其他稿本，以及清朝國史館纂修的紀、志、表、傳初輯本、覆輯本、黃綾定本等等。清史館纂修的大批稿本因未經選刊，而被世人忽略。討論《清史稿》不能一概而論，清史館中的稿本，因出自多人之手，其中有不乏可信度較高的稿本，可以整理出版，作為《清史稿》的補編，稱為《清史稿補編》，可與《清史稿校註》相輔而行。本文撰寫的旨趣，即在探討清史館未刊紀、志、表、傳各種稿本的纂修情形，及其史料價值。掌握豐富的原始稿本，有助於大型清史的纂修。

The purpose of historiography is chiefly to preserve historical records. For a long time, the omissions and errors in the Draft Ch’ing History (Ch’ing-shih kao) were attributed to a lack of careful editing that resulted from its hasty publication. In 1914, the project to compose and compile the dynastic history of the Ch’ing was launched with the Peking government’s formal establishment of the Ch’ing Historiographer’s Office (Ch’ing-shi kuan). Founded on the basis of the former Historiography Institute of the Ch’ing, the new institute was intended to follow the traditional historiographic practice employed in compiling the dynastic history of the Ming. In 1927, the project was competed and the text was published. The entire process spanned a period of fourteen years and involved the labor of over one hundred people. Therefore, the conclusion that the flaws within the text of Draft Ch’ing History were the result of its rushed publication appears specious and lacks persuasiveness. Many of the Draft Ch’ing History manuscripts from Ch’ing Historiographer’s Office were published in book form as the Draft Ch’ing History. Some, however, were not. In other words, the present text to the Draft Ch’ing History does not included all of the records originally complied by Ch’ing Historiographer’s Office as part of the Draft Ch’ing History project. These unpublished manuscripts include a large corpus of annals, treatises, tables, and biographies; as well as the first second, and yellow silk cover editions the Ch’ing History. A large number of the manuscripts compiled by the Ch’ing Historiographer’s Office have been ignored and forgotten because they were not included in the Draft Ch’ing History. When we discuss the Draft Ch’ing History, we should not over-generalize. Due to the fact that the historical manuscripts of Ch’inig Historiographer’s Office were complied by a large number of people, some are more reliable than others. These should be assembled and published as an addendum to the Draft Ch’ing History, which could be entitled the Supplement to the Draft Ch’ing History (Ch’ing-shih kao pu-p’ien), and studied alongside the Revised and Annotated Edition of the Draft Ch’ing History (Ch’ing-shi kao chiao-chu). The main purpose of this essay is to explore the compilation and historical value of the unpublished annals, treatises, tables, and biography manuscripts of the Ch’ing Historiographer’s Office. A thought understanding of this abundant corpus of original manuscripts will greatly benefit the compilation of the large-scale Ch’ing History.