相較於江藩《漢學師承記》之廣受注意，桂文燦的《經學博采錄》則顯得失色許多。但如果從對研究清代中葉以降經學與學術的價值來看，桂氏之書誠有其不可忽視的價值。因為此書可說是乾、嘉、道、咸四朝的經學采風，也可以做為乾、嘉學術慣性的重要記錄。就內容而言，主要是對以許、鄭為基礎的漢學活動之采錄，可謂四朝之經學提要；就地域而言，除了江、浙、安徽與京畿等傳統勢力地區之外，兩廣、福建、江西、兩湖、雲貴、四川、山東、山西、河南等地，同樣湧現出許多研治漢學的學者；就學者而言，除了廣為吾人熟知的重要漢學家之外，桂氏更記錄了許多不為人知，而終身執守漢學的經學家；至於就漢學的擴散途徑而言，桂氏在不經意間，為我們暗示了漢學與科舉考試以及學校教育不可分割的密切關係。從思想史的大敘事來看，道、咸以降，世局漸變，講今文學；但是從學術史的角度來看，考據學的勢力，即使到民國建立，仍不稍衰，更不用說仍在乾、嘉學術慣性下的道光、咸豐年代。由桂氏此書，可以看到思想史敘事與學術史實之間的落差；其意義，誠為治經學與經學史者，亟待補足之處。

Though Gui Wencan’s 桂文燦Jing Xue Bo Cai Lu 經學博采錄 may pale in comparison with Jiang Fan’s 江藩Han Xue Shi Cheng Ji 漢學師承記, yet Gui’s text is still important in understanding the study of the Classics and academics in general after the mid-Qing dynasty. Based mainly on the Han dynasty scholarship of Xu Shen 許慎and Zheng Xuan 鄭玄, it describes the classics study of this period, providing a record of the main directions of thought in the QianLong 、JiaQing、DaoGuan and XianFeng reign periods. In terms of regional scholarship, it indicates that outside the traditional centers of Han Learning scholarship in areas such as the capital of the empire, Jiangsu, Zhejiang and Anhui, there also were numerous scholars of this school in Fujian, Jiangxi, Hunan, Hubei, Guangdong, Guangxi, Yunnan, Guizhou, Shandong, Shanxi, Sichuan and Henan. In terms of individual scholars, beyond those better known, Gui also notes many others who were devoted to the Han Learning. In terms of the channels by which Han Learning was propagated, Gui’s work reminds us of the inseparable relationship between the imperial examinations and the academic training. From the viewpoint of intellectual history, Jinwen 今文scholarship was the mainstream after the Dao, Xian reign period; but from the viewpoint of academic history, the strength of evidential scholarship remained unabated up to the Republican Period, and an examination of the Jing Xue Bo Cai Lu helps to clarify this difference.