本文旨在考察當今《總目》學中較少被關注的楚辭類著作，並以《四庫全書》編纂時的重要思潮－崇實，作為分析討論的切入點。「崇實」雖為一種風氣，在不同領域、面向開展，又足以作為一種具體的操作方法。透過集部〈總敘〉、〈楚辭類敘〉，確實可見「崇實」概念流動其間，此處之「實」同時包含作品文本自身的版本考據外，也必須考慮其外延的歷史環境，以便於知人論世。從中可看出文學除卻藝術性的要求外，如世道教化、文人爭譽的實用性的功能更不容忽視。藉由兩篇敘文的概括，重新檢視楚辭類提要，嘗試考掘「崇實」思想主要展現在哪些部份，館臣又是透過何種辭彙來進行具體批評。據此，發現「考據訓詁」與「本意寄託」為兩條主要脈絡，前者著重篇次字句等基礎，後者則考量到作者與註解者的遭遇、情性之真實。簡言之，館臣們之苦心表現在文學審美與版本考徵的微妙調和，卻又涵蓋在能為清廷所用的前提下，達到文本內、外的平衡。由提要之評價可知，當考據與本意產生衝突時，當以本意為宗，這種詮釋進路將作品與作者（註本與註解者）緊密結合，突顯忠愛纏綿的「靈均旨趣」，最後歸向有益於清廷統治之用。

This paper aimed to probe into the literay works in the category of Chu Elegies, which have been relatively underrepresented in the literature of the ”Comprehensive Table of Contents Study” to date. In the present paper, Chu elegies were analyzed in terms of Realism, a weighty ideological trend in the compilation of the ”Complete Library of the Four Treasuries”. Climate as Realism was at the time, it was practiced in different domains and fields and could be drawn on as a methodological approach. From 'Zong Xu' and 'Chu Ci Lei Xu' in the Ji Branch of literature, it was found that the idea of realism prevailed in such works. Based on the examination of the semantics of the texts and their corresponding historical background, this approach proffered an insight into the human nature and society at the time. It is clear that besides its artistic requirements, literature has such pragmatic functions as enlightenment and bookmen's means of achieving fame. Based on the investigation of the two texts, the present study re-examined the synopsis of Chu Elegies and discussed the embodiment of Realism as well as the lexicon that those textual annotators used for textual criticism. It was found that textual semantics and reality-based interpretations were two main domains focused on, with the former on the linguistic elements of the texts and the latter on the reality of the authors' and annotators' personal experiences and dispositions. In short, those annotators' efforts could be seen in the harmony of literary aesthetics and textual semantics, which contributed to the internal and external balance of the texts under the premise of the applicability of the annotation by Ching Dynasty. Given the comments on the textual synopsis, when the textual criticism conflicted with the original semantics of the texts, the latter was favored over the former. This approach closely related the texts to their authors (and the annotation to their annotators), which manifested fidelity and affections and helped to lead to the unity of Ching Dynasty.