The aim of this article is to examine 1) the backdrop against which Han-yuan Baekje-zhuan 翰苑百済伝 (hereafter HB) was compiled and its character as an historical record, 2) the relationship between the Kuodizhi 括地志 (herafter HBK) that was quoted in HB and other relevant materials, and 3) the uniqueness and chronology of HBK.Hanyuan is the reference book for writing in the alternating 4-, 6-character line prose style called siliu pianliwen 四六駢儷文 compiled by Zhang Chujin 張楚金 during the Tang Period. A comparison of the parts of Chinese Zheng-shi 中国正史 quoted in HB with the extant versions of the Chinese Zhengshi shows that the HB extractions are not precise; however, rather than errors in transcription being the cause, the author observes that the compiler may have attempted to correct mistakes in the original text through the comparison of different versions available at the time. It is also clear that in some of the quotations, the compiler decided to rewrite the text.The author then proceeds to classify into 17 categories the HB’s content regarding the kingdom of Baekje based on eighteen Chinese sources, in order to show that in terms of the connections between the items, the information in HB and HBK is almost identical to that provided in Suishu 隋書and similar to that contained in Zhoushu 周書 and Beishi 北史. However, in terms of the order of the content, both HB and HBK are far different from the above three works.Given this intention on the part of the compiler, the author argues that it would not be proper to “correct” the HBK text based on relevant Chinese materials.HBK is thought to have been compiled based on the information provided to the Court for Dependencies (Honglushi 鴻臚寺) by envoys from Baekje. It describes the history of Baekje during the transition period between the Sui and Tang Dynasties; that is, between 624 and the early 630s. Since HBK contains unique text and articles not found in any other source, it could be a very valuable piece of historiography in such areas as institutional change during the 6th and 7th centuries, after the correction of errors and omissions in transcription and a textual critique in comparison with contemporary and semi-contemporary sources.