When examining the characteristics of ancient local chronicles compilation, it is evident that subsequent chronicles are often compiled on the basis of their predecessors, leading to a phenomenon of imitation. Therefore, a cautious approach should be taken towards the dialectal and colloquial materials recorded within them. Indeed, from the perspective of exploring the evolution of phonetics and vocabulary, the dialectal materials provided by ancient local chronicles do have certain limitations, and researchers need to adopt an attitude of “careful caution, to remove the dross and retain the essence, to verify and correct errors.” However, from the viewpoint of modern Chinese character research, the continuation of later chronicles from earlier ones is not merely simple copying. On the contrary, there are often differences in character usage, and these variant characters actually contain rich linguistic and textual information, which is also valuable for the revision of large-scale linguistic dictionaries. However, there is currently less attention given to the value of variant characters in ancient local chronicles. This paper examines two cases of dialect vocabulary variants in the old chronicles of Zaoyang, Hubei, including the “汆壺廬” from the 1853 edition of the chronicles during the Xianfeng era and the “氼壺盧” from the 1854 edition. Additionally, it discusses the two types of chronicles from the Xianfeng era, “ 黍” and the “萄黍” from the 1923 edition of the chronicles, exploring the reasons for the emergence of these variants and seeking insights from experts in the field.

Stone inscriptions, as one type of excavated literature, have unique functions different from those of traditional literature, and they hold great value for the study of language, script, history, and culture. However, due to various reasons, there are some materials with difficult-to-distinguish authenticity, age, or nature, which cause significant interference in the study of language, script, history, and culture, and also affect the judgments of collectors. Therefore, it is crucial to identify them. This article examines the stone inscriptions of six stone statues in medieval China. Among them, the inscriptions of four of the statues, which date back to the Six Dynasties, can be divided into three categories: forgeries, half-true and half-false, and errors in recording or omissions by the compiler. Of these inscriptions, this demonstrates the complexity and difficulty of determining the authenticity. This is also why determining the authenticity of the “Statues of Wang Sanniang” is challenging, based on a single piece of evidence. With limited excavated information and other tangible historical records, it becomes necessary to look for clues in other areas. One such suspicious records involves the mention of “Child-giving Guanyin”. This reference, as a singular instance predating the Ming Dynasty, is questionable when considered alongside the premature use of era name before the official announcement of the regime, suggesting a high probability that this inscription is a forgery. The Guanyin statue from the third year of the Renshou of the Sui Dynasty, whether in terms of the inscription’s content or the statue’s type, should not be identified as the “Child-giving Guanyin”. This suggests that the claim regarding the origin of Child-giving Guanyin from the Six Dynasties has lost an important documentary backing, which is worthy of reflection on the current issues in the research regarding the origin and dissemination of the Child-giving Guanyin.