Cefu Yuangui (冊府元龜) extensively quotes texts from the Book of the Later Han (後漢書), containing numerous variant readings. By employing computer technology to digitize various paper versions of Cefu Yuangui and Book of the Later Han, and through programming comparisons supplemented with manual proofreading, a database of variant readings where Cefu Yuangui cites the Book of the Later Han was established. From this database, 75 sets of ancient and modern characters were sorted out. The majority of these cases involve the use of ancient characters in the Book of the Later Han and modern characters in Cefu Yuangui, with a few instances in reverse, but there are also cases where both texts use a mix of ancient and modern characters. This reveals the characteristics of the times of the emergence and use of ancient and modern characters during the Wei, Jin, Northern and Southern Dynasties, as well as the Two Song Dynasties. Some conclusions drawn from this study can provide references and insights for further improvements of the revised version of Cefu Yuangui.

Zhuan Li Wan Xiang Ming Yi’s “Gujinzi” is a typical sample outside the region, and it stores a wealth of thematic corpus. This paper sorts out more than 300 groups of “Gujinzi”, and through the analysis and summary of the style of these materials, it is found that there are not only typical terms marked by the words “Gu” and “Jin”, but also terms such as “Tongshang.” “Shangwen” and “Mouzi” mixed with the typical terms. The collection and identification of its expression style is the premise for further research on the materials of “Gujinzi”, and as an exotic sample of the development of “Gujinzi”, the comparative research on Chinese “Gujinzi” can provide some circumstantial evidence for solving the long-debated problems in the academic history of “Gujinzi”; As an exotic eye, it also provides us with a new perspective to understand the connotation of the traditional term “Gujinzi” and the relationship between words.

In the abstract, I concretelyexamined a book called 'shinsenjikyo' that introduces various ways to account for 'gujinzi'. Furthermore, from a viewpoint of graphology, I investigated if the explanations in the annotation of the book are about 'gujinzi' that obviously showthe relation of succession in the course of creating a character, atitle letter for searchingthe dictionary of Chinese characters, Chinese characters that arecurrently being widely used, or variants of Chinese characters. Consequently, it was difficult to find 'gujinzi' that obviously showthe relation of succession in the course of forming a character. However, as for Chinese characters that are currentlywidely used, commentaries on 'gujinzi' are quite correct. There are several approachesin identifying the gujinzi relation in characters.To account for the title character, he uses the 'guzi' of the title character or the 'jinzi' of the title character or the 'guzi' and 'jinzi' of the title character. All the three ways shows that the title character and the suggested 'guzi' or 'jinzi' have the same meaning or are substituted or divided characters or are 'gujnzi' that apparently show the relation of succession in the course of forming a character. Accordingly, all the characters are correlatedand were actively used in the past. In conclusion, because the words of 'gu' and 'jin' are used, there was confusion between 'gujinzi' that account for 'guzi' with characters being used currently and widely and 'guzinzi' that means the succession relation in the course of forming a character. However, 'Shochu' seems to be successful in conveying to readers a broad meaning of 'gujinzi' relation that exists in certain Chinese characters.

Fenbiewenand Leizengziare two kinds of complex phenomenon ofChinese character which were coming from WangYun's research on Chongwen,both ofthem were from the point of view of character creation,they are different fromGujinzi,the term of contacting the usage of characters in ancient bibliography.Fenbiewen, LeizengZiand GujinZiare heterogeneous concepts due to theirdifferent academic backgrounds and research purposes.Beacuse of different pointof view，they have intersection of materials,so WangYun occasionally use Fenbiewenor Leizengzito explain those Jinziof Gujinziis in order to explain the causeof Jinzi,but doesn't mean he changed the historical definitions of Gujinzi. XuHaois the origin of the Gujinzidistortion,the different usage of a word in differentages' documents had been paralleled by XuHao with the terms like FenbiewenandLiezengzi,and then he inclined to tell that Gujinzimeans the phenomenon thatcharacters creation with the radicals increasing,so later misled people becomesto believe Gujinzimeans the phenomenon that characters creation with the radicalsincreasing just like Fenbiewenand Leizengzi,then they usually believe this isWangYun'sGujinziconcept but in fact this is not true.