The glyph does not match the evidence.

The evidence shows the Zhuang reading is gyəmƽ (aka gyaemq) and the meaning is 紫色 (purple).


▲ 《壮汉英词典》, p. 569

The component 门 is often used to the meanings of colours, that means the semantic element is 门 (related to colour) and the phonetic element is 金 (currently 老借 is gim, but I trust gyaem is more ancient form). Therefore, there is no need to change anything.

U+49A6 䦦

Agree with comment #3325. The evidence 1 has 今 in the middle. Care needs to be taken when reading handwritten characters. The only question here is which of two already encoded Zhuang characters this is a poorly written form of.

There is
, page 220 of 《古壮字字典》 , the only difference in reading from gyaemq being that of tone ~x (4th tone) versus ~q (5th tone). The traditional form would be ⿵門今 .

As well there is
which is found on page 168 of 《古壮字字典》 .

The fact that SJT-11239 aka 八辅 has U+2CB9E 𬮞 at 2390 strongly suggests that it is the normal rendering of evidence 1

The glyph is very reasonable and the glyph is not misidentified.
⿱丶冂 is a variant of 门

The glyph in the index:

More cases in the book:
闼，U+95FC

𮤬，U+2E92C

𮤸，U+2E938

Thank you the index is clearly shows the inner component as 金. This additional evidence is much clearer than evidence 1 and so I remove my earlier objection.

If 金 is phonetic then one possible explanation is that 'gyaem' comes from the Cantonese pronunciation of 金 which would be highly unusual in the Wuming are and perhaps explains the comment that the character is seldom seen. A borrowed pronunciation coming from Cantonese would not make it older but rather of different origin.

To John's comment #10593:
Yes, very likely.
I have scanned the book again recently and the quality is better. Thank you for bringing the issue out.