繁體中文
嘉慶二十四年（1819）《新安縣志》卷之十二 海防畧「防海形勢」門正文（人手核讀：掃描本第 175 頁上下兩葉同第 176 頁上半葉）依次記八項。一、南頭一寨原轄汛地六處：「曰佛堂門、曰龍船灣、曰洛格、曰大澳、曰浪淘灣、曰浪白」。二、明萬曆十四年「總督吳、御史江會題：南頭為全廣門戶，控制蠻倭，請以總兵移鎮」，理由係番船固可直達澳門，而由澳門至省則水淺不能行，必須由大嶼山經南頭直入虎頭門以抵珠江，「此南頭所以為全廣門戶也」。三、「正德年間，番彝佛朗機入寇，占據屯門海道，汪鋐平之」。四、「厥後隆慶三年，海賊曾一本入寇；四年，倭寇流劫鄉村」，「萬曆年間老萬山賊肆劫」，「崇正年間艚賊李魁奇、劉香等相繼入寇，雖屢經剿滅，而南頭之守禦尤嚴」。五、「國朝康熙年間，亦以海氛未靖，故有遷界之舉；自復界後，海宇敉寧，而設險更為周密，今之汛地及設兵皆與舊制不同」，並列「大嶼山雞翼角砲臺、南頭砲臺、赤灣左右砲臺最為險要」。六、「大鵬一城，所以禦東北也，與平海相連，而自惠潮至者則大鵬適當其衝；明隆慶五年，倭賊攻大鵬所城，舍人康壽柏率眾協守，圍乃解」。七、「國朝順治四年，山寇陳耀破大鵬城，賊首李萬榮據之；後總兵黃應傑圍李萬榮於大鵬山，糧盡投誠，地始平。乃為善後之計，添設弁兵以資防守，此新安海防之大畧也」。八、引「明吏科尹瑾海防要務疏」，先列八項致病之由——海洋廣濶其分布難周也、海澳險阻其巨艦易壞也、汛地空虛其奸宄易乘也、兵糧匱乏其軍旅未充也、器貝（照掃描本字形抄錄）缺少其急用未濟也、接濟潛通其盜源未塞也、鋤撫失算其兵威未奮也、督率乏人其查覈未嚴也——再列「海防八事」：一曰量地廣狹以置船多寡、二曰量海淺深以置船大小、三曰就寨修船以回守汛地、四曰查革虛冒以振飭軍旅、五曰預置器具以防備急用、六曰嚴禁私濟以杜絕寇源、七曰籌酌招撫以奮兵威、八曰專任海防以肅軍務，末言「其為海疆計至備，而有防海之責者，顧可不講求以收實效哉」。呢條係由公共領域掃描本人手核讀出嚟嘅內容事實（人名、地名、數字一律照掃描本抄錄），同志錄並排對照，兩邊互相補足：志錄 1563 年（明嘉靖四十二年）記譚綸、戚繼光請復水寨舊制，此後廣東設六座水師寨，其中佛堂門、龍船灣、大澳同浪淘灣四處汛地喺今日香港境內、歸南頭寨管轄、每處駐兵逾二百名——縣志「南頭一寨原轄汛地六處」正列出同一組汛地，除志錄舉出嘅四處仲有洛格同浪白兩處。志錄 1540 年（嘉靖十九年）記備倭巡海官軍分三路、東莞縣南頭城為中路啟程之地，巡經佛堂門等海澳，對應縣志「胥出海所必經也」。志錄 1630 年（崇禎三年）記海盜李魁奇率逾百艘賊船犯香港，南頭寨參將陳拱喺佛堂門迎擊、追擊時陣亡；另 1633、1634（六月十五日）、1635 年三記劉香犯新安、南頭——對應縣志「崇正年間艚賊李魁奇、劉香等相繼入寇，雖屢經剿滅，而南頭之守禦尤嚴」。志錄 1682 年（康熙二十一年）記屯門墩臺改制為屯門寨（千總一人、士兵三十人）同增置輞井、九龍、大埔頭、麻雀嶺四汛，對應縣志「今之汛地及設兵皆與舊制不同」；志錄 1729 年（雍正七年）記清廷喺大嶼山汾流（今分流）海角修築雞翼角炮台，對應縣志列「大嶼山雞翼角砲臺」為最險要之一。志錄 1646 年記惠州賊陳耀劫掠新田、九龍、官富並圍龍躍頭九天，1647 年記南明參將李萬榮據九龍寨東南、鯉魚門北雞婆山（今魔鬼山）向商船索通行費，1656 年記清總兵黃應傑圍李萬榮於大鵬山、李萬榮歸降——正對應縣志「順治四年，山寇陳耀破大鵬城，賊首李萬榮據之……總兵黃應傑圍李萬榮於大鵬山，糧盡投誠」（縣志寫「順治四年」，志錄則將陳耀劫掠繫於 1646 年，年份差異照兩邊原文並列，本站唔會自行改寫）。志錄未見縣志下列幾條，屬未配對：萬曆十四年總督、御史會題總兵移鎮南頭；隆慶三年曾一本入寇、四年倭寇流劫鄉村；隆慶五年倭賊攻大鵬所城、舍人康壽柏協守；順治四年添設弁兵（志錄只有 1656 年圍大鵬山一條）。同書卷之十三 防省志「寇盜」另有正德十一年佛郎機條，已另立一條，本站唔會把同一件事重複當新事實。「寨船」門（同一葉末起）另見一條。卷之十二 海防畧其他部分（掃描本第 175 頁之前各葉，若有）同卷之十一 經政畧四 兵制嘅汛地、兵額清單仍未逐葉核讀，現時未上線。
English
In the Jiaqing 24 (1819) edition of the Xin’an County Gazetteer, the body of the “coastal-defence topography” section of juan 12 (“Coastal Defence”; read by hand from both leaves of page 175 and the upper half of page 176 of the scan) runs as follows. First it lists the six stations formerly under the Nantou fort: Fat Tong Mun, Lung Shuen Wan, Lok Kak, Tai O, Longtao Wan and Long Pak. Next, in the fourteenth year of Wanli, the governor-general and the censor jointly memorialised that Nantou was the gateway to all Guangdong, keeping the southern barbarians and the Japanese in check, and asked that the regional commander be moved there — for foreign ships could sail straight to Macao, but from Macao up to the provincial capital the water was too shallow, so they had to pass by Lantau and enter through the Tiger Gate to reach the Pearl River, and hence Nantou was the gateway to all Guangdong. It then records the Zhengde-period raid of the Folangji, who seized the Tun Mun sea passage until the naval commissioner Wang Hong subdued them; the third year of Longqing, when the sea bandit Zeng Yiben raided; the fourth, when Japanese pirates plundered the villages; the Wanli years, when the pirates of Lao Wanshan plundered; and the Chongzhen years, when the net-fleet pirates Li Kuiji and Liu Xiang raided in succession — suppressed again and again, yet the defence of Nantou grew stricter. It notes that in the Kangxi period the seas were still unsettled, hence the boundary evacuation, and that once the boundary was restored the seas were calm and the defences made more thorough, so that the stations and the troops now differ from the old establishment, naming the Kai I Kok battery on Lantau, the Nantou battery and the Chiwan batteries as the most critical points. It describes Tai Pang as the city that guards the north-east, adjoining Pinghai and meeting the road from Huizhou and Chaozhou, and records that in the fifth year of Longqing Japanese pirates attacked the Tai Pang garrison city, where the retainer Kang Shoubai led the people in a joint defence until the siege was lifted. It then records that in the fourth year of Shunzhi the mountain bandit Chen Yao broke into Tai Pang city, that the bandit leader Li Wanrong held it, and that the regional commander Huang Yingjie later besieged Li Wanrong on Tai Pang mountain until his supplies ran out and he surrendered, whereupon the place was pacified and garrison troops were added as a measure of consolidation — “the outline of Xin’an’s coastal defence”. Finally it quotes the Ming secretary Yin Jin’s memorial on the essentials of coastal defence, listing eight causes of trouble (the breadth of the ocean, the danger of the sea inlets to large ships, the emptiness of the stations, the want of pay and grain, the shortage of equipment, the smuggling of supplies, the failure alike of suppression and pacification, and the lack of supervision) and then “eight matters of coastal defence”: measuring the extent of land to fix the number of ships; measuring the depth of the water to fix their size; repairing ships at the stations so as to keep the stations manned; checking false rosters to invigorate the troops; stocking equipment against emergencies; strictly forbidding private trade to cut off the pirates’ source; weighing pacification to lift the army’s prestige; and giving one man sole charge of coastal defence to keep the service in order — a plan, it concludes, complete for the maritime frontier, which none charged with coastal defence can afford not to study.This content fact was read by hand from the public-domain scan (names, places and numbers as printed) and set alongside the Chronicles archive, the two sources completing each other. The archive for 1563 records that Tan Lun and Qi Jiguang asked the Ming court to restore the old naval-fortress system, after which Guangdong established six naval fortresses, four of whose stations — Fat Tong Mun, Lung Shuen Wan, Tai O and Longtao Wan, all within present-day Hong Kong — came under the Nantou fort, each stationing more than two hundred soldiers; the gazetteer’s six stations under the Nantou fort match that same group and add Lok Kak and Long Pak. The archive for 1540 records the anti-pirate sea patrol divided into three routes, with the Nantou fort in Dongguan as the starting point of the middle route, passing Fat Tong Mun and other inlets — answering the gazetteer’s phrase that these inlets “must all be passed on the way out to sea”. The archive for 1630 records the pirate Li Kuiji entering Hong Kong waters with more than a hundred ships, the Nantou fort’s deputy general Chen Gong meeting him at Fat Tong Mun and dying in the pursuit, and its entries for 1633, 1634 (15 June) and 1635 record Liu Xiang raiding Xin’an and Nantou — answering the gazetteer’s “net-fleet pirates Li Kuiji and Liu Xiang raided in succession … yet the defence of Nantou grew stricter”. The archive for 1682 records the Tuen Mun watchtower converted into Tuen Mun camp (one lieutenant and thirty soldiers) with four new stations at Mong Tseng, Kowloon, Tai Po Tau and Ma Chuek Leng, answering “the stations and the troops now are not the same as the old establishment”; and its entry for 1729 records the Kei Yik Kok battery built at Fan Lau on Lantau, which the gazetteer lists among the most critical. The archive for 1646 records the Huizhou bandit Chen Yao plundering San Tin, Kowloon and Kwun Fu and besieging Lung Yeuk Tau for nine days; for 1647, the Southern Ming lieutenant Li Wanrong holding the south-east of the Kowloon fort and Kai Po Shan (now Devil’s Peak) north of Lei Yue Mun and charging merchant ships for passage; and for 1656, the Qing regional commander Huang Yingjie besieging Li Wanrong on Tai Pang mountain, whereupon Li surrendered — answering the gazetteer’s “in the fourth year of Shunzhi the mountain bandit Chen Yao broke into Tai Pang city, the bandit leader Li Wanrong held it … the regional commander Huang Yingjie besieged Li Wanrong on Tai Pang mountain until his supplies ran out and he surrendered” (the gazetteer says Shunzhi 4 while the archive places Chen Yao’s raids in 1646; both years stand as printed and this site amends neither). The archive has nothing corresponding to the gazetteer’s memorial of Wanli 14 moving the regional commander to Nantou, to Zeng Yiben’s raid of Longqing 3 and the Japanese piracy of Longqing 4, to the attack on the Tai Pang garrison city and Kang Shoubai’s defence in Longqing 5, or to the garrison troops added in Shunzhi 4 (the archive has only the 1656 siege of Tai Pang mountain). The same book’s juan 13, “Banditry”, carries a separate Zhengde 11 entry on the Folangji, already published as its own entry, so the same event is not counted twice here. The “fleet” section, beginning at the end of that same leaf, is a separate entry; the rest of the coastal-defence juan (any leaves before page 175 of the scan) and the list of stations and troop strengths in juan 11, “Military establishment”, have not been read leaf by leaf and are not online.
出處：掃描本：《廣州大典》第三十五輯·史部方志類·第六十三冊，嘉慶《新安縣志》卷之十二 海防畧「防海形勢」門正文，掃描本第 175 頁上下兩葉同第 176 頁上半葉（三葉版心逐葉實測題「卷之十二 防海形勢」；「寨船」標目喺第 176 頁上半葉末，另見一條）；Commons sha1 ad357f97…。掃描本冇可用文字層，內容一律人手核讀：見 scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift。Provenance: Scan: Guangzhou Dadian, series 35 (local gazetteers), volume 63 — the Jiaqing Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 12, “Coastal Defence”, the body of the “coastal-defence topography” section: both leaves of page 175 of the scan and the upper half of page 176 (the running head of all three leaves reads “juan 12, coastal-defence topography”; the heading “the fleet” stands at the end of the upper half of page 176 and is published as a separate entry); Commons sha1 ad357f97…. The scan has no usable text layer, so its content is read by hand — see scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift.