繁體中文
嘉慶《新安縣志》卷之二「都里」按司逐村列出村莊，四個司各分本籍同客籍（附）兩段。批次 M7／M8 讀咗官富司本籍段由第 59 頁起嘅部分，批次 M9 定位咗典史同縣丞兩段、四司骨架齊備，但兩處逐葉對數一直欠住：典史本籍段（志錄 67 條）同官富司本籍段（志錄 298 條）。本批（M10）補齊兩者——典史本籍段逐葉 67 名同志錄完全吻合，官富司本籍段逐葉 300 名對志錄 298 差 2，差額同該司客籍段嘅 −2 合成零，官富司合計 492 ✓。典史本籍段逐葉點算：第 56 頁上葉左頁末欄 2 名（一係「新街」清楚；另一欄欄首有小字「南頭」，其下兩個大字未確認）＋第 56 頁下葉 36 名（右半 18＋左半 18）＋第 57 頁上葉 29 名（右半 18＋左半 11，批次 M9 已讀、本批重對）＝67 名，同志錄所記典史本籍 67 條完全吻合——連同 M9 已核嘅典史客籍 6 條，典史一司 73 名已全部逐條對上。第 56 頁下葉村名（照掃描本字形抄錄，右半先讀、同一欄由上而下）：右半 18 名——寺街、石橋頭、崇鎮里、福慶村、關口、大石鼓、向南村、向前村、南山村、西鄉、北頭村、莆圍村、墪頭村、涌下、田下村、福源村、第一甲、子街；左半 18 名——隔岸村、大涌村、莘塘村、庵前村、新圍村、塘蓢村、北灶村、鐵岡村、福洞村、上川村、白石村、留仙洞、平山村、珠岡頭、上面岡、臣田村、莊邊村、西歷村。可辨認者盡係今深圳南山同寶安西鄉一帶（南山村、向南村、北頭村、大涌村、白石村、留仙洞、平山村、上川村、臣田村、鐵岡村、西鄉、隔岸村、珠岡頭、塘蓢村），同批次 M9 判「典史段＝南頭縣城一帶」一致，一條都唔屬香港；本葉五個字形已由批次 M11 以 1800 px 半葉圖高倍重核後定案（見批次 M11 條目）：原讀「萬岡村」實為「莆圍村」、原讀「整頭村」實為「墪頭村」、原讀「塘蔭村」實為「塘蓢村」（艹＋朗，同批次 M11 讀到嘅「蛋家蓢墟」一類），「莘塘村」「西歷村」兩字形態清楚、照錄，前三處照批次 M11 讀法更正；「西鄉」「西鄉村」兩個名同頁前後各見一次（分屬右半同左半），照錄、唔推定係同一村抑或兩村。第 56 頁上葉係卷之二兩個分段嘅交界：右頁 9 個墟市／街市名（石湖墟〔小字註「舊志天岡 今移石湖」〕、大步墟、清湖墟、平湖墟、永豐墟、塘頭下新墟、葵涌墟、鹽田墟、清溪墟），左頁續 6 個帶小字註（塘勒墟〔今入東莞〕、王母墟〔新增〕、長洲墟〔新增〕、碧洲墟〔新增〕、大鵬城西門街市〔新增〕、烏石巖墟〔新增〕），再左就係分段題「都里」同【典史管屬村莊】標目；標目右手邊嘅欄係上一段（墟市）嘅尾、左手邊先係典史本籍段，同批次 M6／M7／M9 定落嘅標目規矩一致。第 56 頁上葉版心題「新安縣志／卷之二／城市」、下葉版心題「新安縣志／卷之二／都里」——即卷之二同時收「城市」（墟市／街市）同「都里」（村莊）兩個分段，兩份名單分開排列；「城市」段開頭各葉（即第 56 頁上葉之前）嘅墟市名單已由批次 M11 補讀（掃描本第 55 頁上下兩葉：全份「城市」名單 41 個，標目同版心都題「城市」，見批次 M11 條目）。墟市段有香港名：石湖墟即今上水（同批次 M8 喺官富司本籍段讀到嘅「石湖墟」係另一個分段嘅同名條目，兩者並存、本站唔會混同，亦唔會據同名斷定今址）；批次 M11 高倍重核本葉，右半第 2 欄原讀「大坳墟」實為「大步墟」（即志錄所記大步頭墟、今大埔舊墟），「石湖墟」一欄另見小字註「舊志天岡 今移石湖」，兩處已照改／補上。官富司本籍段：本批逐葉點算第 61 頁上葉兩葉同第 62 頁上下四頁（第 61 頁上葉批次 M4 已入庫，但當時冇逐葉點算，本批補上並同時覆核字形）。第 61 頁上葉右半 18 名——積存圍、田心村、逕口村、隔田村、小瀝源、九龍寨、衙前村、蒲岡村、牛眠村、牛池灣、古瑾村、九龍仔、長沙灣、尖沙頭、芒角村、土瓜灣、深水莆、二黃店村；左半 18 名——黃泥涌、香港村、薄寮村、薄鳧林、掃管莆、赤礪村、向西村、湖貝村、水貝村、黃貝嶺、上步村、羅湖村、南塘村、向南村、湖南村、西湖村、東鄉村、洲邊村。呢兩頁布滿今香港境內嘅舊村名：積存圍（今沙田大圍）、小瀝源、九龍寨、衙前村、蒲岡村、牛池灣、九龍仔、長沙灣、尖沙頭（今尖沙嘴）、芒角村（今旺角）、土瓜灣、深水莆（今深水埗）、黃泥涌、香港村、薄寮村、薄鳧林（今薄扶林）、掃管莆（疑今掃管笏）——同批次 M4 條目一致，本批逐葉 36 名補返 M4 未做嘅點算。第 62 頁上葉右半 18 名——筲岡村、大莆村、莆心村、田尾村、草塘圍、新屋嶺、彭坑村、月岡屯、上梅林、下梅林、新石下、舊石下、龍塘村、沙嘴村、東涌村、椰樹下、梅林逕下、沙尾村；上葉左半 18 名——東坑村、西涌村、東山村、莆海村、西河村、〔沙頭〕東頭村、新灶村、蚊洲村、福田村、田面村、岡下村、谷田村、下新村、漢塘村、橫岡村、隔涌村、嶺貝村、三角村；下葉右半 18 名——吉田村、白石龍、烏石下、上新村、和寧墟、培風墟、田心圍、泰源里、大平村、緣芬村、竹村村、清湖村、龔村村、上芬新村、平湖圍、松源頭村、喬頭圍、黃沙坑；下葉左半 18 名——石馬舊圍、述昌圍、岐嶺村、長表村、白坭坑、新圍仔、竹山下、諸佛嶺、劉家圍、西莆圍、塘下新墟、雙安村、黃客坳、隔水村、餘慶圍、振興圍、莆心湖、甲溪村。呢四頁可辨認村名盡係今深圳龍華、觀瀾、平湖一帶（清湖村、竹村村、龔村村、上芬新村、大平村、平湖圍、松源頭村、白坭坑、諸佛嶺、塘下新墟、上梅林、下梅林、沙尾村、沙嘴村、福田村、田面村），同第 61 頁上葉嘅香港島、九龍、沙田村名形成連續過渡——官富司本籍段由第 59 頁（批次 M7：元朗、屏山、屯門、大嶼山）向東北走，第 60 頁北區、大埔、沙田、西貢（批次 M8），第 61 頁上葉香港島、九龍、沙田，第 61 頁下葉起轉入今深圳羅湖、福田（羅湖村、向西村、湖貝村、水貝村、黃貝嶺、上步村、福田村、田面村），第 62 頁盡係深圳龍華、觀瀾、平湖，最後由第 63 頁上葉標目右手邊 14 名（批次 M6／M9 已記）收段。逐葉對數（官富司本籍段）：第 59 頁 68 名（批次 M7）＋第 60 頁 74 名（批次 M8）＋第 61 頁 72 名（上葉 36 本批＋下葉 36 批次 M8）＋第 62 頁 72 名（本批）＋第 63 頁上葉標目右手邊 14 名（批次 M6／M9 已記）＝300 名；志錄所記官富司本籍 298 條，差 2。另一邊，官富司客籍段逐葉點算 192 名（批次 M5）對志錄 194 條，亦差 2——兩邊差額一正一負、相加係零：官富司合計 300＋192＝492 ✓ 同志錄所記官富司轄村 492 條（298＋194），即出入純屬「本籍／客籍」界線前後各 2 條嘅歸屬差，唔係漏讀抑或多讀；照站規唔硬改志錄數字，差異入 /coverage 缺口。全縣逐段合計（照掃描本讀出）：典史 67＋6＝73 ✓、縣丞 62＋44＝106（志錄 104，差 2 全部落喺本籍 62 對志錄 60）、官富 300＋192＝492 ✓、福永 154＋31＝185 ✓，合共 856；志錄全縣 854（本籍 579＋客籍 275）。即四個司入面，除咗縣丞本籍一項，其餘分司數字同志錄逐條對得上；兩個差額（縣丞本籍 +2、官富本籍 +2 而同司客籍 −2）都記入 /coverage，未完成高倍覆核前唔會改志錄數字，亦唔會當統計數字用。讀法同版式：一個掃描頁＝上下兩葉，葉內右半先讀、左半後讀（跨過版心續讀），同一欄由上而下兩個村名；本批讀到嘅六頁（第 56 頁下葉、第 61 頁兩頁、第 62 頁四頁）逐頁實測都係 9 欄 × 上下兩名＝18 名（含標目嘅頁要扣標目欄），同批次 M8 讀到第 60 頁上葉右半 10 欄 20 名唔同——即各頁欄數唔一定一樣，逐葉點算一定要數欄，唔可以一律乘。欄首小字方面：第 62 頁上葉左頁「東頭村」一欄欄首兩個小字讀作「沙頭」（可讀成〔沙頭〕東頭村；同批次 M9〔黃里〕、批次 M7〔屏山〕〔元萌〕同類，小字係圖／約名前綴抑或名字嘅一部分一律唔推定）；第 56 頁上葉左頁末欄欄首兩個小字讀作「南頭」。零星小字排法另有：第 62 頁下葉「松源頭村」嘅「松」字、下葉左頁「塘下新墟」嘅「塘」字都以小字排（同批次 M8「山尾新村」嘅「山」字一類），一律照錄、唔改寫。印刷字形方面：掃描本「莊邊村」首字用俗寫（與「莊」簡體同形嗰個俗字），正文一律寫正字「莊」，同批次 M9 將「猪」「脚」寫成「豬」「腳」同一處理。字形未能在高倍放大下確認（已列入 /coverage 缺口，未完成覆核前唔當已核實村名引用）：第 56 頁上葉左頁末欄兩個大字（上字「鎮」清楚，下字形近「沙」，兩字水平錯開，係一個村名抑或兩個單字村名未能確定；批次 M11 再以 1200 px 單欄高倍重看，兩字確認係「鎮」「沙」但分讀／合讀仍未定，維持缺口）、第 62 頁「月岡屯」、「二黃店村」、「古瑾村」、「牛眠村」、「逕口村」、第 61 頁上葉「薄寮村」同「薄鳧林」（批次 M4 記作薄鳧林，本批字形近「薄崑林」）、「赤礪村」（批次 M4 記作赤磡村）、「掃管莆」、「莆海村」、「筲岡村」。志錄並排對照：《香港志》志錄記 1819 年官富司轄村本籍 298／客籍 194（EV-18190000-19）、全縣本籍 579／客籍 275（EV-18190000-18）、全縣 854 條（EV-18190000-34）；第 61 頁上葉嘅香港村名逐一喺志錄搵到（積存圍、九龍寨、衙前圍、蒲崗、牛池灣、九龍仔、長沙灣、尖沙嘴、芒角／旺角、土瓜灣、深水埗、黃泥涌、香港村、小瀝源、東頭村），第 62 頁嘅龍華、觀瀾、平湖一帶舊村名志錄唔收；同名村落兩地皆有者（東頭村、沙尾村、田心村、隔田村一類）一律唔逐村指派司屬、唔當統計數字，亦唔會因為同名就當係今日同一條村。仍未核讀：卷之十一 經政畧四 兵制各葉，以及官富司本籍段以外各段嘅字形長尾（批次 M9 已列一批）；卷之二「城市」段（墟市／街市名單）已由批次 M11 整段核讀（掃描本第 55 頁上下兩葉），第 56 頁下葉原列嘅五個字形缺口亦已由批次 M11 高倍重核定案。
English
The Jiaqing Xin’an County Gazetteer lists its villages office by office in juan 2, “Radiations of the Territory” part 1, each of the four offices keeping an indigenous list and an appended Hakka list. Batches M7 and M8 read the indigenous Guanfu list from page 59 onwards and batch M9 located the registrar’s and the county deputy’s sections, so the skeleton of all four offices was complete; two leaf-by-leaf tallies were still outstanding — the registrar’s indigenous list (67 entries in the Chronicles archive) and the Guanfu indigenous list (298 entries). Batch M10 closes both. The registrar’s indigenous list counts two names in the last column of the left half of the upper leaf of page 56 (one of them 新街, clearly printed; the other column opens with the small-type prefix 南頭 over two further large characters that could not be confirmed), thirty-six names on the lower leaf of page 56 (eighteen to each half) and twenty-nine on the upper leaf of page 57 (eighteen in the right half and eleven in the left, read in batch M9 and re-checked here) — sixty-seven names in all, exactly the archive’s figure; with the six Hakka names of the same office checked in batch M9, all seventy-three of its names now tally. The lower leaf of page 56, right half, eighteen names: 寺街, 石橋頭, 崇鎮里, 福慶村, 關口, 大石鼓, 向南村, 向前村, 南山村, 西鄉, 北頭村, 莆圍村, 墪頭村, 涌下, 田下村, 福源村, 第一甲, 子街; left half, eighteen names: 隔岸村, 大涌村, 莘塘村, 庵前村, 新圍村, 塘蓢村, 北灶村, 鐵岡村, 福洞村, 上川村, 白石村, 留仙洞, 平山村, 珠岡頭, 上面岡, 臣田村, 莊邊村, 西歷村. Every identifiable name lies in present-day Shenzhen — Nanshan and the Xixiang district of Bao’an (南山村, 向南村, 北頭村, 大涌村, 白石村, 留仙洞, 平山村, 上川村, 臣田村, 鐵岡村, 西鄉, 隔岸村, 珠岡頭, 塘蓢村) — consistent with batch M9’s finding that the registrar’s area is the county town of Nantou; not one name belongs to Hong Kong. Batch M11 re-read this leaf at high magnification (1800 px half-leaf crops) and settled five characters: what batch M10 read as 萬岡村 is 莆圍村, as 整頭村 is 墪頭村 and as 塘蔭村 is 塘蓢村 (艹 plus 朗, as in 蛋家蓢墟 read in batch M11), while 莘塘村 and 西歷村 stand as read; the first three are corrected here (see the batch M11 entry). The names 西鄉 and 西鄉村 each occur once on the leaf; both are transcribed, and no inference is drawn as to whether they are one village or two. The upper leaf of page 56 stands where two subsections of juan 2 meet. Its right page lists nine markets and street-markets (石湖墟, carrying the small-type note “the old gazetteer has it at 天岡, now moved to 石湖”, then 大步墟, 清湖墟, 平湖墟, 永豐墟, 塘頭下新墟, 葵涌墟, 鹽田墟 and 清溪墟), and its left page continues with six more carrying small-type notes (塘勒墟 “now in Dongguan”, and 王母墟, 長洲墟, 碧洲墟, 大鵬城西門街市 and 烏石巖墟, each “newly added”), after which come the section title 都里 and the heading “Villages under the Registrar’s Office”; the column to the right of a heading closes the preceding stretch and those to its left open the new one, as fixed in batches M6, M7 and M9. The running head of the upper leaf of page 56 reads “Xin’an County Gazetteer / juan 2 / Cities and Markets” and that of the lower leaf “Xin’an County Gazetteer / juan 2 / Villages”, so juan 2 carries both a “Cities and Markets” list (markets and street-markets) and a “Villages” list, kept apart; the opening leaves of the “Cities and Markets” section were supplied in batch M11, which read both leaves of page 55 and counted the whole list at forty-one markets and street-markets, its section title and the running head of the upper leaf of page 56 both reading “Cities and Markets” (see the batch M11 entry). Batch M11 also re-read the upper leaf of page 56 at high magnification, where the second column from the right, read as 大坳墟 in batch M10, is in fact 大步墟 — the archive’s 大步頭墟 and the old market of Tai Po — and where the 石湖墟 column carries the small-type note “the old gazetteer has it at 天岡, now moved to 石湖”; both are corrected here. One market carries a Hong Kong name: 石湖墟 is Sheung Shui today, though the same name also stands in the Guanfu indigenous village list read in batch M8 — the two entries are kept separate, and no modern identity is asserted from the coincidence. For the Guanfu indigenous list this batch counts the two leaves of the upper leaf of page 61 (entered in batch M4, but never counted leaf by leaf) and the four pages of page 62 (read here for the first time). Upper leaf of page 61, right half, eighteen names: 積存圍, 田心村, 逕口村, 隔田村, 小瀝源, 九龍寨, 衙前村, 蒲岡村, 牛眠村, 牛池灣, 古瑾村, 九龍仔, 長沙灣, 尖沙頭, 芒角村, 土瓜灣, 深水莆, 二黃店村; left half, eighteen names: 黃泥涌, 香港村, 薄寮村, 薄鳧林, 掃管莆, 赤礪村, 向西村, 湖貝村, 水貝村, 黃貝嶺, 上步村, 羅湖村, 南塘村, 向南村, 湖南村, 西湖村, 東鄉村, 洲邊村. These two pages are full of old village names inside present-day Hong Kong: 積存圍 (Tai Wai in Sha Tin today), 小瀝源, 九龍寨, 衙前村, 蒲岡村, 牛池灣, 九龍仔, 長沙灣, 尖沙頭 (Tsim Sha Tsui), 芒角村 (Mong Kok), 土瓜灣, 深水莆 (Sham Shui Po), 黃泥涌, 香港村, 薄寮村, 薄鳧林 (Pok Fu Lam) and 掃管莆 (possibly So Kwun Wat), exactly as batch M4 recorded; this batch adds the thirty-six-name leaf count that M4 did not make. Page 62, upper leaf right half, eighteen names: 筲岡村, 大莆村, 莆心村, 田尾村, 草塘圍, 新屋嶺, 彭坑村, 月岡屯, 上梅林, 下梅林, 新石下, 舊石下, 龍塘村, 沙嘴村, 東涌村, 椰樹下, 梅林逕下, 沙尾村; upper leaf left half, eighteen names: 東坑村, 西涌村, 東山村, 莆海村, 西河村, 〔沙頭〕東頭村, 新灶村, 蚊洲村, 福田村, 田面村, 岡下村, 谷田村, 下新村, 漢塘村, 橫岡村, 隔涌村, 嶺貝村, 三角村; lower leaf right half, eighteen names: 吉田村, 白石龍, 烏石下, 上新村, 和寧墟, 培風墟, 田心圍, 泰源里, 大平村, 緣芬村, 竹村村, 清湖村, 龔村村, 上芬新村, 平湖圍, 松源頭村, 喬頭圍, 黃沙坑; lower leaf left half, eighteen names: 石馬舊圍, 述昌圍, 岐嶺村, 長表村, 白坭坑, 新圍仔, 竹山下, 諸佛嶺, 劉家圍, 西莆圍, 塘下新墟, 雙安村, 黃客坳, 隔水村, 餘慶圍, 振興圍, 莆心湖, 甲溪村. Every identifiable name here lies in the Longhua, Guanlan and Pinghu districts of present-day Shenzhen (清湖村, 竹村村, 龔村村, 上芬新村, 大平村, 平湖圍, 松源頭村, 白坭坑, 諸佛嶺, 塘下新墟, 上梅林, 下梅林, 沙尾村, 沙嘴村, 福田村, 田面村), forming a continuous transition from the Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and Sha Tin names of page 61: the indigenous Guanfu list runs north-east from page 59 (Yuen Long, Ping Shan, Tuen Mun and Lantau, batch M7) through the North District, Tai Po, Sha Tin and Sai Kung (page 60, batch M8) and Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and Sha Tin (page 61 upper), into what is now Shenzhen’s Luohu and Futian from page 61 lower onwards, and wholly into Shenzhen’s Longhua, Guanlan and Pinghu on page 62, closing with the fourteen names to the right of the heading on the upper leaf of page 63 (batches M6 and M9). Leaf counts for the Guanfu indigenous list: page 59, sixty-eight names (batch M7); page 60, seventy-four (batch M8); page 61, seventy-two (thirty-six here and thirty-six in batch M8); page 62, seventy-two (this batch); and the fourteen names to the right of the heading on the upper leaf of page 63 — three hundred in all, against the archive’s 298, a difference of two. The same office’s Hakka list counts 192 leaf by leaf (batch M5) against the archive’s 194, a difference of two the other way, and the two cancel: the office totals 300 + 192 = 492, exactly the archive’s 492 (298 + 194), so the discrepancy lies purely in how two names either side of the indigenous–Hakka boundary are assigned, not in anything missed or counted twice. Following this site’s rule the archive’s figures are not corrected; the difference is recorded in /coverage. County-wide the scan gives 典史 73 (67 + 6), 縣丞 106 (62 + 44, against the archive’s 104), 官富 492 and 福永 185 (154 + 31) — 856 against the archive’s 854 (579 indigenous and 275 Hakka), the whole difference sitting on the county deputy’s indigenous list; every other office figure matches name for name. Reading and page layout: one scan page holds two leaves, each read right half first and left half second (reading on across the running head) with each column read downwards through its two village names. All six pages read here (the lower leaf of page 56, both pages of page 61 and all four pages of page 62) hold nine columns of two names, eighteen to the page, once the heading column is discounted — whereas batch M8 found ten columns and twenty names in the right half of the upper leaf of page 60, so layouts vary and a leaf count must count columns rather than multiply. Small-type prefixes at the head of a column occur on the left half of the upper leaf of page 62, where the column over 東頭村 opens with 沙頭 (to be read 〔沙頭〕東頭村; the same device as 〔黃里〕 in batch M9 and 〔屏山〕／〔元萌〕 in batch M7, and whether the small characters are a map or district prefix or part of the name is not decided), and on the last column of the left half of page 56, which opens with 南頭. Elsewhere single characters are set small: the 松 of 松源頭村 and the 塘 of 塘下新墟 on the lower leaf of page 62, like the 山 of 山尾新村 in batch M8; all are transcribed as printed. Characters not confirmed under high magnification, listed as gaps in /coverage and never cited as verified village names until re-checked: the two large characters in the last column of the left half of page 56 (the upper is clearly 鎮, the lower is shaped like 沙 and set off to the left; whether they form one name or two one-character names is undecided, and a further single-column re-read in batch M11 confirmed the two shapes as 鎮 and 沙 without settling the segmentation, so the item stays open); and on pages 61–62 月岡屯, 二黃店村, 古瑾村, 牛眠村, 逕口村, 薄寮村, 薄鳧林 (batch M4 read the middle character as 鳧, this batch as 崑), 赤礪村 (batch M4: 赤磡村), 掃管莆, 莆海村 and 筲岡村. The five character gaps previously listed for the lower leaf of page 56 (萬岡村, 西歷村, 莘塘村, 塘蔭村 and 整頭村) were settled by the high-magnification re-read in batch M11 (as 莆圍村, 西歷村, 莘塘村, 塘蓢村 and 墪頭村) and are no longer counted as gaps. Set alongside the archive: the Chronicles archive gives the Guanfu Office 298 indigenous and 194 Hakka villages in 1819 (EV-18190000-19), the county 579 indigenous and 275 Hakka (EV-18190000-18) and 854 villages in all (EV-18190000-34); every Hong Kong name on the upper leaf of page 61 appears in it (積存圍, 九龍寨, 衙前圍, 蒲崗, 牛池灣, 九龍仔, 長沙灣, 尖沙嘴, 芒角／旺角, 土瓜灣, 深水埗, 黃泥涌, 香港村, 小瀝源 and 東頭村), while the old Longhua, Guanlan and Pinghu names of page 62 are not in the archive at all. Where a name exists on both sides of the present border (東頭村, 沙尾村, 田心村, 隔田村 and the like) no office is assigned, no modern location is asserted and none of these names is used as a statistic. Still unread: the military-establishment leaves of juan 11, and the long tail of unconfirmed characters in the sections other than the indigenous Guanfu list (batch M9 lists a first set); the “Cities and Markets” section of juan 2 has since been read whole in batch M11 (both leaves of page 55), which also settled the five character gaps listed for the lower leaf of page 56.
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》卷之二 輿地畧一——第 56 頁上下兩葉（卷之二「城市」墟市段尾、分段題「都里」、【典史管屬村莊】標目同標目後首兩個村名）、第 61 頁上葉兩葉同第 62 頁上下四頁（官富司本籍段餘葉），另重對第 57 頁上葉前段（批次 M9 已讀）；版心逐葉實測：第 56 頁上葉題「新安縣志／卷之二／城市」，第 56 頁下葉同第 61、62 各葉題「新安縣志／卷之二／都里」，各葉版心下端另有一個行草字形（形近「去」、「圭」、「乖」一類），係唔係葉次未能確認，所以唔填頁次；Commons sha1 ad357f97…。掃描本冇可用文字層，內容一律人手核讀（裁圖工具（唔用 OCR）：全頁圖 1400、左右半葉放大 1600–1700、單欄同窄條放大 900–1300）：見 scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift。Provenance: Scan: Guangzhou Dadian, series 35 (local gazetteers), volume 63 — the Jiaqing Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, “Radiations of the Territory” part 1: both leaves of page 56 (the tail of the juan’s “Cities and Markets” list, the section title “Villages”, the heading “Villages under the Registrar’s Office” and the first two names after it), both leaves of the upper leaf of page 61 and all four pages of page 62 (the remaining pages of the indigenous Guanfu list), together with a re-check of the opening of the upper leaf of page 57 (already read in batch M9). Each leaf’s running head was read directly: the upper leaf of page 56 reads “Xin’an County Gazetteer / juan 2 / Cities and Markets”, while the lower leaf of page 56 and the leaves of pages 61 and 62 read “Xin’an County Gazetteer / juan 2 / Villages”; at the foot of the running head each of these leaves carries a further cursive character (shaped like 去, 圭 or 乖) — whether these are folio numbers could not be confirmed, so no folio number is given; Commons sha1 ad357f97…. The scan has no usable text layer, so its content is read by hand (whole-leaf crops at 1400 px and half-leaf and narrow-strip magnified crops at 900–1700 px, 裁圖工具（唔用 OCR）): see scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift.