繁體中文
嘉慶二十四年（1819）《新安縣志》卷之二「疆域」門（人手核讀：界至段喺掃描本第 51 頁上半葉，版心題「新安縣志 卷之二 疆域」、頁次「三」）以「某至某某若干里，與某縣某司分界」嘅句法逐面列出縣界，並逐面附小字註糾正舊志。今次高倍逐字核到嘅正文界至共五面：一、「北至羊凹山八十里，與東莞縣缺口司分界」；二、「東北至西鄉凹山一百五十里，與歸善縣碧甲司分界」；三、「西南至三牙牌山一百二十里，與香山縣澳門廳分界」；四、「西北至合瀾海面八十里，與東莞縣缺口司分界」；五、「東南至沱灣山二百四十里，與歸善縣碧甲司分界」。小字註（舊志糾正）逐條核到：「舊志謂北抵蓮花峯六十里誤，且蓮花峯偏於西，北亦非正北方」、「舊志謂東北抵羊凹山九十里誤」、「舊志謂西北抵虎頭門誤」、「舊志謂東南抵平海守禦所陸路一百五十里誤」，另南面一句「舊志謂抵佛堂門誤」（該句所糾正嘅南面正文喺前一葉，未逐字核；「疆域」按語有論南面，見「疆域收尾」一條）。按語（逐字核到）：「按新安形勢與他處海疆不同，蓋他處地以海而止，而新安則海外島嶼甚多，其下皆有村落，固不能不合計海面」——同句之後「而遺居民於幅幬之外也」嘅「幬」字高倍確認（巾部加「壽」），前一字「幅」已於 2026-10-21 補核一輪高倍確認（巾部加一個由「一、口、田」疊成嘅右旁），即「幅幬」兩字皆已核到；按語尾段同全門收尾已由另一條（「疆域收尾」）逐字核到。呢條係由公共領域掃描本人手核讀出嚟嘅內容事實：五個山／海面名（羊凹山、西鄉凹山、三牙牌山、合瀾海面、沱灣山）同里程一律照掃描本抄錄，本站唔比定今址、唔當統計數字；「缺口司」、「碧甲司」係清代縣下巡檢司名，「澳門廳」係廳名，一律照錄、唔代站方考證。同志錄並排對照：《香港志》志錄未收新安縣「疆域」界至一類條目；最接近嘅係 1540 年（明嘉靖十九年）備倭巡海官軍三路巡經佛堂門等海澳、1563 年（嘉靖四十二年）六座水師寨中香港境內四處汛地、1591 年（萬曆十九年）南頭參將派船巡行佛堂門等水域，以及多條記佛堂門本身（南堂古塔、荷蘭船、海盜李魁奇等）——志錄講事件同海路，縣志講縣界里程，兩者唔可以互相當證，本站唔會配對。字形更正記錄：M12 交接時把北面一句讀作「與東莞交界鐵口司分界」，今次高倍核到係「與東莞縣缺口司分界」；「沱灣山」交接時曾寫作「沱海」，今次高倍核到字形係「灣」。
English
The “Territory” section of juan 2 in the Jiaqing 24 (1819) edition of the Xin’an County Gazetteer (read by hand; the boundary section stands on the upper half of page 51 of the scan, its running head reading “Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, Territory”, leaf number three) lists the county’s limits face by face in the form “so many li to X, bordering the Y subprefecture of Z county”, each followed by a small-type note correcting the earlier gazetteer. Five boundary statements were confirmed character by character at high magnification: eighty li north to Yang’ao Shan, bordering the Quekou subprefecture of Dongguan county; one hundred and fifty li north-east to Xiang’ao Shan, bordering the Bijia subprefecture of Guishan county; one hundred and twenty li south-west to Sanyapai Shan, bordering the Macao subprefecture of Xiangshan county; eighty li north-west to the sea off Helan, bordering the Quekou subprefecture of Dongguan county; and two hundred and forty li south-east to Tuowan Shan, bordering the Bijia subprefecture of Guishan county. The small-type corrections read: the old gazetteer’s sixty li north to Lianhua Peak is wrong, for Lianhua Peak lies to the west and is not due north either; its ninety li north-east to Yang’ao Shan is wrong; its north-west to Hutou Mun is wrong; and its south-east, by land one hundred and fifty li to the Pinghai garrison, is wrong; a further line corrects the old “south to Fat Tong Mun” (the south-facing statement it corrects lies on the preceding leaf and was not read character by character; the editorial note discusses the south, see the entry for the close of “Territory”). The editorial note reads: “The shape of Xin’an differs from other sea frontiers: elsewhere the land ends at the sea, whereas Xin’an has many islands offshore, each with villages on it, so the sea must be counted in” — in the clause that follows, “and the inhabitants not left outside the county’s bounds”, 幬 is confirmed at high magnification (the cloth radical with 壽) while the character before it, 幅, was confirmed at high magnification in a further pass on 2026-10-21, so that both characters of 幅幬 are now read; the tail of the note and the section’s last entry have since been read character by character in the entry for the close of “Territory”. This entry is content read by hand from a public-domain scan: the five mountain or sea names (Yang’ao Shan, Xiang’ao Shan, Sanyapai Shan, the sea off Helan, Tuowan Shan) and the distances are transcribed as printed, without pinning them to any modern site or treating them as statistics; Quekou and Bijia are subprefectures and Macao a subprefecture of the Qing county administration, transcribed as printed rather than interpreted here. Cross-check with the Hong Kong Chronicles archive: the archive holds no “Territory” boundary entries for Xin’an county; the nearest material is the 1540 coastal patrol route past Fat Tong Mun and other sea anchorages, the 1563 record of four guard stations within today’s Hong Kong under the Nantou fort, the 1591 patrols of the Nantou assistant commander past Fat Tong Mun, and many entries on Fat Tong Mun itself — those record events and sea routes, this gazetteer records county distances, and the two are not evidence for one another, so no pairing is made here. Corrections of earlier readings: what the previous session transcribed as “bordering Tiekou subprefecture of Dongguan” is here confirmed as “bordering the Quekou subprefecture of Dongguan county”, and what it wrote as “Tuohai” is confirmed as “Tuowan”.
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「疆域」門（界至段喺掃描本第 51 頁上半葉，版心逐字實測題「新安縣志 卷之二 疆域」，頁次「三」；按語尾同「分野」門喺同頁下半葉）；Commons sha1 ad357f97…。掃描本係影像、冇可用文字層，內容一律人手核讀：見 scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift（逐欄高倍放大核字）。Provenance: Scan: Guangzhou Dadian, series 35 (local gazetteers), volume 63 — juan 2, “Territory”, of the Jiaqing Xin’an County Gazetteer (the boundary section stands on the upper half of page 51 of the scan; its running head reads “Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, Territory”, leaf number three; the tail of the editorial note and the “Astronomical Division” section follow on the lower half of the same page); Commons sha1 ad357f97…. The scan is an image without a usable text layer, so its content is read by hand — see scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift (column-by-column reading at high magnification).