繁體中文
嘉慶二十四年（1819）《新安縣志》卷之二「疆域」門嘅收尾（人手核讀：按語末句喺掃描本第 51 頁上葉最後兩欄，其餘喺同頁下葉右半——該下葉版心已題「新安縣志 卷之二 分野」、頁次「四」，即左半已新開「分野」門，右半仍屬「疆域」）。上葉按語末句逐字核到：「……固不能不合計海面，而遺居民於幅幬之外也」——「幬」字高倍確認（巾部加「壽」），前一字「幅」係同欄上一字，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。下葉右半接住嘅按語尾段同全門收尾亦逐字核到：「（「故須」之前半句喺上葉最後一欄，共 16 字；2026-10-21 補核一輪已將成欄自上而下逐字核到：「以四至定縣治不能以縣治定四至故須」，即該句讀作「以四至定縣治不能，以縣治定四至，故須統計海洋，開方畫界」；句讀係本站編輯所加，原刻無標點，「不能」之後嘅停頓位置係本站按文義定）故須統計海洋，開方畫界。舊志但即縣治陸地而論四至八到，皆不足憑。即以正南言之，舊志謂抵佛堂門，而佛堂門外如蒲臺、長洲、大嶼山、擔杆山各處居民，竟不得隸於新安版圖乎？府志亦謂新安南抵海四十里，而新安縣城外即海，則至海四十里之說亦誤。今就現在形勢合計海陸，酌定里數，而海面則以極盡處之山為止。再縣境東長西縮，東南寬而西北狹，縣城實偏於西北。舊志縣境圖將縣城繪列中宮，亦失方位。茲皆改正，庶幾疆域井然而方隅不致舛錯矣。邑由城至府二百四十里，上至京八千餘里。」句讀係本站編輯所加（原刻無標點）；地名同里程一律照掃描本抄錄，本站唔比定今址、唔當統計數字；「蒲臺」「長洲」「大嶼山」「擔杆山」係縣志用嚟講「佛堂門外」島嶼唔應摒於版圖之外嘅例子，本站唔會話佢哋全部喺今日香港境內、亦唔會逐個配今名。呢條係由公共領域掃描本人手核讀出嚟嘅內容事實，同志錄並排對照：《香港志》志錄 36,501 條冇「新安縣疆域」一類條目（亦冇「分野」字樣），最接近嘅係 1540 年三路巡海、1563 年六座水師寨、1591 年南頭參將派船巡佛堂門等海路事件——志錄記事件同海路，縣志記縣界、海面同縣境圖方位，兩者唔可以互相當證，本站唔會配對。縣志所稱「舊志」係嘉慶以前嘅縣志（康熙本、乾隆本），本站只照錄嘉慶志嘅轉述，未逐句核舊志原文（列缺口）。
English
The close of the “Territory” section in juan 2 of the Jiaqing 24 (1819) edition of the Xin’an County Gazetteer (read by hand: the note’s closing sentence stands in the last two columns of the upper leaf of page 51 of the scan, the rest on the right half of the lower leaf of the same page, whose running head already reads “Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, Field allocations”, folio four — the “Field allocations” section has begun on its left half while the right half still belongs to “Territory”). The note’s closing sentence on the upper leaf was read character by character: “… the sea must be counted in, and the inhabitants not left outside the county’s bounds”, where 幬 is confirmed at high magnification (the cloth radical with 壽) while the character before it, 幅, the preceding character of the same column, was confirmed at high magnification in a further pass on 2026-10-21 (cloth radical with a right-hand element built by stacking one, mouth and field), so that both characters of 幅幬 are now read. The continuation of the note and the section’s last entry on the right half of the lower leaf were likewise read character by character: “Hence the sea and the ocean must be counted in, the grid laid out and the boundary drawn. The old gazetteer argued from the land of the county seat alone, and its four limits and eight reaches are all without foundation. Take the south: the old gazetteer says the county runs as far as Fat Tong Mun, but are the inhabitants of the islands beyond Fat Tong Mun — Po Toi, Cheung Chau, Lantau, Tam Kan — really not to belong to Xin’an? The provincial gazetteer likewise says that Xin’an lies forty li south to the sea, yet the sea begins outside the county town, so the forty-li figure is wrong too. Taking the position as it now stands and counting land and sea together, the distances are fixed, and for the sea the limit is the furthest island. Again, the county runs long from east to west and is cut short in the west, broad in the south-east and narrow in the north-west; the county town in fact lies to the north-west, and the old gazetteer’s map, which sets the county town in the central palace, is out of position as well. All this is now corrected, so that the territory stands clear and no quarter is mistaken. From the county town to the prefectural city is two hundred and forty li, and to the capital more than eight thousand li.” (The clause before 故須 stands in the last column of the upper leaf, sixteen characters in all; a further pass on 2026-10-21 read the whole column character by character as 以四至定縣治不能以縣治定四至故須, so that the sentence runs “以四至定縣治不能，以縣治定四至，故須統計海洋，開方畫界” — the punctuation being the site’s own, the block print having none, and the pause after 不能 placed by the site according to the sense.) The punctuation is the site’s own, the block print carrying none; place names and distances are transcribed as printed, not pinned to any modern site and not treated as statistics; Po Toi, Cheung Chau, Lantau and Tam Kan are the examples the gazetteer uses for islands beyond Fat Tong Mun that should not be shut out of the county, and no claim is made here that all of them lie within Hong Kong today. This entry is content read by hand from a public-domain scan; set beside the Hong Kong Chronicles archive, which holds no “Territory” entry for Xin’an county among its 36,501 entries (nor the words “field allocations”), the nearest material being the 1540 three-route coastal patrol, the 1563 record of six guard stations and the 1591 patrols of the Nantou assistant commander past Fat Tong Mun: the archive records events and sea routes, the gazetteer records limits, sea area and the orientation of the county map, and neither is evidence for the other, so no pairing is made. The “old gazetteer” the text refers to is a pre-Jiaqing edition (Kangxi or Qianlong); only the Jiaqing text’s report of it is transcribed here, and its wording has not been checked against those editions (recorded as a gap).
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「疆域」門——按語末句同全門收尾，掃描本第 51 頁上葉（版心逐字實測「新安縣志 卷之二 疆域」，頁次「三」）最後兩欄，以及同頁下葉（版心逐字實測「新安縣志 卷之二 分野」，頁次「四」）右半；下葉左半已新開「分野」門，右半仍未離開「疆域」。Commons sha1 ad357f97…。掃描本冇可用文字層，內容一律人手核讀（2000 px 全葉裁圖＋每欄 1200–2000 px 高倍局部圖）：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, section “Territory”: the closing sentence of its editorial note and the section’s last entry, in the last two columns of the upper leaf of page 51 of the scan (running head read directly as “Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, Territory”, folio three) and across the right half of that leaf’s partner, the lower leaf (running head “Xin’an County Gazetteer, juan 2, Field allocations”, folio four), whose left half has already begun the next section while its right half still belongs to “Territory”. Commons sha1 ad357f97…. The scan has no usable text layer, so its content is read by hand (2,000 px full-leaf crops plus 1,200–2,000 px per-column details): see scripts/ocr-pd-gazetteer-scans.swift.