CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Sha Ha

village of Hong Kong

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMar 17, 2025
Entity authorityQ111796323 ↗
Source-derived summary

Sha Ha (Chinese: 沙下) is a village in Sai Kung District, Hong Kong.

Administration

Sha Ha is a recognized village under the New Territories Small House Policy.

References

Further reading

Hamilton, Eric; Schofield, Walter; Peplow, S. H.; Tsui, Paul; Coates, Austin; Hayes, James (2010). "Chapter 6. Sai Kung Peninsula". In Strickland, John (ed.). Southern District Officer Reports: Islands and Villages in Rural Hong Kong, 1910-60. Hong Kong University Press. p. 253.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Sha Ha” is village of Hong Kong. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through village, Hong and Kong, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA strong orientation record where physical form, institutional use and historical geography need to be read together. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2010, 1910—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, village, Hong and Kong is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “village of Hong Kong” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 17, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q111796323. Authority coordinates are 22.389, 114.276. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2010 and 1910.

Critical limits

Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Sha Ha”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Sha Ha primary sources, Sha Ha archive and village research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Sha Ha”?
  2. Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
  3. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Sha Ha” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.