Po Hing Theatre (Sheung Wan) / 普慶戲院 [1890-????] | Gwulo: Old Hong Kong
Pre-order the new Gwulo book today to get 
special pricefree shippingsigned copies, and a free sample
Details and how to order

Po Hing Theatre (Sheung Wan) / 普慶戲院 [1890-????]

Current condition: 
Demolished / No longer exists
Date Place completed: 
1890-01-01

Seating capacity: unknown

Address: Given by the source as: 上環普慶坊和卜公花園附近, in the neighbourhood of the present Blake Garden and Po Hing Fong, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong.  The location marker on this map is approximate.

Fong in Chinese means a place smaller than a village, so the theatre was named after the place it was located.  The source gives only its Chinese name so the English name shown on this page is selected to pronounce the same as its Chinese name.

Po Hing Theatre opened in 1890, but its closing date is unknown.

Source:   https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hk/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E5%B7%B2%E7%B5%90%E6%A...

Tags: 

Comments

I wonder if this theatre is connected either to the Chung Hing or the Pok Lok theatre as there is nothing located in the vicinity of Blake Gardens

Thanks Herostratus for the feedback.  While little information is available for this Po Hing (Sheung Wan) Theatre, I think it is not connected with Chung Hing or Pok Lok Theatre.

The creation of the page for Po Hing was based on the Wikipedia source:

  • "同慶戲院(上環普仁街)1876年建成,後易名重慶戲院  (called it A)
  • 普慶戲院(港島)(上環普慶坊和卜公花園附近)1890年建成 (called it B)"

​​I used B to create the Po Hing page and placed its marker by the park.  The "A" is likely corresponding to the Tung Hing Theatre [1867-1912] page already created and showing the marker on Po Yan Street.  It could be that the year for one of them is a mistype.

A separate page for the Pok Lok Theatre has already been created with its marker, similar to Tung Hing,  on Po Yan Street but two blocks away.  Its opening day is unknown, and the page says a fire destroyed it in 1886 - prior B's 1890 starting date.  A possibility is that Po Hing was built four years later on the same site as Pok Lok, but I would think this connection would have been mentioned in the source.   Regards, Peter