本文旨在釐清竹山媽祖宮歷史中的若干問題。先以契書確認廟地由李裕蔥、盧友弘二人所喜捨。至媽祖宮創建年代有五說，但以《彰化縣志》之「乾隆初、里人公建」，最可相信。次探究媽祖宮名，先有天上宮、聖母宮、天后宮、天后聖母廟之名、連興宮要到光緒八年才出現。所以不是創廟便叫連興宮。第三確定媽祖宮有僧人當住持，時間約一百四十年，自乾隆中葉到日治初。可能是清代台灣的普遍現象。最後論定長、胡邦翰、李振青長生祿位的適當性，認為定長似無惠政，李振青解決水沙連地方竹木放流出口的困難，又增加媽祖宮的收入；胡邦翰貢獻最大，豁免舊欠，減則、沿山一帶一九抽的配入媽祖宮為香油費，都是他努力促成的。當然，沒有巡台御史李宜青的上奏，胡邦翰也不一定能實現他愛民的理念。李宜青也當受香火紀念。李宜青、胡邦翰、李振青的惠政，水沙連地方的人民稅負輕、貨物暢，土地迅速開發，地方富庶繁榮，更使媽祖宮香火興旺，成為水沙連地方宗教的中心，也是沿山一帶墾殖的推動者。

The purpose of this essay is (1) to clarify several issues and incorrect understandings of the history of the Ma-Chu-Gong in Chu-Shan, (2) to complement the previous omissions, and, thus, reveal the truth of several historical issues of the Ma-Chu Gong in Chu-Shan. This essay, first, affirms the contributor of the estate of the Ma-Chu Gong, second, examines the establishment date of the Ma-Chu Gong, third, investigates the development of the shrine’s name—Ma-Chu Gong, forth, ascertains that, in the entire Ching Dynasty, the Lin-Ji-Chung (a sect of Buddhism) monks lived in the Ma-Chu Gong as administrators, and last, explains the context of erecting the three Chang-Sheng-Lu-Wei (three planks as symbolic identities of three persons, who are enshrined and worshiped) in Ching Dynasty. The above issues, excluding the establishment date of the shrine, which is confined to a year in ChyuanLong era, are all clarified, and the problems accompanying these issues are also answered. Above all, the policy of the tax regulations in favor of the Shoei-Sha-Lian (Chu-San) area, which are tributed to the magistrate of Chang-Hwa County—Hu, Bang-Hung, is now distinct.