421
they are not aware. Take, for example, his description (pp. 38-39) of the formalities and practices of marriage in Sung times in his opening chapter on the Sung poet Qin Guan, the subject of the first biography in the book. He cites his source and adds useful information (p. 473). When describing the arranged marriage that was the norm until recent times, and still lingers on here and there in and outside China, he adds that this is why the event was described as the family taking “a new daughter-in-law” rather than as “a son taking a bride” (p. 40). See also note 14 on p. 499 and note 12 on p. 501 together with the upper plate on the 10th page of illustrations I'm giving no clues, look for yourselves! In short, he illuminates as well as entertains.
By now, readers will have gathered that I like this book. Of course, in such a large work (528 pages) and in an academic field that is very demanding and exacting for those who write in it, there are bound to be places in the text where the reader's own studies may refute or add to it. Contrary to what Mr. Ching says in the prologue (p. 20), recent collecting and oral history projects in the New Territories have shown that most, if not all, Chinese lineages, including those comprised of the peasants who made up the great bulk of the population, have kept written genealogies, albeit few of them got published like those of the Qin and other major lineages or, until recently, found their way into the great library collections of the West.
I understand that Mr. Ching is contemplating a book about the major families of Hong Kong, descended from successful men who came here in the 19th century with little more than their wits. On the showing of his first historical work, I cannot think of a more suitable person to undertake this task than Mr. Ching, and I hope that, warts and all, he gets all the cooperation and understanding of the requirements of the job he will need from the families concerned:
From there, or in the process, he could perhaps take up the true history of families great and small during the years of the Japanese Occupation of the colony, where the same rules apply. The job needs to be done, because of the way in which leading families have shunned the very mention of these years. Shanghai was not the only place where, as Mr. Ching writes (p. 458), the returning authorities looked down on those who had lived under the Japanese as tainted.
I
JAMES HAYES