[
    {
        "id": 207720,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1976",
        "page_number": 108,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "A HAWAIIAN KING VISITS HONG KONG, 1881\n\n93\n\nsuccessful in negotiating a Reciprocity Treaty effective in 1876. This gave Hawaii and the United States duty-free trade with each other. For Hawaii, it meant that sugar and rice, the principal agricultural products exported to America in that period, brought about an era of prosperity to the islands.\n\nHawaii, since its chance discovery by the English explorer, Capt. James Cook, in 1778 in his search for a Northwest passage from the Pacific to the Atlantic, advanced rapidly from a primitive, feudal state into a stable monarchy under Anglo-American tutelage. Beginning with King Kamehameha I in 1795, King Kalakaua was the seventh ruler of this tiny kingdom in the central Pacific Ocean, which is over 2,000 miles from San Francisco and 5,000 miles from Hong Kong. By 1898, Hawaii was annexed as a United States territory until 1959 when Hawaii became the fiftieth state of the American Union.\n\nEarly relations between China and Hawaii started soon after Capt. Cook's discovery in 1778. American and European trading vessels passed by Hawaii on their way to the Pearl River estuary. The sandalwood trade from Hawaii to China flourished from 1790-1840. To the Chinese in the Canton-Macao area, the Hawaiian Islands became known as Tan Heung Shan #2 or Sandalwood Mountains.\n\nBy the time of King Kalakaua's reign, the Pearl River delta area furnished the principal labor supply for Hawaii's agricultural development and Hong Kong had become the principal port of departure. In 1864, the Hawaiian government started to take an active part by establishing a Bureau of Immigration. The ending of the American Civil War (1861-1865) affected the sugar market favorably for Hawaii. Dr William Hillebrand, newly appointed Commissioner of Immigration, went to Hong Kong and other areas in the Far East in 1865 in search for labor suitable to Hawaii's burgeoning sugar plantations. With the help of the Reverend Wilhelm Lobscheid and the Chinese emigration agency, Wo Hang *, Hillebrand carefully selected 521 Chinese laborers, including ninety-five women and thirteen children,\n\nThey left Hong Kong in two single-deck ships, the Alberto and Roscote, arriving in Honolulu on September 23 and October 12, 1865.2 Chinese labor, both under contract or as free immigrants, contributed greatly to the agricultural economy of Hawaii.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208939,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1980",
        "page_number": 101,
        "title": "RAS-1980",
        "content_text": "SILK & SILVER: MACAU, MANILA TRADE\n\n69\n\nthe imprisonment of Tomé Pires, whom they had sent as ambassador to the Emperor, and to the closure of Canton until 1530 to all foreign commerce. Henceforth the Portuguese had to trade clandestinely around the Bay of Amoy and at Ningpo in Fukien in the various goods, notably pepper and sandalwood, for which no amount of imperial prohibitions could lessen the demand in China.\n\nThe commercial losses suffered by the Chinese as a result of their isolationism and the prohibition of their own navigation were gains for the Portuguese. As the American scholar George D. Winius has aptly put it, \"in the Atlantic the Portuguese were explorers; in the Indian Ocean they were conquerors and in the Far East they were businessmen\". Before long their trading activities in the China Sea had developed sufficiently to make inadequate the temporary shacks and tents in which they stored and displayed their wares in such places as Shang-ch'uan (Portuguese Sanchao or São João, where St. Francis Xavier died of fever in 1552), and they began to press the Chinese authorities for a trading centre of their own. In 1555 the Jesuit Father Belchior Nunes Barreto described Shang-ch'uan as a centre for trade with the Chinese where \"silk, porcelain, camphor, copper, alum and China-wood are bartered for many kinds of merchandise from this land\" (i.e. Japan).7 In the previous year Leonel de Sousa had secured permission for regular trade with China on payment of customs dues and in 1557 the Portuguese were allowed to establish themselves at Ao-men (Gate of the Bay), otherwise known as Amacon, Macau or the City of the Name of God in China.8\n\nThere was no written agreement with the Chinese for the establishment of Macau as a Portuguese enclave in China and, though the Portuguese continued to pay rent to the Chinese government till 1849, their sovereign rights in Macau were not fully conceded till 1887. But from the outset, Macau's extra-territoriality was admitted in practice because it suited both parties to the agreement - the Portuguese because it gave them a secure place in a highly profitable commercial network and the Chinese because, as later with Hong Kong, they could now enjoy most of the benefit of foreign trade without having to abandon their restrictions on foreigners entering or Chinese leaving China.\n\nA gate was erected across the isthmus joining Macau with the mainland - the Porta do Cêrco - upon which the Portuguese placed a grandiloquent inscription: \"Dread our greatness and respect...\"",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209268,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1981",
        "page_number": 171,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "JUAN YUAN'S MANAGEMENT OF SINO-BRITISH RELATIONS IN CANTON, 1817-1826\n\n157\n\nopium grown in Turkey, the British cultivated poppy in India and brought opium into China. Selling this commodity for cash only, the British hoped to reverse the balance of trade at China's expense. In 1821, to put an end to this smuggling of opium into China and silver in the reverse direction, the Tao-kuang Emperor reiterated the court's anti-opium policy. As a result, Juan Yuan adopted strict measures against opium importation through the port of Canton. This thinking was behind his taking action against the hong merchants later on that year, in the wake of the Terranova case, especially when he removed the button from Puiqua's hat.\n\nIt was in the memorial requesting the removal of Puiqua's button that Juan Yüan's attitude on opium was revealed. He was concerned with the harmful effects of opium addiction. “Opium is grown overseas, but its harmful effects are most keenly felt in interior China. Its most serious damage lies in the moral degradation of the populace”.* The memorial also showed that Juan Yüan had known the sources of opium. He concluded that there were three major groups of foreign traders who carried opium in their cargo from West Asia and India.\n\n41\n\nThree major groups of foreign traders are the sources for our opium. Among these traders there are a number of merchants who come from across the Atlantic Ocean. They pick up cargoes of opium on their way to China. Moreover, the British merchants, in their private capacities, also bring with them this contraband commodity when they come to Macau. The Company, franchised by the British sovereign, does not officially engage in the opium trade itself. The American ship owners and captains constitute the last group of opium smugglers. They, not having any king to restrain them, bring in the commodity themselves in the holds of their ships.*2\n\n42\n\nThese foreign traders worked with the Chinese merchants in Canton and Macau who provided them with the marketing machinery to distribute opium. For this reason, Juan Yuan blamed the Chinese merchants, especially the hong merchants, for the thriving illicit opium trade.\n\nThe hong merchants are so close to the foreign traders that, although their smuggling activities could be kept dark from the officials, it is impossible for the hong merchants not to be aware of them. How can foreign ships bring contraband commodities for thousands of miles without being assured of a market here first? They, therefore, must work hand-in-glove with the hong merchants. The hong merchants appear to consider only their",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210533,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1985",
        "page_number": 140,
        "title": "RAS-1985",
        "content_text": "8\n\n121\n\nprovincial community such as Lyons, we may take it for granted that in the second century A.D. the religious outlook of the populace ranged from open disbelief to a willingness to suffer, and even to die horribly, for one's convictions. Nor should this occasion surprise: even if we discount for the moment the matrix of cultural forces which condition religious sentiments, such as social status and educational attainment, it should be remembered that for more than six centuries Rome's rule stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the banks of the Euphrates, and that throughout this long period the Romans presided over populations of striking social and cultural dissimilarity. Rome subjugated the primitive tribes of Britain, the Iberian peninsula and the Danubian basin as well as the culturally sophisticated and highly urbanized inhabitants of Greece and the Near East. Diversity of belief is to be expected in such an environment, but for anyone who wishes to analyze the parts or the whole, it also poses difficulties that are all but insuperable.\n\nFirst, there is the question of evidence. In matters of religion, as in all else regarding classical antiquity, it is notoriously imperfect. We are handicapped above all by its capricious character. We know a great deal about some cults, but of others, almost nothing. Even in the case of well-documented cults, however, a caveat is necessary: the literary sources, upon which we are heavily dependent for information, not only vary widely in reliability but are also unevenly distributed. Too much of the evidence stems from Rome itself, but even here we know a great deal more about some periods than we do about others. Hence even when the source is trustworthy, too frequently it still remains unclear whether the particular passage that interests us reveals behaviour current only at this one point in space and time, or has a wider application.\n\nConfronted with such difficulties, it is hardly surprising that classical scholars have tended to shy away from ambitious syntheses in favor of the more modest task of tracing the spread of particular cults and elucidating their contents.12 To be sure, there have been exceptions, the most notable being Nock's seminal work on conversion;13 in scope it compares favorably with the global view of Chinese religion advocated by J.J.M de Groot, Marcel Granet, and C.K. Yang.14 It is, however, only a noteworthy exception: in the literature on",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216409,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2003",
        "page_number": 168,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "118\n\nIn addition to her usual cruising on the China coast the ship paid one visit to Nagasaki and, early in 1933, another to the Philippine Islands.\n\nOn 11 June 1933 the carrier EAGLE, Captain L.V. Wells, DSO, arrived at Hong Kong to replace her on the station. Accordingly the next day HERMES slipped for Singapore and after a pleasant passage reached Sheerness on Saturday, 22 July 1933.\n\nAlthough while in the East mention has been made above of the activity of pirates, actual direct involvement with any such deed had been about the only experience she missed between 1930 and 1933. She was to fill that gap during her following commission, also on the China Station when under the command of Captain The Hon. George Fraser.\n\nNOTES\n\n[Hon Ed.] HMS HERMES, a small aircraft carrier of some 10,950 tons, was the first purpose-built such warship in the Royal Navy. On 15th January 1918 she was laid down at the Armstrong Whitworth yard and launched on 11 September 1919. The yard was scheduled to close, and no great post-World War I urgency to complete her was perceived, so she was towed to Devonport for completion. There she was commissioned on 6th August 1923. Several of her pre-World War II commissions were spent on the China Station. At the outbreak of World War II she \"worked up\" in the English Channel, carried out one patrol, and then in October 1939 was ordered to Dakar to work with the French Navy on anti-enemy blockade runner and surface raider patrols. With the ship operating twelve Swordfish aircraft, generally speaking these operations took place out across the Atlantic towards the coast of South America. On 8 July, 1940, with the advent of Vichy then at Dakar, the ship launched a daring night-time attack first using her motor boat immediately followed by Swordfish aircraft torpedoes, crippling the new battleship RICHELIEU which was lying in Dakar Roads. Subsequently, when returning to Freetown, she was damaged in collision with the P & O liner CORFU, then an armed merchant cruiser engaged in convoy protection duties. She was repaired at Simonstown, South Africa. Following repairs she saw further service, enjoying some notable successes, in the South Atlantic, Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf.\n\nFrom Trincomalee late on 8th April 1942, the approaching Japanese fleet having",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    }
]