[
    {
        "id": 204436,
        "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-1962",
        "page_number": 68,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "CHINA'S 35 MILLION NON-CHINESE\n\n57\n\nminor groupings in south China. In the southwest were the Ch'iang, the Fan (properly read Po), the Wu-man14 (who include the Yi, Lolo, Norsu, etcetera), and a fourth group of poorly differentiated tribes. In the south were the Austronesian Tai or Thai, the Yao and TanE, and the Liao#. The six subsidiary groups he considered derived from intermixtures and cultural overlays. These include the Miao (descendants of the Fan or Po), the Ch'i-lao or K'e-lao2 of the southwest plateau lands, the Pae of Szechwan, the Pai-man of the Ta-li✯ plain in west Yunnan, the Li of Hainan Island, and the Yueh centered on the Canton delta in early times.\n\nAlthough, in general, the historical movement of the non-Han people of central and south China has been southward in the face of the constantly expanding pressures of the Han from the north, the migratory paths of some of the chief ethnic groups within south China are interesting to note. Four of these groups of present importance are the Miao, the Yao, the Yi or Wu-man, and the Tai.\n\nSince the Miao are high mountain dwellers, their migration routes generally have followed mountain ranges where they could practice their fire-field or forest-burning, shifting type of cultivation and semi-nomadic pastoral herding. The Miao, apparently derived from the Fan or Po of the west Szechwan mountain lands, migrated slowly eastward along the Ta-pae and Ch'in-ling ranges and down into the Tung-t'ing lake region after traversing the Wu mountains of the Yangtze Gorges. Here they must have established themselves for a long time and acquired the name Ching Man# or the Barbarians of the Ching (Tung-t'ing Lake) region.\n\nThe Miao then spread southward in several directions, but especially into the west Hunan and east Kweichow regions among the tributaries of the Yuan river from which they acquired the name Wu-ch'i* (Five Streams) Barbarians. They became further dispersed during various dynastic struggles among the Han and especially during the Sung and Mongol struggles. The Manchu and their Han Chinese forces during the Ch'ing dynasty dispersed them further in many bloody battles with the Miao. Today the Miao have sought refuge not only in the more",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204439,
        "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-1962",
        "page_number": 71,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "60\n\nHEROLD J. WIENS\n\nof south China that have evolved a significant culture. But precisely because of this and because they occupied irrigable valley lands, the Han Chinese came into conflict with them. Moreover, because of superior culture, technology and number, the Han gradually took over the T'ai states of the Yangtze valley and assimilated their populations. Those among the T'ai leadership who escaped Han political and cultural conquests were the ones who led their following in migration away from the front of contact. The direction of this slow historical flight was southward and southwestward,\n\nBefore the Han Chinese conquest under the Ch'in dynasty (Third century B.C.), south China contained 6-8 large T'ai states. In Szechwan the T'ai state of Shu was centered on the present provincial capital of Ch'eng-tu. The Pa state was centered at Chungking. In the central and lower Yangtze region were the T'ai states of Ch'u and Wu respectively. The T'ai state of Nan-yueh included such areas as the Canton delta and the Red river delta of Tongking. In Fukien were the Pai-yueh, sometimes politically centralized at Foochow. All of these were absorbed into the political body of China during the 400 years of the Han dynasties. Sinicization, however, took many more centuries and reached its greatest flowering in the Canton delta region during the T'ang period. West of this region in the Yunnan-Kweichow plateaus, however, a Sinicized T'ai power lingered on through the T'ang and Sung periods in the state of Nan-chao, at times strong enough to pose threats to the stability of the T'ang empire. The successor to this state, Ta-li, withered under the Mongol onslaught directed by Kublai Khan, and T'ai political genius moved across the southern borders of Yunnan into the Mon-Khmer cultural sphere in the basin of the Chao Phya river where it evolved the present state of Thailand.\n\n7\n\nT'ai autonomy within southwest China continued in smaller units in the lake and river basins of Yunnan near the Burma borders until the Communist conquest of China. The reasons for the extended freedom from close Han Chinese control over the southwest include the rough topography of the region with agriculture restricted to small basins or primitive self-sufficiency\n\nCh'en Pi-sheng, T'ien-pien san-yi (Reflections on the Yunnan borderlands), Chungking, 1941, 21-24.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206075,
        "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-1970",
        "page_number": 155,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "150 \n\nS. F. BALFOUR \n\n• \n\n\"A merchant of Ta Ts'in (Eastern Roman Empire) came to the court of the Emperor Sun Chuan of Wu (in the present Shanghai region). When Chu-Ko Ko (in A.D. 226) had subdued Tan Yang (a place in the mountains on the Anhwei-Kiangsi border) he caught some dwarfs of the 'Black' tribe. The merchant when he saw them said that such people were rarely seen in his country. The emperor gave him ten of each, male and female. \n\n** \n\nIt is very doubtful whether our region was ever populated by these dwarfs, but the fact that their present distribution is somewhat that of the Indonesians raises an additional culture problem. In any case, we can see from these texts that South China, before the Chinese colonisation, was an agglomeration of peoples whose race and movements are too obscure for us to connect them with any certainty with the existing population, \n\nIV. THE COLONIZATION OF SOUTH CHINA \n\nIt is important to distinguish between the Chinese conquest of South China and its colonisation by peasants. The conquest of our region for instance occurred in 220 B.C.; it then became a remote part of the Chinese Empire. Its colonisation by Chinese peasants did not occur until over 1,000 years later and is in fact a comparatively recent development. \n\nThe armies sent to subjugate the aborigines by the first Emperor of Ts'in in 220 B.C. started from Chang Sha in modern Hunan province and crossed the mountains by five passes descending on our region somewhere to the east of Bias Bay and to the west upon the delta somewhere in the neighbourhood of San Wui. The object of the expedition was to open trade routes for the precious objects which came from the south — pearls, coral, ivory, etc. The region was incorporated into the military governorship of Nan Hai or the \"Southern Seaboard\", and to it were sent political prisoners who died in large numbers of fever. \n\nBesides holding the Canton estuary the Chinese armies moved west to another important centre of trade, the Tonkin delta. Here they established themselves in a place they called Chiao Chih which is now Hanoi. When the short-lived Ts'in dynasty came to an end, a Chinese general who had participated in the campaign of the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206080,
        "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-1970",
        "page_number": 160,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "HONG KONG BEFORE THE BRITISH\n\n155\n\nnot a general practice, it was probably due to the easiness of running before the wind that the ships could become such large hulks. Unfortunately, we do not know who built them.\n\nBy the eighth century, the boats had become huge. \"Ladders several tens of feet high had to be used to get on board.\" The trade was organised. Foreign captains had to be registered with the Office of Trading Ships, which inspected manifests and collected export and import duties. These captains had legal powers to deal with offending passengers when at sea.\n\nIn 758, the Mohammedans had so much the upper hand in Canton that they yielded to the temptation of sacking and burning the city and making to sea with the loot. However, trade continued to flourish, the principal imports being, according to Soleyman, ivory, frankincense, ingots of copper, turtle shells, and rhinoceros horns (with which the Chinese used to make girdles), and the principal exports: silk and porcelain.\n\nThe foreign ships also carried as passengers Chinese Buddhists visiting the holy places in Java and India. In the biographies of sixty pilgrims composed by I Ching,12 37 of them took the sea route to India. Some of these went from the Tonkin delta region, but the majority started from Canton or returned thither. The compass was still unknown in those days, and the first mention of its use for navigation in Chinese literature occurs at the beginning of the 12th century.\n\nV. T'UN MUN\n\nIn the preceding sections, a picture has been given of the elements which made up the population of South China up to the end of the T'ang dynasty. We now come to our region — the peninsula South East of the Canton delta, and we must do our best to piece together such fragments of historical knowledge that we can find into a sequence which will indicate how its population developed and thrived.\n\nThe first historical reference to any place in the region occurs in a list of itineraries from China to the Persian Gulf collected\n\n11 Tang Kuo Shih Pu, by Li Chan.\n\n12 義淨,大唐西行求法高僧傳",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207046,
        "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-1974",
        "page_number": 117,
        "title": "RAS-1974",
        "content_text": "THE HONG KONG REGION\n\n111\n\nOctober 1860, and again by the lease of the New Territories by the Convention of Peking in June 18981.\n\nThe population of the region was probably around 100,000 in 1898, including boat people. These persons inhabited — in round figures — a thousand villages and a number of market centres. Seven hundred of these settlements were located within the present New Territories of Hong Kong, with many others around Sham Chun and in Hong Kong island and Kowloon. The Punti or Cantonese-speaking element accounted for rather more than half the land population, with Hakka speakers comprising most of the remainder. The boat population, mainly Tanka, lived afloat in the main.2\n\nDescriptions of the geography and climate of the present British Crown Colony are generally applicable to the Hong Kong region. They have long been given in the Hong Kong annual reports. The most recent is supplied in the opening sections of chapter 18 of the report for 1974.3\n\n1. The Hong Kong Region in the wider scene: some historical and geographical considerations\n\nIn Ch'ing times Hsin-an was one of the 14 hsien of the Kuang-chou prefecture. The designation fu or 'prefecture' was adopted only at the start of the Ming dynasty but the area of Canton and the Delta had long been administered under various designations that changed through the centuries and with dynastic change. The oldest of its hsien, Nan-hai, was established in the Sui dynasty in the year 590-591; the next, P'an-yu in 703-704 during the Tang; with the rest becoming separate districts at various times until the first year of Wan Li of the Ming (1573-1574) when, finally, Hsin-an was created from one of the former commanderies of Tung-kuan district (a hsien of 973-974) established in the 27th year of the first Ming ruler (1394-1395).\n\n1 The relevant documents are given in Alabaster, III, pp. 2-4 and 6-8. 2 See Baker 1968: 3-4. Also the Colony Census for 1911 in SP1911: 103(27-36) and (37-38), though it does not list all the villages of the Southern District of the New Territories or of New Kowloon.\n\n3 CR1974, pp. 176-178.\n\n4 See e.g. TCITC 41/1 and KCFC 6/10.\n\n5 KCFC 6/1-10 and YCKC 4/1-9.\n\n6 KTTC 2/93 and KTKKCY 1/1. The administrative areas to which the Hsin-an district belonged from the Ch'in dynasty (221-207 B.C.) onwards are shown in KCFC 6/24 and in HNHC 1/1. The date of the establishment of the commandery is given as Hung Wu 27 in HNHC 1/3, KTKKCY 1/1, TCITC 41/3 and KTTC 2/93, but as Hung Wu 14 in KCFC 6/24.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207050,
        "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-1974",
        "page_number": 121,
        "title": "RAS-1974",
        "content_text": "THE HONG KONG REGION\n\n115\n\nVarious local accounts show that many craft came from northeast Kwangtung and elsewhere for the seasonal fishing. The presence of pirate fleets, sometimes in very large numbers, was also a feature of the local scene.\n\nThis activity, and the importance it gave to the local seaways is reflected by the Chinese records. The Kuang-tung K’ao-ku Chi-yao gives what at first appears as a disproportionately large amount of space to the subject of coastal defence.3 The provincial gazetteer devotes many pages to maps of the coast line and the off-shore islands, and it is significant that these are included in the coastal defence section and not in that dealing with administrative boundaries.4 Another long work, the Kuang-tung T'u-shuo, which deals with the administrative geography of the province, gives maps that show the outer islands in the districts on each side of the Pearl River delta. Some of these maps showing outlying areas are blank, for all but a corner of a page, but have still been included. It also lists the garrisons and naval forces responsible for the area.\n\nIn the Hong Kong region, Lantau and the islands are the subject of much of an article by Hsü Tei-shan on Hong Kong and its past, included in the compendium to the exhibition of Kwangtung Culture assembled at the University of Hong Kong in 1940.6 As is to be expected, the fall of the Sung takes up much of his attention,7 but he then considers Lantau itself. Hsü's discussion on one of its Chinese names, Tai Yue Shan, is relevant here because it\n\n1 Orme, para 53; CR 1947, p. 10.\n\n2 Lo-shu Fu, p. 597 has a long note on pirates in the Ladrones c. 1779-1810.\n\n3 KTKKTY 30/1-11. See also chuan 28 on military matters.\n\n4 KTTC, vol. 2, pp. 2394-2433, especially 2406-2410 for the islands between and outside Hong Kong and Macau, the Ladrones. Two chüan, 123-124, (pp. 2359-2442) deal with coastal defence. The district maps for the Delta are in chuan 83, Hsin-an at pp. 1454-5 and Hsiang-shan at 1464-5. The late Ming work Wu-pei Chih lists posts, garrison strengths and ships for the Central, East and West lu of Kwangtung; chüan 215/12-13, 15-16 and 17, 18 being of special relevance to Hsin-an and the adjoining area. The maps for the outlying parts of the Canton Delta are in chüan 210/9-10 and 215/6-7. For this work see Franke, p. 209. Ku Yen-wu's celebrated T'ien-hsia chün-kuo li-ping shu has eight chüan (97-104) on Kwangtung, much of which is devoted to military organisation and defence.\n\n5 See the general map at the beginning, 1-2, and detailed maps under reference chuan 11-12/7-9.\n\n6 KTWW, pp. 425-426,\n\n7 ibid. He gives a clear exposition of the various problems surrounding the identification of the various places at which the last struggles of the Sung occurred.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207052,
        "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-1974",
        "page_number": 123,
        "title": "RAS-1974",
        "content_text": "The Hong Kong Region\n\n117\n\noverlooked in 1898 when only the inshore islands were included in the territory that Britain requested be leased to her at that time.\n\nWhat were the islands like? I have spoken with several old men who now live on Lantau but were born on two of the eight or more islands in the Lo Man Shan group in 1891 and 1893, and with several younger men. Their accounts show that there were long-settled villages there, with padi and sweet potato fields. There were also flourishing inshore fisheries using the largest types of stake net.1 These were owned by village families, and the catches were salted and taken to Macau by a public ferry operated by local people. Salt, which was needed in large quantities for the stake net fisheries, was bought mostly in Cheung Chau, where it was said to be cheaper than in Macau. This was the position in my informants' youth, early in this century. Some of the islands belonged to Hsin-an Hsien, others to Hsiang-shan, but this allocation for administrative purposes was less important than the economic and other ties which dictated the connections favoured by its inhabitants. Wind and sea also affected links in the different seasons of the year.\n\nHsin-an and the outlying islands were thus part of the historical, strategical, social and economic life of the Canton Delta in the late Ch'ing period. The safety of their seaways was likely always to have been an important consideration with the provincial government. This contrasts with the relative unimportance of Hsin-an's history and record of scholarship when compared with the older hsien of the Kuang-chou prefecture.\n\n2. The principal events in the local history of the Hong Kong region since the establishment of Hsin-an hsien in 1573\n\nAs already mentioned in the Introduction, the Hsin-an district, to which the Hong Kong region belongs, was established as a separate administrative division of the Kuang-chou prefecture in 1573. The area was then separated from the old Tung-kuan district in response to problems of defence. It followed upon a petition from local persons which complained that because it was 100 li from Tung-kuan City, ‘barbarians and dwarves’2, had been able\n\n1 The village representative of Shek Pik on Lantau island (b. 1899) and friends of the same age had found regular work there in their youth.\n\n2 HNHC 14/2. I have followed Peter Y. L. Ng's rendering of the character, pp. 143-144.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1974.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/x633mp077",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207349,
        "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-1975",
        "page_number": 117,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "EUROPEAN WORKING CLASS IN 19TH CENTURY\n\n109\n\nin the main it is a limited number of English words used more or less according to Chinese idiom, and also mispronounced. The fewest possible number of English words is used.35 The widespread use of this lingua franca prevented Chinese and Europeans from even remotely grasping the subtleties of each other's culture.\n\nThe amount of social contact, outside work and the market place, between Europeans and Chinese must not be exaggerated, for both groups enjoyed a healthy contempt for, and misunderstanding of, the other. W.A.P. Martin, at that time a Presbyterian missionary, relates that when he stepped ashore at Canton in 1850 he was greeted by a hooting mob 'who shouted Fanqui, fanqui! Shato, shato! (\"Foreign devils! cut off their heads.\")'36 L.C. Arlington, of the Chinese Maritime Customs, claims that, even in 1891, when a foreigner passed in his chair from Shameen (the foreign concession quarter in Canton) through the native city the coolies would shout out 'Take him to the execution ground'. No foreigner, he continues, be he white, Indian or Japanese, could escape the contemptuous term ‘foreign devil'. 'It was shouted at you from the tops of houses, from alleyways, and from courtyards.'37\n\nDespite the language barrier, a working class European did not find it too difficult to establish a liaison with a Chinese woman. In the early days, such women were found usually among the Tanka boat population, a pariah group that populated the fringes of the Pearl River delta region. A few of these women achieved the status of 'protected' woman (a kept mistress) and were, sometimes, well provided for by their paramour, such as a ship's captain. In time, a considerable number of police, overseers, tidewaiters and others, entered into alliances, even marriages, with local women, since, of course, there was always a scarcity of marriageable young European women in Hong Kong.* But mixed marriages were condemned by Taipans; the partners were ostracised by polite European society since a mixed marriage clearly stigmatised a European as an outcaste. Such racial attitudes became more rigid toward the end of the century.\n\nAlthough some Europeans lived with or even married Chinese women, it does not follow that such social arrangements provided\n\nSee Carl T. Smith's interesting article on one of these Tanka Women in Chung Chi Bulletin, No. 46, June 1969, 13-17 and 27.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209253,
        "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": 156,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "142\n\nTA ACTON\n\n22 of J. Hayes \"The Hong Kong Region\" in JHKBRAS 14(1974) p. 111 and D. Akers-Jones, \"Boat People's Ceremonies observed at Island House\" in the JHKBRAS 15 (1975) pp. 300-303. This paper does not make overt ethnic judgments, but does have an odd ethnographic style: for example \"In the middle of all this there was a wedding ceremony, and I think the preceding activities were connected with it. But I was particularly struck by the frenzied, almost ecstatic and unseemly behaviour of the women.\"\n\n23 Barbara E. Ward, \"A Hong Kong Fishing Village\", in the Journal of Oriental Studies 1 (1955) p. 195\n\n24 Barbara E. Ward \"Varieties of the Conscious Model\" in M. Banton ed. The Relevance of Models for Social Anthropology. (Association of Social Anthropologists Monograph No. 1, London, 1965). p. 113, and \"Sociological Self-Awareness: Some uses of the Conscious Models” in Man, (1966) p. 201.\n\n26 H. Kani A General Survey of the Boat People in Hong Kong, (New Asia Research Institute, Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1967) p. 67, E. Anderson, \"The Boat People of South China\" in Anthropos 65 (1970) and “The Floating World of Castle Peak Bay\", University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Mich. 1978.\n\n26 E. Anderson \"The Ethnoichthyology of the Hong Kong Boat People” in his Essays on South China's Boat People\", Orient Cultural Service, Taipei, 1972, p. 39.\n\n27 J. McCoy, \"The Dialects of the Hong Kong Boat People: Kau Sai\" in the JHKBRAS 5 (1965) pp. 46-64. But note that this paper is based on work in only one village, does not take account of the well-known habit of respondents with both “high” and \"low\" versions of their own language to use the \"high\" version when speaking to outsiders. Note also the contradictory evidence in this paper at page 18.\n\n28 T. Acton, \"II ruolo della cultura tradizionale romani come contributo allo sviluppo dell'educazione moderna\" in Lacio Drom, Rivista Bimestrale di Studi Zingari 15:3 (1979) p. 20\n\n29 J. Gibbon ed. Viewpoint Hong Kong (Longman, Hong Kong, 1977) ch. 3 For example, on p. 19 of this book of English Language development exercises, we are asked \"Some people look down on the boat people. Why is this unfair?”\n\n30 F.M.O. document \"Duties and Responsibilities of Liaison Officers\", Para. 11 (3) iv.\n\n31 Ibid. Para III (6)\n\n32 W. Hahn Aberdeen Catching the Last Rays (Perennial Press, Hong Kong, 1974) pp. 193-4.\n\n33 D. Wood ed. Hong Kong 1980 (Government Information Services, Hong Kong. 1980) p. 59\n\n34 SOCO, A Survey of Boat People in Hong Kong (Hong Kong, 1978, in Chinese), p.3\n\n35 V. Wong \"Among the Sewage and Sampans of Yaumatei” in the South China Morning Post, 13 October 1979. pp. 10, 14. R. Daryanani \"Home for 5,000 is most polluted” in the South China Morning Post, 8 September, 1980, p. 19\n\n36 E. Elliott \"Ordinance not in public interest\" (Letter) in the South China Morning Post 11 August, 1980, p. 20.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209784,
        "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-1983",
        "page_number": 43,
        "title": "RAS-1983",
        "content_text": "21\n\nA prolonged discussion followed, mostly with local researchers into the history, economy and society of the Hong Kong Region. Dr. David Faure offered two contributory reasons for the KMT's failure to deal with land reform in addition to those mentioned by Dr. Myers. One was the effects of the World Depression of the early 1930s; another was the amount spent on military expenditure that might have been usefully spent on land reform. Dr. Myers agreed. Dr. Hayes said that if the time needed for land survey and settlement in the N.T. of Hong Kong (4 years) and its cost were any indication of the size and complexity of the task, it might indicate that it was beyond the KMT's capacity, even in one province. There was also the matter of sufficient trained staff.\n\nThe discussion then turned to tenancy itself. Dr. Patrick Hase said that, if the N.T. was in any way typical of the situation in the sub and top soil ownership situation, the amount of true tenancy was small, consisting of a small number of landless peasant families and others who had to rent land from others to make up for their own insufficient holdings. He also queried whether one could apply a broad brush. There was surely a difference between subsistence areas such as the Hong Kong Region and highly developed market-economy regions centred round big cities, as at Canton and in the Yangtze delta.\n\nDr. Hase went on to say that in discussion of tenancy an important factor in assessing its effect was the percentage of the crop taken in tenancy, either by the sub-soil owner or by the surface owner from sub-tenants. In the Hong Kong Region the percentage of the crop represented by the first was very low, below 25% and getting less as more land was opened. The latter was (and had long been) customarily set at around 50%, and there were no signs that it had created economic deprivation and social tensions. Dr. Hayes added that the desperate economic situation of the peasants attributed to the tenancy position, as reported by the Institute of Pacific Affairs' social scientists in the 1930s, seemed very unreal to those of us working on the Hong Kong Region.\n\nDr. Quested asked \"who, then, were the tenants?\" and what had been their experience and significance. Dr. Myers said they",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1983.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j9607p61v",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210657,
        "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-1986",
        "page_number": 8,
        "title": "RAS-1986",
        "content_text": "PRESIDENT'S REPORT 1986-87\n\nLadies and Gentlemen,\n\nLet me say at the outset that this has been a good year. Our programme of activities has been maintained at a satisfactory level and, in general, has attracted larger audiences and attendances than in recent years. We have also made steady progress in regard to back-up organization. The publication of the two Journals for 1984 and 1985 is expected soon, with other projects in hand. The remaining unsatisfactory area is that of financing where the current level of expenses, particularly on publications, is such that an increase in the annual membership charge is not only advisable but also necessary. I shall now review the year's changes and activities.\n\nProgramme\n\nLast year's programme included the usual variety of lectures, visits and tours. The ten lectures were varied, covering a wide range of historical and cultural subjects, as follows:\n\nPhillip Bruce\n\n\"The Forgotten Fortress\"\n\n4 April, 1986:\n\n30 April, 1986:\n\nProf. Ed Wright\n\n\"Korean Furniture Elegance and Tradition\"\n\n22 May, 1986:\n\nDr. Raj Ghose\n\n12 June, 1986:\n\n3 September, 1986:\n\n\"The Hindu Temple as a religious, social and political institution.\"\n\nDr Richard Irving\n\n\"The Rise and Fall of Shrimp Farming in Deep Bay and its Impact on the Deep Bay Landscape.\"\n\nDr. Janice Stockard\n\n\"An Unorthodox Marriage Practice in the Canton Delta Region.\"\n\nvii",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1986.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/jq08c7063",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212470,
        "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-1991",
        "page_number": 24,
        "title": "RAS-1991",
        "content_text": "themselves they had to turn to migration to urban centres and overseas emigration, and to nonfarm work in the villages.\n\nFollowing the path of the traditional junk trade, overseas emigration was common in southern Fukien (Fujian) and eastern Guangdong in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, but it did not spread to the rest of Guangdong until the nineteenth century. In the 1860s, when the European powers were initiating mining and plantation projects in Southeast Asia, and when the American continent was building transcontinental railways, China became a popular source for labour recruitment. There were three major emigrant areas in South China: first, southern Fujian and eastern Guangdong; second, the western part of the Pearl River delta and Siyi, namely Kaiping, Enping, Xinhui, and Xinning (later renamed as Taishan); and third, northeastern Hainan Island. People from the first area were the first to emigrate because of the junk trade with Southeast Asia.\n\nThe Nanking (Nanjing) Treaty following the Opium War in 1842, which stipulated the establishment of treaty ports along the coast of China, broke the Canton monopoly. The newly opened ports of Shanghai, Ningbo, Fuzhou and Amoy (Xiamen) competed with Canton for China's foreign trade. With the rich Yangzi River valley as its hinterland, Shanghai soon began to fulfill its extraordinary potential as a port of trade. By 1850 the volume of trade in Shanghai had surpassed that of Canton. Trade routes were diverted to these cities, causing a lot of porters and boatmen to lose their jobs. Canton was no longer a recipient of any substantial foreign investment. It went either to Shanghai or Hong Kong. The development of Hong Kong with a shift of British interest from Macau and Canton also attracted many Cantonese merchants to search for economic opportunities. For instance, Cantonese traders, artisans, and laborers from all neighbouring districts followed the British merchants in flocking to the British colony. Moreover, Hong Kong had become a major centre of Cantonese emigration abroad. The high points of overseas emigration came between 1890 and 1904. Between 1885 and 1900, a total of 1,830,572 Chinese emigrants embarked at the port of Hong Kong.\n\nThe overwhelming majority of the Cantonese emigration came from the Pearl River delta region, particularly from the counties shown in figure 1. The Xinning, Xinhui, Kaiping and Enping were known collectively as Siyi while Panyu, Nanhai and Shunde were Sanyi.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 212482,
        "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-1991",
        "page_number": 36,
        "title": "RAS-1991",
        "content_text": "16 \n\nShunde \n\nDongguan \n\nSanshui \n\nGaoyiu \n\n2 \n\n3 \n\nI \n\nI \n\n1 \n\n1 \n\nN \n\n| \n\n10 \n\n2 \n\nOut of delta region \n\nNon-Cantonese \n\n5 \n\n& \n\n13 \n\n2 \n\n1 \n\n- \n\n1 \n\n4 \n\nHang Kong \n\n1 \n\n༣ \n\n2. \n\n3 \n\n1 \n\n8 \n\nUnidentified \n\n18 \n\n30 \n\n72 \n\n132 \n\n17 \n\n422 \n\nTotal \n\n20 \n\n46 \n\n105 \n\n186 \n\n193 \n\n550 \n\nSource: Hong Kong Record Series #144. The Supreme Court of Hong Kong. Probate Jurisdiction - Wills. \n\nFrom the 894 Chinese wills of the period between 1850-1906 deposited in the Hong Kong Public Records Office, 550 were believed to be held by merchants. Merchants were defined here as owning business, joining in partnership and holding properties. As indicated in table 1, there were 128 out of 550 who stated their native origins. Most of them came from the Pearl River Delta region, Xiangshan men being the largest in number, followed by Nanhai, Xinning, Xinhui, Shunde, Dongguan, Panyu and so on. More interesting, though they had been doing business in Hong Kong for a number of years, they did not claim they were Hong Kong people. Instead they identified with their native place. More frequently they were probably absent from Hong Kong and had resided in Canton and Macau. A puzzling question is that a large portion of these 442 persons had not told in their wills where they came from. Can we take it for granted they did not state it because there was no need to specify as they had identified with Hong Kong? Nevertheless, there were eight cases reported where they were definitely identified as Hong Kong persons. Some claimed “Victorians\", some were \"Hong Kong people\" and some identified with the place where they lived such as Kowloon, Shaukiwan, etc. \n\nIt is supposed that during the nineteenth century the majority of the Chinese in Hong Kong did not settle permanently but returned home or moved to other places in China. They retained ties with their home villages in China. As a scholar points out, wealthy Hong Kong Chinese usually held landed property in Hong Kong, but from the wills we know there were also frequent references to fields and houses in the home villages and houses in Canton, Foshan and Macau. The landed properties they held were mostly houses and land, and little were shares",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1991.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/k356gt84j",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 213766,
        "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-1996",
        "page_number": 118,
        "title": "RAS-1996",
        "content_text": "89\n\n5%\n\n2.992 females aged 25-30 in 1911, 2,795 in 1921\n\nCensus Report 1911, Table XXI\n\nCensus Report 1921, Tables XXIV-XXVII\n\nBased on a figure of double the female population since the male population is clearly significantly distorted by immigration\n\n* See JW Hayes, The Hong Kong Region 1850-1911: Institutions in Town and Countryside.\n\nHamden, Connecticut, 1977\n\n** Census Report, 1977, Tables IX and X. No detailed breakdown of Place of Birth of the\n\nFloating population is included in the 1911 Census\n\nC. I\n\nThe statistics for Place of Birth in the 1921 Census give a somewhat different picture. There (Census Report, 1921, Table XI) the place of birth of 34,724 Northern District males and 36,311 Northern District females are given, of which only 88% (males) and 82% (females) were born within the New Territories. The sharply higher figures for persons born outside the New Territories seems to be due to three factors. The first is the time of the Census. The 1921 Census was taken during the cooler weather (March-April) as compared with the 1911 Census (April-June). Numbers of stonecutters, itinerant weavers, etc., are likely to have been higher in 1921 as it is known from oral evidence that many of these village-to-village traders went back to their own families in villages outside the New Territories for the summer and harvest seasons, and would thus have been enumerated in 1921 but not in 1911. This is doubtless the reason the 1921 Census shows a far higher figure for males born in Kwai Shun District (997 compared to 354), and also for males from the area north of Canton (241 as compared to 23), although the numbers from Ka Ying and other East River areas were lower (142 as compared to 177). This may also be the reason for higher recorded numbers of males from other inland areas in 1921 (Sze Yap 77 as compared to 25, and Shiu Hing area, 95 as to 19). With the exception of Kwan Shun, all the 1921 figures for these areas show far fewer females than males (Kwan Shun, 1507 females; north of Canton, 1-42; East River, 72; Sze Yap, 16; Shiu Hing, 45). The effects of the Ching Ming Festival, and the remaining 1920 refugees are responsible, almost certainly, for the much higher numbers of San On born males (1213 in 1921, only 243 in 1911), and may in part also account for the increase in Tung Kun males (385 in 1921, 163 in 1911). Most of the difference, however, must be due to a more careful enumeration of the boat people in the area. The higher numbers recorded in 1921 for males born in the Delta (750 as against 234), the Chin Chau area (143 as against 9), Hong Kong (226 as against 10), and Macao (25 as against nil), must be due to this factor. The reduction in the numbers of women recorded as born in Hong Kong (1208 as against 2383 in 1911) may be due to errors in the 1911 record. Because of these differences, it is difficult to compare the two Censuses directly with regard to these statistics. It is considered likely that the 1911 figures are closer to the actual position of long-term land population residents born outside the area. The information in the 1921 Census does not permit any direct comparison with the Place of Birth figures for Southern District in 1911, since the 1921 figures include New Kowloon as well as the Islands.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1996.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/3n209j641",
        "rank": 0
    }
]