[
    {
        "id": 206619,
        "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-1972",
        "page_number": 167,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGY IN HONG KONG AND SOUTH CHINA (1938)\n\nW. SCHOFIELD*\n\nOf all the ancient and famous seats of early civilisation, China is the one where the smallest amount of scientific investigation has hitherto been done. Years of excavation and research have revealed to us many of the details of the life and history of Ancient Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Palestine, Minoan Crete, the Hittite confederacy, and prehistoric India; but of China all that was known came partly from the chance finds of curio-hunters, about which their finders carefully suppressed all information of scientific value such as provenance, depth of burial, and context of other finds; and partly from the literature of the Chou and Han dynasties, which, valuable as it is, is a distorting medium for historians.\n\nIn the last ten years, however, scientific investigation has been started. The Chinese National Research Institute has excavated several important dwelling sites in North China, including that of the capital of the Shang dynasty. Several distinguished foreign scholars, mostly Swedes, have conducted explorations and excavations in the service of the National Government, and various provincial societies of scholars and archaeologists have worked in their own areas. A few years ago the Research Institute discovered and excavated untouched graves of the great Shang civilisation; the report on their work is eagerly awaited.\n\nAll this activity, however, relates to the area of North China traditionally known as the centre of ancient Chinese civilisation. From China south of the Yangtse and especially from its coast provinces, hardly any object had been known to come that was\n\n* Mr. Schofield (1888-1968) was a Cadet Officer in the Hong Kong Civil Service 1911-1938. Previous contributions will be found in the 1968 and 1969 Journals, (Vols 8 and 9).\n\nThe first of these, Ch'eng-tsu-yai (*‡A), a Report of Excavations of the Proto-historic Site at Cheng-tzu-yai, Li-ch'eng Hsien, Shantung was published as Archaeologia Sinica Number One by Academica Sinica Nanking 1934. A translation into English by K. Starr has been published by the Yale University Press, Yale Publications in Anthropology, No. $2, under the title Ch'eng-tzu-yai: The Black Pottery Culture Site at Lung-shan-chen.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207371,
        "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": 139,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN MILITARY TALENT\n\nConcluding Remarks\n\n131\n\nIt is difficult to know to what extent the vision and vocabulary of the Chinese world order affected the perceptions and policies of Chinese officials in the late Ch'ing period. Obviously, the compelling rhetoric of the Chinese world order lasted longer than the Sinocentric system it described. This is quite understandable, for one could hardly expect the Ch'ing emperor to willingly abandon his claim to rule \"all under Heaven\" (t'ien-hsia). At the same time, it is clear that among the few informed \"Confucian patriots\" who had extensive contact with foreigners in treaty port areas, a new world view was rapidly evolving. Not surprisingly, this is clearer in their private writings and conversations than in their official communications and pronouncements.\n\nMy point, in any case, is not that \"traditional\" attitudes were breaking down faster than the official record would seem to indicate—although this was certainly true and deserves further study. Rather, I am suggesting that certain aspects of Chinese tradition were not, as is commonly supposed, necessarily inimical to modernization. Although the lingering perception of a hierarchical, Sinocentric world order unquestionably retarded China's modern development in some areas—notably her entrance into the so-called \"family of nations\"—this was less true in military affairs, where China's long tradition of borrowing foreign military talent was more of an asset than a liability. Recourse to foreign military assistance did not, after all, imply the inferiority of China's inherited culture, with its predominantly civil ethos, nor was it an affront to the dignity of the Chinese state (t'i-chih).\n\nChina's failure to use foreign military assistance effectively in the late nineteenth century was less a function of traditional attitudes toward the employment of barbarians, than of late Ch'ing administrative practice. Stripped of its world order rhetoric, much of Chinese policy toward the use of foreigners in late Ch'ing times seems to compare favorably with that of other nations in similar periods. A glance at Civil War America, for example, indicates that China was not alone in her concern over the linguistic and cultural integration of foreign officers, their fidelity, or the potential for interference on the part of their respective governments. Like the Chinese, both the Confederacy and the Union liberally rewarded foreign service, yet significantly, both also tended to reserve the highest ranks and greatest honors to individuals who",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207378,
        "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": 146,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "138\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH\n\n86 See Smith, \"Foreign-Training;\" also Yang-wu yün-tung [The “foreign matters\" movement] (Shanghai, 1961), 3: 463, 469, 492, 599, 613, etc.\n\n87 IWSM, TC 22: 12-13b; 23: 42-43.\n\n88 See the IWSM references cited in note 85. Pennell became fully sinicized, shaving his head, changing to Chinese clothing, learning Chinese, marrying a Chinese, and finally petitioning to be registered as a native of Ho-fei, Anhwei. Mesny, too, was attracted by Chinese civilization, thus reinforcing the persistent notion of barbarian \"transformation\". See especially the memorial by Wu Tang and Ch'ung-shih in 1870 requesting that Mesny be advanced to the rank of lieutenant-colonel (ts'an-chiang) and awarded the peacock feather for his efforts against the Miao. This memorial was in many respects a replica of Hsueh Huan's request for similar awards to be granted to Ward in 1862.\n\n89 Examples in IWSM and WCSL abound. See also Fairbank, \"The Early Treaty System,\" esp. 264-265; John Schrecker, Imperialism and Chinese Nationalism (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), 50. Traditional attitudes were, of course, reinforced by the examination system. One of the topics for the metropolitan examinations in 1880 was the following quotation: \"By indulgent treatment of men from a distance they are brought to resort to him from all quarters. And by kindly cherishing the princes of the states, the whole empire is brought to revere him.\" Cited in the North-China Herald, May 18, 1880.\n\n90 See, for example, WCSL 101: 9; 129: 17.\n\n91 See especially K. C. Liu, \"The Confucian as Patriot and Pragmatist: Li Hung-chang's Formative Years, 1823-1866,\" HJAS, 30 (1970); David Pong, \"Confucian Patriotism and the Destruction of the Woosung Railway, 1877,\" Modern Asian Studies, 7.4 (1973).\n\n**\n\n92 For a discussion of the concept of r'i-chih, see Immanuel Hsü, China's Entrance into the Family of Nations (Cambridge, Mass., 1960).\n\n93 See Ella Lonn's Foreigners in the Confederacy (Chapel Hill, 1940) and Foreigners in the Union Army and Navy (Baton Rouge, 1951).\n\n94 See, for example, Ernst Presseisen, Before Aggression: Europeans Prepare the Japanese Army (Tucson, 1965); Noboru Umetani, \"Foreign Nationals Employed in Japan during the Years of Modernization,\" East Asian Cultural Studies, 10.1 (March, 1971).\n\n95 What differed was China's international situation. China had to endure far more political, economic and military pressure from the European powers than either the United States or Japan in the nineteenth century.\n\n96 The great majority of Japanese military employees in the latter half of the nineteenth century neither became Japanese subjects nor accepted Japanese culture. See, for example, Presseisen, 112.\n\n97 See the discussion in Smith, \"Foreign-Training.\"",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    }
]