[
    {
        "id": 215673,
        "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-2001",
        "page_number": 450,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "402\n\nBy July 15, the 24th Division was forced back on Taejon, sixty miles below Osan, where it initially took position along the Kum River above the town. Clumps of South Korean troops by then were strung out west and east of the division to help delay the North Koreans.\n\nWhile pushing the 24th Division below Taejon, the main North Korean force split, one division moving south to the coast, then turning east along the lower coastline. The remainder of the force continued southeast beyond Taejon toward Taegu. Southward advances by the secondary attack forces in the central and eastern sectors matched the main thrust, all clearly aimed to converge on Pusan. North Korean supply lines grew long in the advance, and less and less tenable under heavy United Nations Command (UNC) air attacks. The U.S. Far Eastern Air Force meanwhile achieved air superiority, indeed air supremacy, and UNC warships wiped out North Korean naval craft.\n\nAlarmed by the rapid loss of ground, Walker ordered a stand along a 140-mile line arching from the Korea Strait to the Sea of Japan west and north of Pusan. His U.S. divisions occupied the western arc, basing their position on the Naktong River. South Korean forces, reorganized by American military advisers into two corps headquarters and five divisions, defended the northern segment. A long line and few troops kept positions thin in this **Pusan Perimeter**. This line was, essentially, the front on August 12, the day that Mr. Morrison was killed.\n\nMr. Morrison's movements in Korea before his death are unknown. Seoul had fallen several days before his arrival, so he would have been forced to arrive in the south of the country, perhaps at Taegu. One assumes he spent the next five weeks, or so, behind the retreating UNC frontline.\n\n\"Morrison, a Daily Telegraph correspondent, and a great friend of mine, Uni Nair (sic), acting as a UN observer, were all killed together. I have always been convinced that Nair probably got them all into trouble. He was notably fearless. While with the Indian army in Italy during WW2, as a PR officer, he thoroughly enjoyed taking visitors into particularly dangerous sectors where their jeep attracted hostile fire. Towards the end of the war, in Burma, he volunteered without training to jump with paratroops in the drop on the outskirts of Rangoon.\n\n'Nair was fond of palm reading. My own, that I would reach a ripe old age, turned out pretty true. But if we asked Uni what sort of future he read in his own palm he always said, after a pause, “A short life and a merry one.”\" (Russell Spurr -- personal communication with the author)\n\nPage 450\n\nPage 451",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215871,
        "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-2002",
        "page_number": 170,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "103\n\n6\n\nCertain Stations at Home and Abroad shortly before the taking up of the New Territories by the British in 1898. The War Department had a scheme, drawn in 1902, to develop the \"low promontory\" between Yau Tong and Chong Lui (which has become the present Lei Yue Mun Typhoon Shelter) into a barracks area. This promontory is now the Yau Tong industrial and residential zone. The proposed military reserve was extended to cover the entire Cha Kwo Ling promontory (\"Rocky Hill\"). Neither the barracks scheme nor the reserve has ever been implemented. However, there is no doubt that the British military attached great significance to the Lei Yue Mun and Devil's Peak area in the late 19th Century. The leasing of the New Territories definitely had a clear military intention, because it had the French, Russian, or Imperial Chinese forces in mind.\n\nThe Gough Battery was definitely in place as early as 1900. The Pottinger Battery was likely erected at the same time, and not later than 1902. The Duke of Connaught was said to have observed the firing practices of both the Gough and Pottinger Batteries in 1907 (Rollo 1992: 83). The approved establishment for the Gough Battery in 1914 was one officer plus 15 soldiers (Rollo 1992: 96).\n\n[The Pottinger Battery had two 9.2-inch BL (Breech-Loader) Mark X guns. The Gough Battery originally had two 6-inch BL Mark VII guns. However, one of the gun emplacements was later enlarged to accommodate a 9.2-inch BL gun no later than 1910. The approved establishment strength of the Pottinger Battery in 1914 was one officer plus 26 soldiers (Rollo 1992: 96).]\n\nThe Devil's Peak Redoubt was the location of the Eastern Fire Command. It was definitely in place by 1914. Though it could accommodate at least 150 soldiers in action, the approved establishment of the Redoubt in 1914 was only one officer plus 10 soldiers (Rollo 1992: 96).\n\nThe 6-inch gun at the Gough Battery was removed as early as 1912. The three 9.2-inch BL guns at Devil's Peak were subsequently relocated to the batteries on Hong Kong Island South. The 9.2-inch calibre Mark X gun at Gough Battery, originally on a Mark V mounting (Rollo 1992: 187), was removed in 1936 to Stanley Fort and placed on a Mark VII mounting (Horsnell 1998/1999: 249), and the two guns at",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215898,
        "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-2002",
        "page_number": 197,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "March 1909 \n\nJune 1909 \n\nDecember 1909 \n\nTaikoo Docks completed. \n\nVisit of the Inspector General of the Forces (Inspector of Royal Garrison Artillery). \n\nThe Committee of Imperial Defence came to the view that the three 9.2-inch guns at Devil's Peak could well be opposed by 12x12-inch, 12x8-inch, and 18x7-inch guns of three battleships in the event of hostility, \n\nA report stated that the new emplacement for the 9.2-inch gun, originally earmarked for Pottinger Battery, was nearly ready and the pedestal was in position. \n\nThe gun was a 9.2-inch BL Mark X on a carriage Barbette Mark V. \n\nRollo, 1992, p.85 \n\nRollo, 1992, p.87 \n\nRollo, 1992, p.83, p.85, p.187 \n\nThe 6-inch BL Mark VII was still there but was recommended for removal. \n\n1910 \n\nThe third 9.2-inch gun for Devil's Peak was completed (for Gough Battery). \n\nRollo, 1992, p.89 \n\n22 November 1910 \n\nService instructional practice at Pottinger Battery \n\nRollo, 1992, p.86 \n\n8 January 1912 \n\nWar Office Approved Armaments for Devil's Peak: Pottinger Battery: two 9.2-inch BL MX guns \n\nRollo, 1992, p.91 \n\nApril 1912 \n\n28 July 1914 \n\n5 August 1914 \n\nGough Battery: one 9.2-inch BL MX gun \n\nThe 6-inch gun at Gough Battery was removed. \n\nColonel L. Robertson, Chief Engineer of the South China Command signed the 1:120 sketches \"Devil's Peak: Copy of the Original Design prepared by Lt. A. F. Day and coloured by him to show progress up to 1.7.1913,\" and \"Devil's Peak Redoubt as constructed\" showing progress up to 1.7.1914. \n\nDeclaration of war against Germany by Britain. \n\nThe establishment for the Eastern Fire Command at Devil's Peak: \n\nPost at Redoubt: 1 officer + 10 soldiers Gough Battery: 1 officer 15 soldiers \n\nRoilo, 1992, p.187 \n\nPRO central reference 441 (1 & 2) \n\nRollo, 1992, p.96 \n\nA stone inscription showing the year 1914 can be found \n\nin the redoubt. \n\n130",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215900,
        "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-2002",
        "page_number": 199,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "indicated the establishment for the battery observation post (BOP), battery plotting room (BPR), and Eastern Fire Command. A total of 88 officers and soldiers were proposed.\n\n30 December 1936 The 12 Heavy Battery dismantled the 9.2-inch gun at Gough Battery (The two 9.2-inch guns at Pottinger were left for the moment).\n\n23 October 1937\n\n1939/1940\n\nJoint Overseas and Home Defence Committee considered re-fortification or de-militarisation of Hong Kong, assuming that it took 90 days for the fleet to relieve Hong Kong. Bokhara Battery constructed.\n\n1940\n\nThe guns at Pottinger Battery removed.\n\nA Japanese military map shows the details of defence deployment at Devil's Peak. It states that for the Devil's Peak defence works, \"underground passages have been altered and barbed wire added.\"\n\n12 December 1941 During the early hours, the 5/7 Rajputs and 1 Mountain Battery took up positions at Devil's Peak. The six 3.7-inch howitzers of the 1st Mtn Bty fired 400 rounds at the advancing Japanese, who were at Black Hill.\n\nThe 5th Anti Aircraft Regiment also moved to Devil's Peak with 6 Lewis Guns\n\nAt 1800 hours, the garrison received orders to withdraw to Hong Kong Island. The evacuation took place the next morning.\n\nRollo, 1992, p.119\n\n2\n\nRollo, 1992, p.113\n\nRollo, 1992, p.120, p.201\n\nEmpson, 1992, p.146 (Plate 2-12)\n\nThe arcs of fire of Devil's Peak's batteries can be found in Rollo, 1992, at p.123\n\nRollo, 1992, p.130, p.171, 173\n\nPRO 16947\n\nPRO 17849\n\n15 December 1941\n\n13 December 1941 Coast defence batteries on Hong Kong Island shelled Devil's Peak, now in Japanese hands.\n\nPak Sha Wan Battery hit by Japanese light artillery fire from Devil's Peak.\n\nRollo, 1992, p.131\n\n18 December 1941\n\nPak Sha Wan Battery fired at Devil's Peak Village.\n\n1944\n\nA USAAF aerial photograph shows Hong Kong Island and Kowloon, including the Devil's\n\nRollo, 1992, p.133\n\nRollo, 1992, p.135\n\n132",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216016,
        "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-2002",
        "page_number": 315,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "249\n\nChinese as a response to Hun incursions is attributed to King Wuling of Zhao (325-298BCE). The crossbow had become the weapon of choice in infantry tactics, as can be seen from the Qin terracotta formations at Xi'an. But except for a weak version, crossbows did not translate to horseback tactics because they were loaded using the feet.\n\nIt requires intensive training to become sufficiently proficient with a traditional Asian bow to be able to rely on it in a life-threatening situation. The aristocratic elite maintained their command of the bow and arrow through their practice of hunting with chariots and from the leisure time they could devote to perfecting their skills. The aristocracy were also the ones who had stocks of horses. Thus it was that the debate that is recorded (Yan Tie Lun, Zhan Guo Ce (Zhan Guo Ce: Wuling Wang Ping Chen Jian Ju. Selby p. 175 fn 17.) about adoption of mounted archery by the Chinese involved the question of putting the aristocrats on horseback: not the ordinary soldiery.)\n\nIn the Eastern Zhou, therefore, tactical and technological developments pushed the aristocracy with their bows and arrows onto horseback, and placed crossbows into the hands of the common people in the rank-and-file. (The very reverse of what happened among the English and French aristocracy in the Middle Ages.)\n\nThe Militarization of archery\n\nThe Confucians had, at some point, chosen to stress the non-military aspect of archery. That trend is summed up in Jun zi wu suo zheng; bi ye, she hu (Selby: 5A). I believe that in the Eastern Zhou, archery had been received from previous eras as a semi-religious, ritual experience with further expression in hunting (to gain sacrifices for the ancestors) and warfare. Even in warfare, if the account of the Battle of Yanling (Zuo: Cheng Gong 16. Selby: 71.) is to be believed, archery was fraught with taboos. Contrast Yanling with the crossbow tactics at Maling (Shiji: Sunzi Wuqi Liezhuan. Selby: 8E)\n\nDespite Wang Meng's belated attempt to revive the rituals prior to his interregnum (Hou Han Shu: Liu Kun Zhuan. Selby: 8H.), the ritual aspects of archery were almost forgotten in the Han period. Nevertheless, there is abundant archaeological evidence of archery in hunting, warfare and funeral imagery (where Yi shooting the Suns in\n\n+\n\nPage 315\n\nPage 316",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    }
]