[
    {
        "id": 205432,
        "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-1967",
        "page_number": 194,
        "title": "RAS-1967",
        "content_text": "BOOK REVIEWS\n\n187\n\nyears of research on Chinese history and politics a number of profound thoughts on the situation of China which he lays before the reader simply, almost conversationally, without any of the impedimenta of scholarship to restrict his book to the expert. The result is a stimulating book which is effortless to read.\n\nAll these essays were published earlier in magazines, and though this might have meant a rather disorganised book, in fact the aspects of the China problem which he covers in this rather small volume are the crucial ones, except possibly for the gap left by his silence on China's relations with Europe and the Soviet Union. On the whole the book is oriented towards the American reader, but this is justified in the preface in which Fairbank explains that his conception of the China expert is as a middleman, explaining China to his own country as much as studying it in vacuo. He fulfils this function himself beautifully in several pieces which show how China developed her hostility towards the U.S. and other foreigners, and one can hardly escape his conclusion that, if the American imperialists had not existed, Peking would have had to invent them. There are a couple of first-class essays on Taiwan, and, at the end, an assortment which includes a piece on the journalist Edgar Snow and another on the protestant missions in China. Both of them drive home vital aspects of the gap in understanding between China and the U.S.\n\nHong Kong.\n\nCOLINA LUPTON\n\n1.\n\nLOCAL PUBLICATIONS NOTED\n\nMAKING ENDS MEET; Majorie Topley (Ed.) being Vol. 1, Journal of the Hong Kong Institute of Social Research (1965), pp. iv, 117, published in Hong Kong by the South China Morning Post. H.K.$5.\n\nCHILDREN WITH PROBLEMS — CHILD GUIDANCE IN HONG KONG: by Gennie Gen-hwa Lee, Anita King-fun Li and Beryl Robina Wright. Hong Kong, 1966, pp. xii, 88, H.K.$6.00.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207911,
        "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": 299,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "284\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nSince then, I have seen a notice which makes it clear that Hong Kong Chinese joined the Volunteer Movement at least 30 years before this time.\n\nIn a speech made by Dr., later Sir James, Cantlie, then Dean of the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese, on 23rd July 1892, on the occasion of the presentation of diplomas to the first two members to qualify (one was Sun Yat-sen), he pointed out that students of the college were the only Chinese then enlisted in the recently reorganised 'Reserve Force of Hong Kong' (See G. Stokes, Queen's College 1862-1962, Hong Kong n.d.).\n\nHong Kong, 1976.\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\nA MISSING CHINESE LIBRARY?\n\nIn order to compile his book Eighteen Capitals of China (Philadelphia and London; J.B. Lippencott Company, 1911) Dr. William Edgar Geil, the celebrated American traveller and author stated in his preface: (p.x) “With the aid of viceroys, governors, Hanlin scholars, librarians, booksellers, we have gathered a large collection, out of which selections by leading scholars have been translated, and a few specimens are given, to let the readers see the old style of book. Local proverbs in themselves have never been brought together on our scale; and to choose from a mass of new material which would fill three volumes has been a difficult task.'\n\nIt would appear from the introduction penned by the famous American sinologue missionary and teacher, Dr. W.A.P. Martin, that this literary material was collected on the spot, at each capital, comprising ... \"their topographical treasures, a mass of literature destined to form the basis of a Chinese Library\" (p. viii). Also that, as for one of Dr. Geil's former books on China, on his journeyings along the Great Wall, Martin had helped to put his materials in shape (p.viii).\n\nDoes anyone know of the present whereabouts of this valuable collection which presumably was taken back by Dr. Geil to his home in Doylestown, Pennsylvania where, according to Who Was Who in America, he was born, lived and died (1925).\n\nHong Kong, 1977,\n\nJAMES HAYES",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209029,
        "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": 191,
        "title": "RAS-1980",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n159\n\nNational Biography, but with the library mentioned by Angus Hamilton. What became of it?\n\nHong Kong, May 1982\n\nJAMES HAYES\n\nA MISSING CHINESE LIBRARY\n\nOur Hon. Librarian, Mr. Rydings, has been following up the question posed in my Note on this subject that appeared in the Journal in the 1976 issue (Vol. 16: 284). The papers reproduced below will be of interest, and may also result in the still missing library being restored to wider public knowledge and use.\n\nHon. Editor\n\n30 July 1980\n\n(I) Letter to The Librarian, David Bishop Skillman Library,\n\nLafayette College, Easton, Pa. 18042\n\nDear Librarian,\n\nWilliam Edgar Geil\n\nPlease see the enclosed extract* from Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 16, 1976, p. 284. As Dr. Geil was one of your distinguished alumni, I am interested to know whether you can throw any light on the mystery of the missing books. It seems extraordinary if they have disappeared without trace, yet I can find no mention of them other than in the source quoted.\n\nAny help which you can provide would be much appreciated.\n\nYours sincerely,\n\nH. A. RYDINGS Librarian\n\nc.c.: Dr. J. W. Hayes\n\n* In order to compile his book Eighteen Capitals of China (Philadelphia and London; J.B. Lippincott Company, 1911) Dr. William Edgar Geil, the celebrated American traveller and author stated in his preface: (p.x) \"With the aid of viceroys, governors, Hanlin scholars, librarians, booksellers, we have gathered a large collection, out of which selections by leading scholars have been translated, and a few specimens are given, to let the readers see the old style of book. Local proverbs in themselves have never been brought together on our scale; and to choose from a mass of new material which would fill three volumes has been a difficult task.\"",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209030,
        "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": 192,
        "title": "RAS-1980",
        "content_text": "160\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nIt would appear from the introduction penned by the famous American sinologue missionary and teacher, Dr. W.A.P. Martin, that this literary material was collected on the spot, at each capital, comprising \"their topographical treasures, a mass of literature destined to form the basis of a Chinese Library\" (p. viii). Also that, as for one of Dr. Geil's former books on China, on his journeyings along the Great Wall, Martin had helped to put his materials in shape (p. viii).\n\nDoes anyone know of the present whereabouts of this valuable collection which presumably was taken back by Dr. Geil to his home in Doylestown, Pennsylvania where, according to Who Was Who in America, he was born, lived and died (1925).\n\nHong Kong, 1977,\n\nJAMES HAYES.\n\nPostscript (1981). I was in error as to place of death. Dr. Geil died at Venice on 11th April 1925.\n\n(II) Letter from The Mercer Museum & Fonthill,\n\nThe Bucks County Historical Society\n\nPine Street,\n\nThe Spruance Library\n\nDoylestown, PA 18901\n\nH. A. Rydings\n\nLibrarian\n\nUniversity of Hong Kong\n\nPokfulam Road\n\nHong Kong\n\nDear Mr. Rydings:\n\nSeptember 18, 1980\n\nYour letter of July 30 was forwarded to us by Mr. Robert G. Gennett of the Lafayette College Library in the hope that we might know something of the present location of the Chinese library of William Edgar Geil.\n\nThe enclosed copy of a 1910 article in our clipping file indicates that the material did come home with Mr. Geil. However, we do not own it and we do not know what has become of it.\n\nWhen Geil died in 1925, he left his manuscripts and collections in his will to his wife (as indicated in the second enclosed clipping). Mrs. Geil died on January 16, 1959. The newspaper account of her will makes no mention of the library. She did leave a daughter, Mrs. Constance Geil Laycock, who was then of Shaker Heights,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209031,
        "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": 193,
        "title": "RAS-1980",
        "content_text": "NOTES AND QUERIES\n\n161\n\nOhio. Other legacies went to the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions, and the American Baptist Foreign Missionary Society, both in New York City.\n\nIf we find any more information on this matter, we will let you know.\n\ncc: Robert G. Gennett\n\nAnnex 1:\n\nYours sincerely,\n\nTerry A. McNealy\n\nLibrary Director\n\nas extracted from a newspaper cutting from The Doyles-town Intelligencer of 1st September, 1910 sent by the Library Director of the Spruance Library.\n\nDr William Edgar Geil, who has been engaged for a year in making political and literary investigations in China, returned to his home in Doylestown, Wednesday night, after completely circumnavigating the earth and getting material enough for three volumes which will be boiled down to one companion volume for the \"Great Wall of China,\" which he published last year.\n\n\"It has been my most successful journey,\" said Dr. Geil to an Intelligencer reporter, Thursday morning, at his home on West Court street. \"I have visited all of the twenty capitals of the Chinese empire, investigated the political situation in each, the economical conditions and gathered a library of Chinese literature different from any in existence. There is really a ton of this literature which is now on its way over and is one of the most remarkable collections ever made.\n\nThis was Dr. Geil's third visit to China. In 1902 he travelled from Shanghai to Bhamo, Burmah, and wrote \"The Yankee on the Yangtse.\" In 1908 he explored the whole length of the Great Wall and wrote a book upon it which had a wonderful sale. It is a great compliment that he has already sold the English rights to his book on his last journey, although it is not yet written.\n\nAnnex 2: as extracted from a newspaper cutting from The Doyles-town Intelligencer of 7th May, 1925 sent by the Library Director.\n\nThe residue of the estate, including manuscripts and collections are given to Mrs. Geil. In the event Mrs. Geil did not survive it was provided the collection and rest of the estate be given to the...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209137,
        "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": 40,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "26\n\nEDGAR WICKBERG\n\nrights. The two most common were: the right to collect revenue from the land, and the right to use the land. A third right, that of permanent sublease tenancy, might also be established and recognized. The first and second of these rights, the ones most commonly found, were called \"ownership\" rights, and it was customary to speak of one \"owner's\" owning the \"topsoil\" and the other \"owner's\" possessing the \"bottom\" soil. Although these terms, used in the New Territories as elsewhere, are colourful and memorable, they are somewhat misleading to those of us who today think of mineral rights, air space, and so on. I prefer to think of these as simply two different rights in land: one a revenue right, the other a right of agricultural cultivation. In most places where this separation of land rights was found, each of the two rights in question was perpetual, could be inherited, and could be freely mortgaged or sold. Thus, the owner of the revenue right might not even know the location of the land from which he drew revenue; he had inherited or purchased a right to income from it, which he, in turn, could freely dispose of. In that sense, the revenue right became, by the late Ch'ing period, more a right to income from a given piece of land than a partial \"ownership\" of that land. The only responsibility he had towards the land was to pay the tax, which, being lower in amount than the revenue he received, allowed him a net profit. The holder of the cultivation right, on the other hand, was closer to what we would consider an \"owner\". He was free to farm the land as he wished, and he might sublet it if he chose. His only responsibility was to pay the revenue charge to the person who held the right to collect it. Since that charge was usually much less in amount than what he might gain from farming the land himself or by collecting rent from a tenant, he, too, made a profit. We tend to think of this person as an \"owner\" because he might very well have farmed the land himself, and, even if he did not, he might reside close by and keep track, thereby, of the condition of the land. Yet there were holders of the cultivation right who did not live near the land in question, and who knew little of its actual condition. In such cases, the tenant who actually held a lease from them might come, in time, to be recognized as having a permanent right to be a tenant on that land. Once that happened, such a tenant might be able to sell his right to be tenant, or mortgage it. He might also, if the land in question were sufficiently sizeable and fertile, sublet part or all of it to someone else. In this way, several different rights in a given piece of land were established, and, thereby, a large and fertile piece of land might support a large number of people, each with a right to some aspect of it. In this way,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209149,
        "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": 52,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "38\n\nEDGAR WICKBERG\n\nhalls to see what I could learn about Tang influence on the one hand and local solidarities and influence on the other.\n\nI expected to find a pattern of declining Tang landholdings as one moved away from Kam Tin towards the east end of the Basin. In fact, what I found was solid owned-holdings and mortgage holdings by the Kam Tin Tangs in the area immediately to the east of the lineage stronghold itself, but a complete drop-off thereafter: no Kam Tin Tang holdings beyond a mile or two east of Kam Tin. Instead, what is most noticeable is the widespread land ownership influence of a different set of Tangs - the Hakka Tangs of Wang Toi Shan, a large village of several hamlets in the Northeastern portion of the Pat Heung area. Indeed, it is Wang Toi Shan ownership that follows my presumed pattern of solidity nearby trailing off to smaller amounts over distance. Wang Toi Shan people owned lands at considerable distances from their village well beyond their ability to walk to them and cultivate them themselves and right up to the area where Kam Tin Tang ownership began. Interestingly enough, Wang Toi Shan Tang holdings were mostly those of clan trusts. Where the lands were near to Wang Toi Shan itself, they were both individually-owned and clan-owned; more distant lands were almost all clan-owned. Parenthetically, this seems to resemble an observation made by J. T. Kamm about the holdings of the Kam Tin Tangs: that their individual holdings were close by and their clan holdings were often distant.\n\nThe Tangs of Wang Toi Shan may or may not be related in some way to the Tangs of Kam Tin. The Wang Toi Shan Tangs were Hakkas, of course, and the Kam Tin Tangs are usually thought of as Punti. But there is a Kam Tin tradition that someone of the Punti Tang branches of Ping Shan or Ha Tsuen married a Hakka woman of Waichow and that her male offspring settled in Wang Toi Shan, thereby founding the Tang name and fortune there. And the genealogy of the Hakka Tangs of Shui Lau Tin, who claim affiliation with the Wong Toi Shan Tangs, shows some possible links between themselves and the Kam Tin Tangs. The Wang Toi Shan Tangs with whom I have spoken deny kinship, but their genealogy appears to show a common place of origin in North China with the Kam Tin Tangs. Lo Hsiang-lin, however, finds no modern connection.\n\nV. Localities\n\nLet us look individually at the villages in the area east of Kam Tin, starting with Sheung Tsuen village, the farthest away at the east end",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209151,
        "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": 54,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "40\n\nEDGAR WICKBERG\n\nThe small Hakka village of Shui Lau Tin was quite different. This was essentially a two-lineage village. The Tsois was the more numerous and owned most of the houses. But the one Tang lineage was quite prosperous as were many of the Tsois. Yet, while the largest landowners among both Tsois and Tangs owned much of their lands away from the village, and more to the west near Yuen Kong, other lineages and other villages owned land right up to the walls, so to speak, of Shui Lau Tin. Without tracing the affiliations of each of these surname groups it would be difficult to classify Shui Lau Tin in any typology of New Territories lineage villages.\n\nFinally, the large village of Yuen Kong, a mixed Hakka-Punti village nearest to Kam Tin of any I have looked at. Here, the Leung surname was preeminent, since Leungs owned almost 30 percent of the houses in the village, twice as many as any other of the major surnames of the village, and they also owned 26 percent of the cultivated land in the village area. There were seven lineage trusts - one for each of the major surnames and five religious associations. 75 percent of the cultivated land around the village was locally-owned, but there were important enclaves of ownership by the Kam Tin Tangs, the Wang Toi Shan Tangs, and individuals from Shui Lau Tin, Lin Fa Tei and Sheung Tsuen.\n\nHaving surveyed the area in this way, I find myself puzzled by what appears to have been an absence of Kam Tin influence east of Kam Tin, other than in the way we know about: that is, the earlier overlordship. Is it possible they never held land in the Pat Heung other than within a mile or two of their own gates? To the west of Kam Tin there were Tang branches, large-scale land ownership, market control, and overlordship over ha-lu. It would seem that the Kam Tin Tangs expanded to the west, but not much to the east. If so, why? Surely, the Pat Heung, a fertile area, was attractive.\n\nI can think of some possibilities. One might be united local opposition. We know that, strong though they are, Tang branches could be successfully opposed when several groups united. The Pat Heung opposition to overlordship discussed above is one instance; the Taipo Market case is another. Was there a united Pat Heung organization well before 1900 and well before the opposition to Tang overlordship, perhaps centering on the Tong Yick Tong, or something like it, that could prevent sales of land to Kam Tin? A second possibility: were there, perhaps, village-level agreements not to sell land to Kam Tin, but rather, if one must sell, to sell to another surname in the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    }
]