[
    {
        "id": 204482,
        "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": 114,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "103\n\nEXCAVATIONS AT MAN KOK TSUI ON LANTAU ISLAND\n\nELSPETH MANEELY *\n\n[On 13 May 1961 over fifty members of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society landed from a launch at Man Kok Tsui, a promontory on Lantau facing Hong Kong. Here Professor S. G. Davis and Dr. S. M. Bard explained to the members of the Society how the excavations were carried out and what objects had been discovered. Later the party walked over the hills to Silvermine Bay. This article gives an account of the excavations carried out there in 1958, Ed.]\n\nTo date, the investigation of Neolithic remains in China points to the existence of three main Neolithic cultures.' This broad classification depends largely on differences in the types of fine pottery. In the north-west traces of the Painted Pottery Culture were first noted by J. G. Andersson at Yang Shao, Honan in 1920, and three years later at the Tao river sites, Kansu. In the north-east, traces of the Black Pottery Culture were uncovered in 1928 at Lung Shan, Shantung. The finds at Man Kok Tsui belong to the third of these Neolithic traditions: the South-East Neolithic, and the characteristic fine pottery found is a hard stoneware bearing a variety of impressed designs. This type of impressed pottery was first discovered in Hong Kong by Dr. C. M. Heanley in 1926 and it was associated with several kinds of stone artifact. It is interesting to note that the traces of these three Neolithic cultures were uncovered within a period of eight years and that in 1926—the year in which Dr. Heanley began his work on pre-historic remains in Hong Kong—the exciting discovery of \"Peking Man\" took place at Chou Kou Tien, south-west of Peking.\n\nDr. Heanley was joined in his systematic survey of the Hong Kong area by Professor J. L. Shellshear and Mr. W. Schofield and they soon established that the Colony was rich in scattered finds, in general concentrated near the beaches and on the low\n\n* Mrs. Maneely has lived in Hong Kong since 1956, and is the Hon. Secretary of the Hong Kong University Archaeological team.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204483,
        "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": 115,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "104\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\n16\n\nhill slopes of the western islands and in the Castle Peak area; but perhaps only four places investigated since archaeological work began in the Colony may be dignified by the term \"site\". These are: So Kun Wat #, a series of low hilltops to the west of the Tai Lam Chun reservoir; Lamma Island (Pok Liu Chau14), which really comprises several distinct sites; Shek Pik and Man Kok Tsui, both on Lantau Island (Tai Yu Shan). A report on the findings at So Kun Wat was presented by C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear in 1932 at the first Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East held at Hanoi. Father Finn's publications on the Lamma sites, begun in 1932, have recently been reprinted in one volume, Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island Near Hong Kong.3 The Shek Pik site, on the south-west coast of Lantau Island, was excavated by W. Schofield and J. G. Andersson in 1937 and a report was published in the Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, in 1938. The artifacts uncovered at Man Kok Tsui are similar to those found at these earlier sites and are of three kinds: stone tools and ornaments, pottery and bronze.\n\nBefore describing the discovery of Man Kok Tsui in more detail however, reference should be made to Father R. L. Maglioni's extensive discoveries in Hoifung as they bear a definite relationship to finds in the Hong Kong area. Hoifung lies on the China coast about one hundred miles north-east of Hong Kong. In 1934 Fr. Maglioni, then a priest in the Hoifung region, embarked on a thorough search for prehistoric remains. He located as many as twenty distinct sites. In general the finds were of the same type as those described by archaeologists working in Hong Kong, but Fr. Maglioni was able to distinguish three separate Neolithic cultures. These three he called the SON, SAK and PAT cultures from the capital letters of the romanized names of villages adjacent to the sites. So far Neolithic remains in Hong Kong resemble closely those of Fr. Maglioni's PAT culture, the latest of the three.\n\nIn April 1958, Dr. S. M. Bard first reported Man Kok Tsui as a possible area for investigation by the University Archaeological Team. The site, given the number 30 by the Team, lies at the extreme tip of the northern arm of Silvermine Bay, Lantau Island. It consists of two sheltered, sandy beaches, a flat fertile valley",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204485,
        "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": 117,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "106\n\nBRONZE\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\nThe bronze, though small in amount, was an interesting and exciting discovery. Fr. Finn at his Lamma sites, and Schofield and Andersson at Shek Pik also found bronze associated with pottery and stone of similar workmanship to the Man Kok Tsui material. The Man Kok Tsui bronze: two pieces of a lanceolate knife, and a fine patinated fishhook, were found in the vegetable fields of the central valley. In considering the age of the site the presence of these three pieces of bronze is important despite the fact that they must be regarded as surface finds.\n\nSTONE:\n\nThe stone artifacts found at Man Kok Tsui consisted of grinding, hammering and polishing tools of local granite and sandstone; polished adzes, knife edges, roughly chipped discs, polished discs and rings. The most interesting of these were perhaps the adzes and the rings, showing as they did the advanced nature of the stone industry achieved by these Neolithic people. The adzes were of most of the types found in South East Asia, including some rectangular in cross-section, a type Fr. Maglioni has linked with his Late Stone Age PAT culture. The rings varied in size and shape, and mostly were of quartz or black dolorite. Some were very finely finished, one particularly fine slotted quartz ring varied in section thickness by only 0.004 of an inch.\n\nPOTTERY:\n\nTwo varieties or qualities of Neolithic pottery were encountered at Man Kok Tsui; a hard resilient stoneware, grey or buff in colour often with a purple tinge and frequently speckled through and through with blackish spots; and a soft, coarse, friable sand-mixed ware. No complete soft pots were found but, judging from pieces of lip and concentrations of sherds found, some of these pots must have been large. Man Kok Tsui yielded eleven whole, nearly whole, or reconstructable hard pots. Some of these looked as if they had been finished on a turn-table and some seemed entirely hand-made. The two largest hard pots, one eighteen and the other sixteen inches high, appeared to have traces of glaze. The shapes of the pots corresponded to those described by Finn, Shellshear, Schofield and Heanley from other sites in Hong Kong.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204489,
        "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": 121,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "108\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\nThe suggestion of glaze on two of the pots, the bronze, the variety of shapes of the polished stone adzes, and the impressed patterns on the pottery similar to Fr. Maglioni's PAT culture, all indicate a Late Stone Age or Early Bronze Age date (Warring States, 481-221 B.C.) for the Man Kok Tsui site. However, the people living in this area may have continued to use stone tools and pottery of this type well into the Han period.\n\nREFERENCES\n\n1 William Watson, Archaeology in China, Max Parrish, London, (1960).\n\n2 C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear, “A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hong Kong and the New Territories\", Proceedings of the First Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Hanoi, (Jan. 1932),\n\n3 Daniel J. Finn, S. J., Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island Near Hong Kong, Ricci Publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, (1958).\n\n4 W. Schofield, \"A Protohistoric Site at Shek Pik, Lantao, Hong Kong\", Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, (1938).\n\n5 R. L. Maglioni, S. J., \"Archaeology in South China\", Journal of East Asiatic Studies, Manila, II, No. 1, (Oct. 1952).\n\n6 R. L. Maglioni, S. J., \"Archaeology Finds in Hoifung\", Hong Kong Naturalist, VIII, Nos. 3-4, (March 1938).\n\n7 S. G. Davis and Mary Tregear, \"Man Kok Tsui, Archaeological Site 30, Lantau Island, Hong Kong\", Asian Perspectives, IV, Nos. 1-2, (1960), 183-212.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204907,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 15,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "S. G. DAVIS\n\n1897). Laufer also pointed out that the only reference that he could find in Chinese literature to pottery of the Han Dynasty is by Chow Mi in the Kuei Hsin Tsa Shih, Chow Mi lived under the Southern Sung Dynasty in the thirteenth century.\n\nSuch an observation by Laufer is of importance because he was an established authority on Chinese archaeology. As Curator of Anthropology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago he was in China from 1901 to 1904 collecting specimens and making investigations with the Jacob H. Schiff Chinese expedition. He returned again to China in 1910 with the Mrs. T. B. Blackstone expedition. While he collected most of his Chou and Han pottery mainly in Shensi Province he also travelled widely in China and visited Canton and Hong Kong. Thus he would certainly have reported Han pottery if it had been known in the area.\n\nThis relatively recent discovery of neolithic archaeology in China is certainly paralleled here in Hong Kong. The first reference to it that I can find is by Dr. C. M. Heanley in 1928 when he described Hong Kong celts (8). Dr. Heanley, who fortunately is still active and keenly interested in Hong Kong (I received a letter from him recently), lives in Salisbury, Southern Rhodesia. He was head of the Government Vaccine and Bacteriological Department and in his spare time was a devoted amateur geologist. He knew of Laufer's work and in his article on celts referred to Laufer's statement that prehistory stone implements were scarce in China. Heanley suggested that they were only scarce because prospectors did not know how to look for them. He said, \"To find celts in South China select the crests and spurs of granite hills bared of vegetation by rain erosion. Do not look for celts but look for isolated fragments of pottery and water-worn stones. The eyes should be kept ranging well ahead and on either side and little attention given to the ground near the feet.\" Heanley estimated that on granite outcrops in Hong Kong there was an average of about 30 to 40 celts to the square mile within 600 yards of the sea and land reclaimed from the sea.\n\nDr. Heanley's shrewd advice to prospectors has helped considerably in later searches. It is on raised beaches, terraces and hill-spurs that most of our archaeological remains have been\n\nPage 15\n\nPage 16",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204908,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 16,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY\n\n11\n\nfound. The explanation for this is that this part of South China has been rising relative to sea level. This positive rise is connected with isostasy and eustatic movements of the oceans that cause cycles of submergence and emergence. Assuming a rise of one foot every hundred years then, Hong Kong in the last 2,500 years has risen 25 feet,\n\nDr. Heanley and his friend Mr. Walter Schofield, a government administrator, gathered a large and varied collection of celts from Kowloon, Cheung Chau and Lantau Island. Examination of this collection by experts soon established that they were not just freaks of nature but definite human artifacts. Since Heanley's first notification, other workers have found them in practically every part of the Colony, and contrary to his belief that they were principally found on granite hills, they have been found often in abundance on every other rock outcrop represented in the area — especially volcanic rock. It may be that because of the extreme susceptibility of granite to erosion, which causes 'badland country' with thin or no vegetation cover, the celts can be seen more easily,\n\nIncluding the places mentioned by Dr. Heanley, celts can still be found in the fields, on raised beaches or on low hills at Tai Wan, Hung Shing Ye, Yung Shu Wan, Aberdeen, Tai Po, Castle Peak, San Hui, So Kun Wat, Tsun Wan, Shatin, Shataukok, Man Kok Tsui, Ha Tsuen, Sheung Shui, Shek Pik, Sai Kung, Lai Chi Chung, Sok Ku Wan, Fanling and Kau Sai Chau.\n\nMuch is owed to Dr. Heanley, Mr. Schofield and Professor J. L. Shellshear, who was head of the Anatomy Department in the University of Hong Kong, for their conscientious and patient work in combing the Colony for other archaeological remains and sites after the celts had been identified. I have been told by our Vice-President, Sir Lindsay Ride, who knew all three intimately and often accompanied them on their field trips, that they were superbly energetic and covered tremendous distances in a day at great speed. Only fit and enthusiastic walkers could hope to last a whole day with them. They located several prehistoric sites, the most notable being So Kun Wat, Shek Pik and those at the northwest end of Lamma Island.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204911,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 19,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "S. G. DAVIS\n\nthe work he very quickly graduated to a well-informed archaeologist capable of making shrewd observations and comparisons.\n\nAltogether, Father Maglioni mapped and recorded twenty-one principal sites and nine others where odd fragments of pottery were picked up. And here it is important to note that all the remains were collected from the surface and that no excavations were ever carried out. It would therefore seem reasonable to assume (on the basis of our experience in Hong Kong, especially at Lamma, Shek Pik, Man Kok Tsui and Fanling) that re-examination of the Hoifung sites with spot digs could be most revealing and fruitful. Perhaps this may be possible one day,\n\nFather Maglioni in his report (16) on the Hoifung District underlined and confirmed many of the conclusions reached by Dr. Heanley and Father Finn: principally that all the sites were either on raised beaches or low granite hills and that the absence of building remains pointed to their having been built of clay and wood (probably as at Tai O today on piles) and therefore easily and quickly disintegrated by weathering and typhoon attrition. He also concluded that all sites are neolithic with a strong reservation that the use of the term \"neolithic\" might be misleading. This was because he recognized distinctly different cultures present. In order to identify them he used the capital letters of the largest villages near the sites; SOW, SOS, PAT, KEB and SAK. Dr. Heanley in a letter (11) to Father Maglioni also was emphatic that the term \"neolithic\" should not be used for Asia. He felt that polished stones were almost certainly in common use in Hong Kong until iron became cheap and abundant.\n\nOn the basis of European usage of the terms \"palaeolithic\" and \"neolithic\" it seems that there is no solid evidence of a pure palaeolithic culture being present. But many palaeolithic artifacts have been found both in Hong Kong and Hoifung and presumably were used by the later neolithic peoples.\n\nFather Maglioni noted that villages were usually located on the western hill slopes below the summit. This village siting is paralleled in Hong Kong and was done to provide shelter from the strong northeast monsoon winds. He also reported that \"Double-F\" pottery was not much in evidence in Hoifung. He concluded that this type of pottery had been imported from Hong Kong by sea.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204915,
        "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-1965",
        "page_number": 23,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "18\n\nS. G. DAVIS\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\n1. Bard, S. M., Chiu, T. N., and So, C. L. \"Stone Ring at Loh Ah Tsai, Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, VIII.\n\n2. Ch'en Kung-che (1957). \"Archaeological Surveys and Excavations at Hong Kong,\" Kao Koo Hsueh Po, No. 4.\n\n3. Davis, S. G. (1952). The Geology of Hong Kong (Archaeology), Government Printers, Chapter XI, pp. 188-194.\n\n4. Davis, S. G. and Tregear, M. (1961). \"Man Kok Tsui. Archaeological Site, 30, Lantau Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, IV.\n\n5. Davis, S. G. (1962). \"Hong Kong University Team Archaeological Activities for Period 1958-61,\" Asian Perspectives, V, 53.\n\n6. Davis, S. G. (1964). \"Rock Carvings at Shek Pik, Lantau Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, VII, 19-21.\n\n7. Finn, D. J. (1933-1936). \"Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, Reprinted 1958, Ricci Hall Publications, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.\n\n8. Heanley, C. M. (1928). \"Hong Kong Celts,\" Bull. Geol. Soc. of China, VII, 209-214.\n\n9. Heanley, C. M. and Shellshear, J. L. (1932). A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hong Kong and the New Territories.\n\n10. Heanley, C. M. (1935). \"Fields of Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, VI, 233-239.\n\n11. Heanley, C. M. (1938). \"Letter to the Editor on Archaeological Finds in Hoifung,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, IX.\n\n12. Laufer, B. (1909). Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty, American Museum of Natural History Publication, East Asiatic Committee.\n\n13. Laufer, B. (1914). Chinese Clay Figures, Part I, Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 154.\n\n14. Laufer, B. (1917). The Beginnings of Porcelain in China, Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 192, Anthropological Series, XV, No. 2.\n\n15. Lo, H. L. (1956). \"The Sung Wong Toi and the Location of the Travelling Courts by the Seashore in the Last Day of the Sung,\" Journal of Oriental Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2, 185-217.\n\n16. Maglioni, R. (1938). \"Archaeological Finds in Hoifung District, China,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, No. 8, 208-214.\n\n17. Maglioni, R. (1940). \"Archaeology: New Nomenclature,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, X, No. 2, 130-133.\n\n18. Maglioni, R. (1940). \"Some Aspects of South China Archaeological Finds,\" Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, 209-229.\n\n19. Maglioni, R. (1952). \"Archaeology in South China,\" Journal of East Asiatic Studies, No. 2, University of Manila, Philippine Islands, 1-20.\n\n20. Meanelly, E. (1962). \"Excavations at Man Kok Tsui on Lantau Island,\" Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 2, 103-108.\n\n21. Schofield, W. (1935). \"Implements of Palaeolithic Type in Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, VI, Nos. 3-4, 272-275.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205395,
        "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": 157,
        "title": "RAS-1967",
        "content_text": "150\n\nLIN SHU-YEN\n\nfamilies the men and women were in their fifties. In the third, the son, who is about thirty, did most of the work.\n\nThe leaching process, Lin tells us, was carried out mainly by natives of Lantau Island and was the only method inherited from their remote ancestors. In 1962 I was able to speak to an old lady who came in 1898 at the age of 16 to the village of Leung Uk, at the south-west edge of the salt pans, to be married to one of the villagers. She told me that men and women from the locality worked in the fields, some of them from Leung Uk. Not many people worked in the fields at that time, and they were operated by an outsider. The workers were paid on a piece work basis depending on their output, but it was customary for the company to advance money for daily food and deduct the sum from the final wage.\n\nFor how long the local village people, as opposed to outsiders, carried out the work on the salt-pans is not known. The Leung Uk settlement, since it is named after the Leung family, it is reasonable to suppose that they were the first inhabitants of the present settlement, was apparently settled about 1800. This estimate is based on calculations from a genealogy which also states that the first ancestor came to Tai O from a village near Shum Chun Market to the north of the present Sino-British frontier. These people are Hakkas. The other villages in the Tai O basin, adjacent to the market town, are the similar small settlements of Nam Chung, San Tsuen, and Wang Hang, and it is unlikely that they are earlier than Leung Uk. At the 1911 Colony census, the population of these three small villages was recorded at 50, 42, and 90 respectively, whilst the population of Leung Uk was 104 persons. There were other, larger villages a little further afield, and some of their inhabitants may also have worked at the pans.\n\nSince writing the above, I have chanced upon a note in The Hong Kong Naturalist, also in Vol X (1940), by Father R. Maglioni, the noted archaeologist, in which he offers some comments upon Lin's article and an earlier one by Dr. C. M. Heanley on some of the problems connected with local, i.e., Hong Kong archaeology. He writes:\n\n\"About the furnaces described by Dr. Heanley in The Hong Kong Naturalist (Vol. VI, Nos. 3-4), I must confess that I am not",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205396,
        "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": 158,
        "title": "RAS-1967",
        "content_text": "SALT MANUFACTURE IN HONG KONG\n\n151\n\nwell acquainted with the Hong Kong area, and never saw those remains. In Hoifung I did not find any furnace or anything which could be referred to an ancient salt industry. In China the manufacture of salt has been of the greatest importance from the most ancient time. In the salt-lake districts (Shansi, Shensi, Kansu and Mongolia) the heat of the sun causes the salt to crystallise at the edge of the lakes and in some cases on the surface of the water. In Yunnan and Szechwan the brine is drawn up from the salt-wells and boiled in cauldrons. Boiling is rare in other provinces. At the sea-coast the salt-pan system is generally in vogue.\n\nIn the last issue of the Hong Kong Naturalist (Vol. X, No. 1) Mr. S. Y. Lin has published a good article on salt manufacture in Hong Kong. In Hoifung both the leaching and the ordinary method are practiced; at the bay of Tchanki.... the former is more common, and at the bay of Swabue only the latter is in use. The salt produced by the leaching method is somewhat refined; it is freer from soil and in fine crystals and is required therefore for kitchen use; but its production needs much more work and its price is greater, too. The salt produced by the ordinary system is coarser and more impure and is chiefly used for pickling and salting fish. People say that the latter salt is more bitter than the former. If this statement is true we must suppose that the mother-water is more easily over-saturated in the ordinary salt-pan method, so that magnesium sulphate can be produced along with sodium chloride. As here the salt season is principally in the dry autumn and winter and from mother-water saturated at over than 32°5 Baumé during cool nights the magnesium sulphate easily crystallises, likely much of our salt is really a mixed-salt.\n\nNowhere in our province, as far as I know, the boiling system is now in use, except occasionally by boat-men when it is impossible to buy salt. Here fuel is very expensive and scarcely sufficient for domestic purposes. Moreover, I note that on the granitic rocks at the sea-shore salt easily crystallises; ancient people may have collected it and so learned how to manufacture salt. Even at the present time some people gather salt by sweeping it from the rocks. However, the note of Dr. Heanley suggests a new field of research; indeed, many of our prehistoric sites are near modern salines or in a good position for salt-works.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1967.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/0c488p70g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205766,
        "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-1969",
        "page_number": 72,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "66\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nsmall plateau averaging some 10 to 12 metres above sea level. This is a plane of marine denudation dating from a time when the sea level stood 12 metres higher than now, perhaps during the last great inter-glacial period (Riss-Würm), some 100,000 years ago. From this lower area much less clay could be washed than from the higher and steeper hill to the north; and the gentler wave-action on the west beach, normally on the lee of the island, made it about five times as long as that on the east of the isthmus, with very few large boulders. Somewhere on the west side of the 12 metres terrace, between about 1100 and 1500 A.D., there was at one or more times a small settlement, perhaps no more than one or two fishermen's huts; for at this point on the west beach are found pieces of Sung and even Ming pottery lying on the beach and in the cliff, which here is largely built up of coarse rainwash from the hill behind. There is, however, no modern settlement and no cultivation, and the island appears to be used only by boat-people, either for fishing or for burial of their dead; for on one visit Prof. Shellshear, who was with me, discovered a human skeleton of recent date two feet below the top of the sand cliff.\n\nMETHOD OF INVESTIGATION\n\nThe site was first discovered and investigated by Dr. Heanley and Prof. Shellshear, who worked together from about 1925 in looking for sites showing early human occupation. Much of what they found lay on the surface of the beaches, but wherever possible they noted the depth from the soil surface of objects found in the sand cliffs. Part of their material was presented later to the British Museum, and some to Mr. Eumorfopoulos and others, but the rest seems to have disappeared during the war in 1941 when the Hong Kong University was wrecked. Their code number for the site was 123, which points to a comparatively later discovery: the Tai Wan site on Lamma, for example, is numbered 83.\n\nThe technique employed by the writer at Tung Kwu was as follows. Objects not found in situ were collected and the initials of the site were painted on them in Chinese ink. If a single object was found in situ, its depth from the surface was measured in inches or centimetres; it was extracted; the depth and initials of the site were written on it or its wrapping paper, and later were recorded in Chinese ink on the specimen. In 1935, by which",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205781,
        "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-1969",
        "page_number": 87,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "TUNG KWU ISLAND\n\n81\n\ninfluence is provided by the recent discovery (in 1968) of a Shang-style stone ko (dagger-axe) on Sha Chau in association with the same soft pottery. The affinity between the decoration on the pottery of Sha Chau and Tung Kwu and Shang pottery is therefore rather stronger than Mr. Schofield's last sentence in the present article suggests. Perhaps his statement made thirty years ago in his classic report on the Shek Pik site remains true: \"From the earliest period to which the Hong Kong culture can be dated a trace of Chinese influence is present.\"\n\n++\n\nPre-war writings on Hong Kong Archaeology include:\n\n(1) J. G. Andersson — “Topography of the Hongkong Sites\" in Bulletin No. 11, Topographical and Archaeological Studies in the Far East, of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, Stockholm, 1939.\n\n(2) S. F. Balfour Section II, \"Archaeological Evidence\" at pp. 336-341 of his article \"Hong Kong Before The British” between pp. 330-352 and 440-464 of T'ien Hsia Monthly, Shanghai, 1941.\n\n(3) Fr. D. J. Finn — various articles in The Hong Kong Naturalist between 1933-36. These are now reprinted in (ed. T. F. Ryan, S.J.) Archaeological Finds On Lamma Island (Akhio) Near Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Ricci publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, 1958.\n\n(4) C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear \"A Contribution To The Prehistory Of Hongkong And The New Territories”, Praehistoria Asia Orientalis, I, Premier Congrès des Pré-historiens d'Extrême-Orient, Hanoi, 1932.\n\n(5) W. Schofield — \"Implements Of Palaeolithic Type In Hong Kong\" at pp. 272-275, The Hong Kong Naturalist, December, 1935.\n\n(6) W. Schofield — \"The Proto-Historic Site Of The Hong Kong Culture At Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong\" at pp. 235-305 of Proceedings of the Third Congress of Pre-historians of the Far East, Singapore, Government Printing House, 1940.\n\nA photograph of Mr. Schofield taken at Tung Kwu by Professor Shellshear on 9 December, 1931 is at Plate 9. Ed.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206620,
        "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": 168,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "162 \n\nW. SCHOFIELD \n\nthought to be older than the Han dynasty (210 B.C.). It was known to have been conquered by the First Emperor and added to China, but even history is silent on it prior to that time (220 B.C.). Hence its prehistory lay shrouded in almost darkness, with only a few vague traditions and scanty ethnographic and linguistic data to shed light upon it. \n\nThe first beginnings of enquiry into the pre-Chinese culture of South China date back to about 1926 when Dr. Heanley, then investigating the geology of Hong Kong as an amateur, noticed lying here and there on hills of gravelly clay formed from decayed granite, stones which could not have been formed and left there naturally, and which clearly had the shape of stone adzes, as a rule smoothed and polished. Realising the importance of these finds, he devoted much of his leisure to a careful search for more of them, and in so doing discovered a number of sites, which included an axe factory, a workshop for jewellers working in quartz and other stones, and shore settlements, presumably of fishermen, as well as hill settlements. In this work he was associated with Prof. Shellshear, of Hong Kong University, and shortly before leaving Hong Kong in 1930 he interested me in the subject. I had for some time been investigating the geology of the Colony, and started this new line in association with Dr. Heanley and Prof. Shellshear. My contribution consisted mainly in discovering new sites, chiefly in sandbanks on the coasts and islands of the New Territory. Special attention was paid to these for two reasons; first, the beaches were being vigorously dug for sand to be used in building and public works; second, these sandbanks were the only places where a succession of layers containing objects of different ages could be found. As no beds of limestone exist in the Colony, it was vain to look for caves. \n\nIn my explorations I had occasion to examine a beach site discovered by Dr. Heanley on the island of Lamma close to Hong Kong. This had been dug back a considerable distance further, and I saw, littered over the beach, vast quantities of pottery, with more projecting from the sandy cliff behind. One piece of a cup I found was covered with a bottle-green glaze, a ware which was later found to be a feature of the culture at this and several other sites in Hong Kong. Later visits to the site revealed that bronze weapons and tools were to be found in fair number; in addition, rings of",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206626,
        "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": 174,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "168\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nEditor's Note The manuscript breaks off abruptly at this point, and since it was passed to me after Mr. Schofield's death in December 1968 and I was hitherto unaware of its existence there is now no means of knowing whether it was completed or finished in part only. It is reproduced here for its interest as a contemporary statement of the progress of the archaeology of Hong Kong and South China by about 1938, when it was written, and for the useful account it provides of the part played by Schofield, Shellshear and Heanley in the early period of Hong Kong archaeological studies.\n\nPRE-WAR WRITINGS ON HONG KONG ARCHAEOLOGY INCLUDE:\n\n(1) J. G. Andersson — \"Topography of the Hongkong Sites\" in Bulletin No. 11, Topographical and Archaeological Studies in the Far East, of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, Stockholm, 1939.\n\n(2) S. F. Balfour Section II, “Archaeological Evidence\" at pp. 336-341 of his article \"Hong Kong Before The British\" between pp. 330-352 and 440-464 of T'ien Hsia Monthly, Shanghai, 1941. [Since reprinted in Vol. 10 (1970) of this Journal -Ed.]\n\n(3) Fr. D. J. Finn — various articles in The Hong Kong Naturalist between 1933-36. These are now reprinted in (ed. T. F. Ryan, S.J.) Archaeological Finds On Lamma Island (Ai》) Near Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Ricci publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, 1958.\n\n(4) C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear “A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hongkong and the New Territories\", Praehistoria Asia Orientalis, I, Premier Congrès des Préhistoriens d'Extrême-Orient, Hanoi, 1932.\n\n(5) W. Schofield — \"Implements Of Palaeolithic Type In Hong Kong\" at pp. 272-275, The Hong Kong Naturalist, December. 1935.\n\n(6) W. Schofield \"The Proto-Historic Site of the Hong Kong Culture at Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong\" at pp. 235-305 of Proceedings of the Third Congress of Pre-historians of the Far East, Singapore, Government Printing House, 1940.\n\nJ. W. H., Hong Kong, 1972.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215238,
        "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": 15,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "Police Force and was its chief information officer for the last seven years of his service. He is now the managing director of an IT services company. He is the Hon. Editor of JHKBRAS (peterhalliday@netvigator.com).\n\nPatrick Hase, B.A. Ph.D., is the current president of HKBRAS. He is a noted scholar and Hong Kong historian, and has written prolifically on the culture and history of Hong Kong (phhase@hkusua.hku.hk).\n\nJames Hayes, Ph.D., D.Litt.(Hon.), is a past-president of HKBRAS. He is a noted scholar and Hong Kong historian and has written several books, the most recent having been Friends and Teachers: Hong Kong and its People, 1953-87. He has contributed prolifically to JHKBRAS (mouse1@bigpond.com).\n\nProfessor Anthony Headley, B.B.S., J.P., M.D., F.R.C.P. (Lond., Edin., Glas.), F.F.P.H.M., F.H.K.C.C.M., F.H.K.A.M., F.A.C.E., D. Soc. Med., was trained in the medical schools of Aberdeen and Edinburgh and formerly worked in endocrinology and internal medicine before moving to the field of public health medicine. In 1983 he was appointed to the chair of public health in the University of Glasgow and since 1988 has been Professor of Community Medicine in Hong Kong and honorary consultant to the Hong Kong Department of Health and to the Hospital Authority. The involvement of four graduates of his alma mater, Aberdeen University, including Kai Ho Kai, in the founding of the Hong Kong College of Medicine for Chinese in 1888, has stimulated his interest in their many contributions to several aspects of educational, social, and political developments in Hong Kong in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. (commed@hkucc.hku.hk)\n\nKo Tim-keung is a council member of HKBRAS and a keen researcher into Hong Kong history.\n\nRosemary Lee spent thirty years abroad in Pakistan, Switzerland, Iran, and Hong Kong. During this time she was able to indulge her interest in archaeology and in Hong Kong was one of a team of Antiquities and Monuments Office volunteers. She was a member of the Archaeological and Palaeontological Committee and Programme and Events Organiser of the Council of the HK Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. On returning to England, she became Co-Events Organiser of the Friends of HKBRAS, as well as becoming actively involved with the Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford (rosemary.lee@talk21.com).\n\nDr. Alfred H.Y. Lin, B.A., M.Phil. (Hong Kong), Ph.D. (London), was trained as an historian at the University of Hong Kong and the School of Oriental and African Studies (London). He is currently an associate professor of modern Chinese history at HKU. His research focuses on the history of South China, particularly Guangzhou politics and society in the 1920s and 1930s. He recently published an article entitled The Founding of the University of Hong Kong: British\n\nPage 15\nPage 16",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    }
]