[
    {
        "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": 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": 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": 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": 204916,
        "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": 24,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY\n\n19\n\n22. Schofield, W. (1938). \"The Proto-historic Site of the Hong Kong Culture at Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, 235-305.\n\n23. Schofield, W. (1938). \"Report of Ancient Beads Found Near Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore,\n\n24. Seligman, C. G. (1935). \"Early Pottery from Southern China,\" Transactions, Oriental Ceramic Society, London,\n\n25. Shellshear, J. L. (1928). \"Pottery Associated with Bronze Implements from Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Proto-historic Sciences, London,\n\n26. Weinberger, W. (1949). \"Some Notes on Early Pottery and Stone Artifacts Excavated on Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" Transactions, Oriental Ceramic Society.\n\n27. Welch, M. W. (1962). “A New Archaeological Site in Hong Kong,\" Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 2, 109-114.\n\n28. Yuen, P. L. (1928). \"Review of the Hong Kong Neolithic Collection,\" Bull. Geol. Soc. of China, VII, Nos. 3-4, 215-220.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "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": 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
    }
]