[
    {
        "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": 204494,
        "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": 126,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "A NEW ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE\n\n111\n\nMaglioni continued archaeological work further afield. After his death, Maglioni roughly outlined the area of their researches and designated it as the Han-Chu region, naming it this because it is bounded by the Han and Teng Rivers in the East and the Chu (or Pearl River) and Tung in the West.\n\nMaglioni divided the neolithic era into three main periods, to each of which he assigned one of the cultures he found. SON was early neolithic, SAK was middle neolithic, and PAT was late neolithic.* All three names were taken from parts of the names of the villages nearest to the sites where the cultures were first discovered.\n\nThe stone artifacts that I have found are typical of the middle neolithic era, and they also closely resemble the SAK artifacts in the Maglioni collection. They differ strikingly from the PAT materials found in the Western part of the Colony. Unlike the latter, they are almost exclusively made of chert. They are also cruder and less sophisticated, with traces of chipping left in spite of the polishing, as if the chipping had been too deep. The cutting edge of the axes as well as the adzes is not bevelled as in the case of those from Lamma and Lantao. They are almost all longer in shape and narrower, not as thick in cross-section as the latter, and to my unpractised eye, they resemble more the stone artifacts displayed in the Hong Kong University Museum from Annam and Laos.\n\nThe most typical element of SAK culture is its pottery, which is a fine ware of smooth mix and is stamped with a variety of patterns, the most common one being a basket weave and others including a herring-bone and concentric circles. The pots are of a small size (perhaps because the SAK people were nomadic), globular in shape, with a shallow ring-like foot, which was added after the pots had been shaped and stamped. They were frequently decorated with an equatorial band in bas-relief as well as other bands above and below it. These bands were also added after the pot had been shaped and stamped. The SAK potters made great progress in both preparing and baking the clay. Maglioni says: \"They utilized clays which received their bright colour when fired, added little or no sand, made very thin ware,\n\n\"PAT appears to have continued uninterruptedly from the stone age into historic times,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204495,
        "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": 127,
        "title": "RAS-1962",
        "content_text": "112\n\nM. W. WELCH\n\nand improved the primitive method of firing so much that well-shaped vessels of fairly hard clay, which may be considered as ancestors of porcellaneous ware, were actually produced. Supports of refractory clay evidently used for the pots in the kiln are proof of this great progress.\n\nThe pottery found in site I and II is pretty uniform in composition and appearance, and I would say typical of SAK. The mixture of clay is very fine; the potsherds quite thin and hard. When struck they give off a fairly fine \"ping\". So far, no other kind of pottery has been found on the sites. There has, for instance, been none of the rough and sandy ware found on Lamma and Lantao, which is crumbly and very thick.\n\n44\n\nOn the potsherds I have found, there are three types of SAK pressed patterns. Though there are no complete pots, I have been able to put together enough of one to conclude that it was fashioned in the same manner as those found by Maglioni in the Hoi-fung area: the pot shaped and patterned first, the foot added later.\n\nPerhaps the most interesting aspect of my site is what I have not found. There has, for instance, been no bronze. Maglioni makes the point that absolutely no bronze or other objects belonging to a metallic period have been discovered in any of the pure SAK sites. Nearby, however, he came upon numerous large villages of the later (PAT) period, often with bronze pieces, and he has a theory that the spreading of the PAT culture was the reason for the dispersion of the SAK people.\n\nI have found nothing that can be assigned to PAT. This is in contrast to other sites in Hong Kong, where a few SAK pieces have been found, but always mixed in with a much larger number of PAT artifacts. My sites are not only rich in SAK, both implements and pottery, but they are pure SAK. They are, indeed, the first pure SAK sites to be found in the Colony.\n\nThere are two other things I want to mention. One is the type of very roughly shaped large tools that I have found in groups on all three sites near kaolin deposits, frequently embedded in a lump of hardened kaolin. I have tentatively separated these tools into eight categories according to their shape. Five are\n\n“Archaeology in South China\" by Raphael Maglioni, University of Manila Journal of East Asiatic Studies, Vol. II, No. 1 October, 1952.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204906,
        "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": 14,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "9\n\n# ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY IN AND\n\n## AROUND HONG KONG\n\nA lecture delivered on 15th February, 1965\n\nS. G. DAVIS\n\nThe exhibition of neolithic finds in our City Hall has for the first time brought together the choicest specimens from the collections of Rev. Fr. D. J. Finn S.J., who concentrated his main work on Lamma Island, Rev. Fr. R. Maglioni who worked along the Kwangtung coast around Swabue, and the University of Hong Kong Archaeological Team that excavated at Man Kok Tsui on Lantau Island. The sites were all dug carefully and have fortunately been written-up in detail and published. But they represent a very small fraction of the total number of sites that have been recorded together with those not so far discovered in this part of South China.\n\nMany sites have only been examined cursorily and there is still very much work to be done with well-organized \"digs\". Unfortunately many sites have suffered and many finds have been lost through free-lance enthusiasts with varying degrees of competence not working systematically and not keeping detailed records.\n\nThe vast amount of pottery and artifacts already found in this area certainly indicates the population in neolithic times was considerable and that there were well-established communications throughout. The types of materials used, the quality of design and the workmanship also point to a civilization that was highly cultured and organized.\n\nIt is strange that neolithic archaeology in China was neglected or barely known until the present century. Berthold Laufer claimed in his Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty (12) that the first mention of Han pottery in European literature was made by S. W. Bushell in his book Oriental Ceramic Art (New York,\n\nEditor's note: Numbers in parentheses in the text are references to fuller particulars on specific book titles in the bibliography which accompanies the article.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204910,
        "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": 18,
        "title": "RAS-1965",
        "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY\n\n13\n\nof conventionalized T'ao T'ieh is also highly prized. There are also fine specimens of both glazed and unglazed pottery decorated with the \"Double-F\" pattern, a design thought to be unique in the Hong Kong area and not so far found elsewhere, even around Canton. The design was quite new to such an eminent authority as Professor Paul Pelliot. Much study and conjecture was given to this design by Father Finn (7).\n\nApart from exhibits of Lamma archaeology at the British Museum and locally at the City Hall and the Fung Ping Shan Museum there are other smaller ones held in Ricci Hall (a University Hostel) and the University Team Working Centre. Further away there are collections in Honolulu at the Bishop Museum and at Harvard University. There are without doubt also many other good private collections that have not been recorded,\n\nFollowing the historical sequence of discovery in and around Hong Kong come the Hoifong sites located about eighty miles away in northeast Kwangtung. All these sites are fairly close to the indented coastline and near well-established ports such as Swabue.\n\nIt was a student in the Jesuit Seminary at Aberdeen (Hong Kong Island) who first reported the presence of remains in Hoifong that were similar to those in the Seminary collection. He brought several pieces to Father Finn who was soon convinced that he should visit the area for an on-the-spot examination. This he did in 1934 and very quickly established the fact that there were many rich sites with remains probably the same in age and culture as those in Hong Kong, especially Lamma.\n\nFather Maglioni, an Italian priest in the Pontifical Institute of the Milan Foreign Mission accompanied Father Finn on much of his fieldwork, especially around Swabue where he was stationed in a Catholic Mission. During this time he learned much from Father Finn and when Father Finn died it was natural that he should continue collecting and studying the remains.\n\nFather Maglioni modestly proclaimed himself as being strictly an amateur archaeologist without any scientific training. However, while this amateur status was correct, when he took over",
        "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": 205775,
        "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": 81,
        "title": "RAS-1969",
        "content_text": "TUNG KWU ISLAND\n\n75\n\nnon-liquid food such as grain, nuts or fruit, or for holding food of some sort for the use of the dead, who would not be likely to find their food jars dissolving in their graves. The use of the net pattern with what were probably magic signs in each mesh may indicate that such jars were funerary vessels, covered with watching eyes or other patterns to repel demons from seizing and carrying off the food. (See R. Maglioni “Some Aspects of South China Archaeological Finds\" in Proceedings, Third Congress of Far East Pre-historians). The variety of patterns is illustrated in Plate 8.\n\nThe distribution of ornamented sherds in depth and locality presents some interesting points. In my collection, there are 33 such pieces. 16 were picked off the beach at unrecorded spots; the others were found in known stretches of beach, indicated on the sketch-map, or in situ at measured depths in the sand. It was not always easy to decide either the nature or the purpose of the designs inside the meshes, but round raised studs were probably ‘eyes', and most other designs were perhaps 'life-giving' or occasionally 'phallic'. A few were indeterminable: these were raised ridges in meshes of rhombic shape, or so shapeless that no conclusion could be drawn.\n\nFour designs of each type came from known depths, and four were found in the I, J, L, and M sectors. One, as well as four loose pieces with ‘eye' patterns, came from C sector. No real conclusion can be drawn from the recorded depths with so few specimens, except that the patterns seem to have been equally fashionable throughout the occupation of the site. From other sites, however, notably Sha Chau, a mile or two south of Tung Kwu, I got the impression that the raised stud in a single-line, square-net pattern was more popular when the upper layers of the sandbank formation were deposited.\n\nThe lines of the netting on the sherds differ in number from one to four, and the angles of the meshes are either right angles, enclosing squares, or obtuse and acute angles, enclosing rhombs. Of the square-meshed nets, only four are from known depths, none lower than 122 cm., and there are three with one line round the meshes and one with three. The rhombic net impressions are much commoner than the square in the pottery found at measured levels: 16 as against 4. Nets of one and three lines show average depths of 111 cm., those of two lines—much commoner—average 170 cm.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 206612,
        "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": 160,
        "title": "RAS-1972",
        "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGY IN H.K. AND SOUTH CHINA\n\n163\n\nquartz and jade, and stone beads, adzes and lance heads were discovered. Some of the pottery bore makers' marks, which seemed in some cases to resemble archaic Chinese characters. To deal with the problems raised by these and the ornaments on much of the pottery, the chief of which was a symbol resembling a long f and showing several variations, Prof. Shellshear invited the collaboration of the late Father Finn, S.J., a distinguished scholar in the Regional Seminary at Aberdeen, Hong Kong, and a lecturer at the University of Hong Kong. Father Finn devoted himself thenceforward to a careful study of this site and its culture, and published thirteen papers in the Hong Kong Naturalist on the subject, basing his work on a profound study of archaeological literature in neighbouring countries, Japan, China, Indo-China, the Straits and elsewhere.*\n\nThis study was greatly aided by the decision of the Hong Kong Government to have the site excavated at its own expense. In five weeks' work about half the undug portion of the sandbank was excavated to a depth of 6 to 7 feet, and some thousands of pottery fragments, a large number of other objects of stone, quartz, jade, bronze and even two or three partly of iron, were unearthed. Father Finn conducted this excavation, and included the description of the results in his articles.\n\nFather Finn also worked at other sites on Lamma and Hong Kong islands, and during visits to St. John's Island (where St. Francis Xavier died), and the Swabue district near Swatow, discovered more sites. The latter district gave very interesting and important results, which have recently been outlined in a paper by Father Maglioni in the Hong Kong Naturalist.\n\nIn 1932 Professor Shellshear brought the facts then known about Hong Kong's prehistory before the scientific world at the Prehistorians' Congress at Hanoi, whose proceedings were published by the École Française d'Extrême Orient as the Praehistorica Asiae Orientales (Hanoi, 1932). Father Finn summed up the results of his work at the Lamma Island site at the Manila Congress of the same body in 1935.†\n\n* A list of publications on local pre-history that includes those mentioned at various places in this article can be found at the end.\n\n† Whose proceedings were not published. I have Mr. Schofield's notes and can make them available to anyone who may wish to consider filling a gap in our published records.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h",
        "rank": 0
    }
]