[
    {
        "id": 204250,
        "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-1961",
        "page_number": 18,
        "title": "RAS-1961",
        "content_text": "Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong Branch\n\nRASHKB and author\n\nVol. 1 (1961)\n\nISSN 1991-7295\n\n15\n\nEgypt had sailed through the Red Sea, and keeping the land on their right had rounded Africa and returned through the Straits of Gibraltar; on the way they had found that the sun appeared for a time on the north side.\n\nA hundred years later, after Egypt had fallen into his hands, Alexander had founded the city of Alexandria on the western side of the delta of the Nile. The city was destined to become the second city of the Roman Empire. Connected by canal with the Red Sea, and making use of the newly understood monsoon winds (A.D. 47) for crossing the Arabian Sea, it became the chief port of the maritime trade with Persia, India, and the regions beyond.\n\nReferences to this maritime trade exist in the Chinese histories as well as in the writings of the Greeks. In A.D. 97 a Chinese envoy, Kan Ying, travelling from Central Asia reached the shores of the Persian Gulf, and was informed by the seamen whom he met that the sea-route from the Gulf proceeded first south-west and then north-west to the port of Wu-ch'ih-san (Alexandria), the return journey taking three months with favourable winds, and two years with unfavourable winds.\n\nThe Chinese records speak of the Persians and the Indians trading by sea with Ta-ts'in (the Chinese name for the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire: Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor) and of the fact that the profits were ten-fold.\n\nThey speak also of traffic between India and China by sea, and record that in A.D. 120 two jugglers who claimed to have come from the Roman Orient (Ta-ts'in) reached Burma, and were sent by the king of Burma as a present to the Emperor of China, via the Burma Road.\n\nAbout the same time a book was written by an unknown Greek sailor called The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea giving a port-to-port description of the voyage down the Red Sea and around the Indian Ocean to the Malay Peninsula (The Land of Gold) 'under the very rising of the sun, with a notice of China beyond.\n\nShortly after this in the 2nd century A.D. the Geography of Ptolemy was written at Alexandria, where Ptolemy gathered together and systematized all that was known to the Western world about Asia and Africa. In particular he plotted the longitude and latitude of the places known, which when transferred to a modern map give surprisingly accurate results, reaching to China itself.\n\nFrom this time notices of the sea-route increase, both on the Greek and on the Chinese side. The Chinese histories in particular show a rapidly increasing knowledge in the early",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1961.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/vd6724704",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 204251,
        "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-1961",
        "page_number": 19,
        "title": "RAS-1961",
        "content_text": "Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong Branch\n\nRASHKB and author\n\n16\n\nVol. 1 (1961)\n\nISSN 1991-7295\n\nChristian centuries of the new states of South-east Asia, formed under Indian influence in Indo-China, Indonesia and the Malay Peninsula.\n\nDuring the Middle Ages the navigation of the Southern Seas was in the hands of the Arabs. But after the rounding of the Cape, direct contact between Europe and the East by sea was restored. It was mainly by the sea-route that India, China, and South-east Asia became known to modern Europe. In this the Portuguese navigators played an all-important part. Passing over the rivalries of the Western nations we come to the days of the East India Company.\n\nIn India the Moghul empire had reached its height, fine examples of its art remaining in the Moghul architecture of Pakistan and North-west India, and Moghul miniature painting. But with the Moghul Moslem law had come to India, and it was soon recognized by the East India Company that the study of Moslem languages was necessary for the government of India. So Islamics now became part of the study of India as of Persia.\n\nIn 1783 Sir William Jones, a brilliant linguist who had mastered Persian and Arabic during his student days in England, was appointed Judge of the Supreme Court of Judicature in Bengal. In 1784 he proposed the forming of the Asiatic Society of Bengal and became its first President. Becoming aware of the importance of Sanskrit, he became the founder of Sanskrit studies in the West. In accordance with Warren Hastings' decision in 1776 that Indians should be ruled by their own laws, he undertook the immense task of compiling a complete digest of Moslem and Hindu law, a task which he left unfinished at his death eleven years later.\n\nIt was from India that the Western study of Tibet commenced, initiated by Catholic missionaries, of whom the most eminent was Desideri who lived for many years in the great Sera monastery at Lhasa, and wrote the first comprehensive account of Tibet.\n\nMeantime the Jesuit missionaries had proceeded eastwards in the wake of the Portuguese to Malacca, Macau and Japan. It was from Macau that Matthew Ricci entered China in 1580 and in course of time reached Peking, where a beginning was made in the study of the Chinese Classics and Histories, which led to the first real knowledge of Chinese civilization in the West. It was now realized that the 'China' at the end of the sea-route was the same as Marco Polo's 'Cathay'.\n\nAt the beginning of the nineteenth century modern Sinology commenced with Robert Morrison at Canton, and continued with a number of able scholars, too numerous to mention here, of whom James Legge with his translation of the Chinese Classics into",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1961.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/vd6724704",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205646,
        "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-1968",
        "page_number": 188,
        "title": "RAS-1968",
        "content_text": "DAWSON, Raymond, ed.\n\nTHE LIBRARY\n\nThe legacy of China. Oxford, Clarendon P., 1964.\n\nDEBNICKI, Aleksy.\n\n183\n\nThe Chu-shu-chi-nien (+) as a source to the social history of ancient China. Warszawa, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1956.\n\nDEGROOT, J. J. M.\n\nThe religion of the Chinese. New York, Macmillan, 1912.\n\nDE MOUBRAY, G. A. de C.\n\nMatriarchy in the Malay Peninsula and neighbouring countries. London, Routledge, 1931.\n\nDER LING, Princess.\n\nTwo years in the forbidden city. New York, Dodd, Mead, 1929.\n\nDRAKE, F. S., ed.\n\nSymposium on historical, archaeological and linguistic studies on Southern China, South-East Asia and the Hong Kong region: papers presented at meetings held in September 1961 as part of the Golden Jubilee Congress of the University of Hong Kong. F. S. Drake, general editor; Wolfram Eberhard, chairman of the proceedings. Hong Kong, University Press, 1967.\n\nEASTHAM, Barry C.\n\nChinese art ivory. Tientsin, Paradissis, 1940.\n\nEBERHARD, Wolfram.\n\nSettlement and social change in Asia. Hong Kong, University Press, 1967.\n\nECKE, Gustav.\n\nAtlantes and Caryatides in Chinese architecture. [Peking, Catholic University, 1930]\n\nEDWARDS, Richard.\n\nPine, hibiscus and examination failures. [Ann Arbor] Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan [1966]\n\nExtract from Michigan. University. Museum of Art. Bulletin, v.1, 1965/66.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1968.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/66833948d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 205989,
        "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-1970",
        "page_number": 69,
        "title": "RAS-1970",
        "content_text": "64\n\nCOLONEL V. R. BURKHARDT\n\nThe main points of Walker's report are that its location was the Happy Valley—now entirely built up—and that the plant on which the insect fed was Buddleia asiatica. Its flight resembled that of one of the Hesperiidae, and that it fed vibrating the wings all the time, with its long tails elevated and quivering. The earliest date he recorded it was on 15th February, 1892, and a fine series was taken on 12th March. In 1893 it was scarce, and did not appear before 2nd April.\n\nNothing is said about the larval stages, or the food plant, but Steven Corbet in his Butterflies of the Malay Peninsula, mentioning an allied species Leptocircus meges, states that its larva has been found in Hong Kong on Illigera cordata: in general appearance it is like a Papilio larva, being dark greenish-brown at first, and then changing to dark apple green. The pupa is attached to the upper surface of a leaf of the food plant.\n\nSince 1950 very few collectors in Hong Kong appear to have captured Lamproptera curius and only two instances have been brought to my notice prior to 1957. Lt. Col. J. Eliot took one female near Sai Kung on 2nd May, 1953, and another was secured by the wife of a member of the University staff.\n\nAll butterflies have their cycles of abundance and scarcity, though their incidence has yet to be determined, and 1957 was evidently a peak year for Lamproptera curius. Two collectors, Messrs. R. A. U. Todd and J. Hackney, on 9th June, found the insect swarming in a gully in the centre of the New Territories. Their description of the flight, like dragonflies, tallies with the observations of Commander Walker. The insects were feeding on wild buddleia, and rested between flights with spread wings on fern. Abundant larvae were also noted, but were not taken as they were thought to belong to one of the commoner Papilionidae. On a later visit on 6th July Mr. Todd brought in seven larvae in various stages, with an ample supply of the food plant. This is Illigera platyandra (Dunn) a tough vine with triple pointed leaves growing at intervals of about four inches. The larvae ranged in length from 9 mm to the full fed at 26 mm, which pupated on the following day.\n\nIn the early stages the larva is black over the thorax narrowing above the prolegs, and broadening out again over the tail. The",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1970.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ww72j0241",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207931,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1976",
        "page_number": 319,
        "title": "RAS-1976",
        "content_text": "304\n\nMay\n\n1\n\n22\n\n2 23\n\n3 24\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nEvacuation\n\nWandering, attachment of cremastral pad, etc.\n\nPupation occurs\n\nNote: the sizes of the larva, given in mm., were all taken when the larva was at rest; measurements taken for example, on the 21st (day 12) showed the larva to be 27-28 mm at rest and 33 mm when active. Similarly, measurements taken on the 28th (day 19) showed the larva to be 60 mm. at rest and 70 mm when active.\n\nPictorial Record of Larval Development\n\nThe coloured plates at the end of this volume are not to scale (refer to sizes shown in the Record of Larval Development):\n\n(a) Egg (approximately 2.5 mm Ø)\n\n(b) Freshly emerged larva eating its egg\n\n(c) Larva 2nd instar\n\n(d) Larva-late 2nd instar\n\n(e) Larva-early 3rd instar\n\n(f) Larva-early 4th instar\n\n(g) Larva-late 4th instar\n\n(h) Larva-late 4th instar showing transparent osmaterium\n\n(i) Larva-securing itself prior to pupation\n\n(j) Typical pupa. (The colour varies from light brown to green depending on the background colour of the plant on which the larva pupates).\n\n(k) 1\n\n(l) (m)\n\nemerging, expanding and drying its wings\n\n(n) Male imago\n\n(o) Female imago\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\n(1) New Records and a Check List of Butterflies from Hong Kong by Major J. N. Eliot (Memoirs of the H.K. Biological Circle, No. 2, Dec., 1953).\n\n(2) V.R. Burkhardt, \"Hong Kong Butterflies”, JHKBRAS 4 (1964): 97-104. \"A Hong Kong Butterfly\", JHKBRAS 10 (1970): 63-68.\n\n(3) Corbet and Pendlebury, The Butterflies of the Malay Peninsula (Kuala Lumpur, 1934).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208209,
        "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-1977",
        "page_number": 248,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "232\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nREPTILES NEW TO HONG KONG\n\nThe purpose of these notes is to record the occurrence of one species of gecko (Reptilia: Sauria: Gekkonidae) and three species of snakes (Reptilia: Serpentes: Colubridae) not hitherto known as part of the fauna of Hong Kong.\n\nHemidactylus brookii Gray\n\nDuring the first six months of 1978 three live adult specimens of these geckos were sent to me by Father Anthony Bogadek for identification. All three had been caught in the same locality in the Sai Ying Pun district on Hong Kong Island. The first two, both males, had been found outdoors behind a piece of building material lying against a brick wall, one in late September or early October 1977 and the other on 1 March 1978. The third specimen, a female, was found inside a school on 3 June 1978. There is no doubt that at least a localized population of Hemidactylus brookii is now established in Hong Kong.\n\nThe known geographical range of this species includes ‘India' [and therefore Pakistan and probably Bangladesh], Sri Lanka, and parts of Burma, extending southeastward into the East Indian Archipelago and Singapore; it is also widely distributed in the northern half of Africa, and has been introduced into the West Indies (Smith, 1935, p.91). Its occurrence in Thailand and the Malay Peninsula is not clear as, while Boulenger (1912, p.43) records it from the Malay Peninsula and Archipelago', Smith (loc. cit.) states that it is: ‘not yet known from Siam, French Indo-China, or the Malay Peninsula except Singapore. . . .’ As regards its occurrence in China, Smith (loc. cit.) remarks:\n\nthere are two specimens in the British Museum said to have come from China, both were obtained more than 80 years ago.... Recently (Anon., 1977), this gecko has been listed for Fukien and Chekiang provinces, but without other details.\n\nIn its habits, Hemidactylus brookii is equally at home inside buildings as it is out of doors. It is due to their close association with man that the geographical ranges of several species of house-geckos have been artificially extended very widely in warmer parts of the world.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208211,
        "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-1977",
        "page_number": 250,
        "title": "RAS-1977",
        "content_text": "234\n\nNOTES AND QUERIES\n\nmountains about Kuatun and Sanchiang.... It is secretive, hiding by day in the beds of the streams and apparently prowling by night.\" The only other record of the distribution of this species of which I am aware lists it for both Fukien and Chekiang (Anon., 1977).\n\nDoubtless the specimen found in a catchment channel near Shek Kong had been carried down with water collected from a stream at a higher altitude, most likely from Tai Mo Shan.\n\nREFERENCES\n\nAnonymous (Compiled by the Amphibians and Reptiles Research Department of The Biological Research Institute of Szechwan Province)\n\n1977 Systematic Keys to China's Reptiles. (In Chinese) Press, Peking.\n\nBoulenger, G. A.\n\n1912 A Vertebrate Fauna of the Malay Peninsula. Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London.\n\nPope, C. H.\n\n1935 The Reptiles of China. Natural History of Central Asia, Vol. 10. The American Museum of Natural History, New York.\n\nSmith, M. A.\n\n1935 Sauria. Reptilia and Amphibia, Vol. 2. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Taylor and Francis, London.\n\nHong Kong, 20 July 1978\n\nJ. D. ROMER\n\nTHE PUBLIC BOTANIC GARDEN OF HONG KONG\n\nSir John Bowring, Governor of Hong Kong from April 1854 to May 1859, was a Governor with wide interests. In his History of Hong Kong, George Endacott relates (pp. 104-105):\n\nHe cared for cultural things; he set up a museum in one of the rooms of the Supreme Court to the annoyance of the court officials, and he was the leader of the local branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. He was also very keen to set up a public Botanic Garden, and lectured to the Royal Asiatic Society in Hong Kong on its value in spreading knowledge of Chinese trees, woods and fibres.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1977.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/np198x23n",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 208937,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1980",
        "page_number": 99,
        "title": "RAS-1980",
        "content_text": "SILK & SILVER: MACAU, MANILA TRADE\n\n67\n\naffairs clandestinely. This greatly encouraged them to develop autonomous merchant communities with what amounted to extra-territorial rights. The most important of these Chinese merchant communities at the end of the 15th century was in Malacca.\n\nShips went to and from Malacca as far as India and China, trading in a wide variety of Indian and Chinese goods which were exchanged for the products of the Indonesian islands. Malacca, the \"city made for merchandise\", was essentially an entrepôt the very existence of which depended upon its carrying trade. It had an excellent and easily defensible harbour, protected on either side by the narrow straits between Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula and strategically placed, as Pires put it, at the end of one monsoon and the beginning of others. When Afonso de Albuquerque captured Goa in 1510 he was quick to see that Malacca's unrivalled position as an emporium and as a centre for the dissemination of Islam in South East Asia made it essential that he gain control of it also. He could thus fulfil Portuguese obligations to the Holy See and acquire a base for their commercial activities in the archipelago, in particular the carrying trade in spices and other precious goods from Indonesia to Goa and Lisbon in which the Portuguese sought to gain a share, if not a monopoly.\n\nAt the other end of the maritime area with which we are here concerned was another important trading centre. This was the Ryukyu Islands. The inhabitants of these islands, known to the Europeans as Lequeos or Loochoos, were actively engaged in the carrying trade between the northern and southern parts of the area from the 13th to the mid 16th century. The islanders carried to the south Chinese porcelain, silks and other textiles, metal goods and drugs, Japanese weapons and armour, lacquer and gold, all of which they exchanged for spices, aromatic woods, dyewoods and exotic beasts and birds from the Indonesian archipelago — goods that they could sell in China for several hundred times the buying price.2\n\nTechnically this trade with China remained an imperial monopoly and was carried out under the pretence of tribute. As Ming seapower dwindled and piracy in the China Seas accordingly grew, and as the Portuguese extended their trading activities in the years following their conquest of Malacca in 1511 into the Indonesian archipelago and beyond to the spice islands, to Timor and the Solor Islands, to Makassar and eventually to Macau—so the Ryukyu trade became increasingly circumscribed until it was con-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1980.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/kh04md207",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210338,
        "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-1984",
        "page_number": 309,
        "title": "RAS-1984",
        "content_text": "288\n\nJULIAN TENISON WOODS IN HONG KONG\n\nRODERICK O'BRIEN S. J.\n\nA century ago, the government and scientific elite of Hong Kong welcomed an unusual visitor; an Australian Catholic priest and scientist, Julian Edmund Tenison Woods, who passed through Hong Kong as part of an extensive scientific tour of south-east and east Asia. Woods is probably best known outside church circles for his scientific work, and despite limited formal training, he became an active scientist, publishing extensively in natural sciences, especially marine biology, botany, geology and paleontology.\n\nIn 1883, Woods was commissioned by the then Governor of the Straits Settlements, Sir Frederick Weld, to explore and report on the mineral prospects of some areas of the Malayan peninsula. During this time, he was elected an honorary member of our sister branch, the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, and two of his nearly two hundred publications are to be found in its journal. This expedition widened in scope, as he took advantage of opportunities to travel more widely, especially on the naval hydrographic ship HMS Flying Fish. Woods eventually returned to Australia in July 1886, after nearly three years research.\n\nDuring this time, he seems to have made four stops in Hong Kong:\n\nJanuary 1885: Hong Kong and Canton\n\nIn mid-January 1885, Woods arrived on the P & O steamer Hydastes from Singapore. He stayed first with the Governor, Sir George Bowen and then with Judge Russell.\n\nSir George arranged for him to lecture on The Mines and Minerals of the Malay Peninsula on 3 February 1885. During his introduction, Sir George expressed surprise at finding a priest involved in scientific pursuits, and his rather tactless remarks have been preserved in the full report which he sent the next day to the Earl of Derby at the Colonial Office:",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1984.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 210339,
        "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-1984",
        "page_number": 310,
        "title": "RAS-1984",
        "content_text": "289\n\nHere we have a practical proof that religion has no longer any fear of science. We see a Roman Catholic clergyman about to lecture on what was once considered the dangerous science of geology, and I am surprised we have not the Bishop ready to applaud him, but I am sure it must be owing to some accident that my friend Bishop Raimondi is not here today. (applause) In the sixteenth century, as we all know, the great astronomer Galileo was persecuted because he contended that the earth goes round the sun, and until quite lately geology was considered a more irreligious science than astronomy. This feeling was not confined to the Church of Rome. At the end of the last century an eminent Bishop of the Church of England ridiculed the pretensions of geologists — and we know that ridicule is often a more dangerous weapon than hatred; . . . by saying that for a man crawling on the face of the earth to pretend that he knew what was going on in the interior of our planet was like a gnat on the shoulder of an elephant pretending that it knew what was going on in the bowels of the huge animal. (laughter) But behold what progress! Here we have Mr. Woods, at the end of the nineteenth century, about to tell us living in Hong Kong what is going on in the bowels of the Malay Peninsula. (applause)\n\nDuring this visit, some time before 9 February, Woods managed to visit Canton for five days. There he met the British vice-Consul, Dr. H. F. Hance, with whom he shared an interest in botany, and membership of the Linnaean Society. He cited Hance's work in his own publications. When Woods returned to Hong Kong, he wrote to a friend in Australia:\n\nI had a little trouble in getting off to Canton. The war has upset everything, and the C. River is full of sunken ships and torpedoes, so that a special pilot is wanted to take one up, and he has to be obtained from the Chinese gunboats. However, I got up there and spent five days most pleasantly. I got all about the city without molestation except from the curiosity of the passers-by and the importunity of the beggars. My time went all the more pleasantly, as the Vice-consul is Dr. Hance F.L.S., the greatest authority we have on Chinese botany. He has a splendid herbarium and when tired of sightseeing in the city I",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1984.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/5h73wh572",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214757,
        "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-1999",
        "page_number": 172,
        "title": "RAS-1999",
        "content_text": "136\n\n13 Yip (1982): 94.\n\n15\n\nFigures on losses for the Battle of Crete include those of killed, wounded, captured and missing. Source: Arbeitskreis für Wehrforschung (1994)\n\nFigures on losses for the Battle of Hong Kong are those on casualties only, i.e. those of killed and wounded. Source: Ko and Wordie (1996)\n\n16 Figures on British losses are estimated by deducing total casualties in the Malaya campaign as reckoned by Leasor minus those losses incurred on the Malay Peninsula loss recorded by Liddell Hart. Japanese losses for the Battle of Singapore are those on casualties only, i.e, those of killed and wounded. Source: Leasor (1968); Liddell Hart (1970)\n\nhttp://www.crete.tournet.gr/crete-intro-Location_and_Size-15-en.html\n\n* Annual Report, Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Printer, 1938.\n\n19 Singapore Year Book, Singapore: Government Printing Office, 1965,\n\n20 According to Rollo (1992), this figure includes six x 18 pdr; six Lewis guns; two Bofors; four x 2 pdrs; eight x 4.5 inch guns; 23 x 3.7 inch guns. The total figure is very close to the numbers of field guns claimed to be captured by the Japanese: 47 guns.\n\n21 According to Rollo (1992), this figure includes three x 9.2 inch Mark VII; five x 9.2 in March V; 12 x 6 inch CP II; two x 6 inch naval; two x 4.7 inch; four x 4 inch naval; two x 60 pdrs guns. Most of these guns were in active use in the defence.\n\n2 Except those with asterisks, the references are those available in the University of Hong Kong Main Library and those quoted in Birch and Cole (1979); Tse (1995); and Ko and Wordie (1996).",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1999.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s178b887x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215666,
        "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": 443,
        "title": "RAS-2001",
        "content_text": "395\n\ncorrespondent for The Times in southeast Asia, having previously supplied articles to the paper on a freelance basis. One of the last to escape the invading Japanese, he reported the retreat along the Malay Peninsula and the last stand and surrender of the British garrison in Singapore on 15 February, 1942.\n\nAfter Singapore, Mr. Morrison went to Java before following the campaigns in the South West Pacific under General MacArthur, and later in Southeast Asia under Admiral Mountbatten.\n\nMr. Morrison was a courageous correspondent who never thought twice about entering a dangerous situation to get a good story. During the Second World War he spent a lot of time reporting from the front and shared the soldiers' life in the jungle. He regularly hitch-hiked on Australian or American army transport planes in order to follow the action and provide authentic accounts of the fighting with the Japanese. He often came close to death. In late November 1942 he was slightly injured during an air raid on the Buna front in Papua, and in December 1943 he was involved in a plane crash which resulted in head wounds and fractured vertebrae. This is how he telegraphed the paper:\n\n'Regret involved in airplane accident enroute obtain eyewitness operational full stop hospitalised injuries seriouser than yestertime hope recover soon Dickson Brown newschronicler kindly consented cover next three days thereafter Curthoys sorry disappoint you good story - Morrison'\n\nHis injuries on that occasion kept him out of action until July 1944, when he returned to cover the South East Area Command. He was not out of trouble for long. On 10 December 1945, while reporting from Batavia (now Jakarta) covering a local campaign he was again wounded and cabled the paper:\n\n'Left hospital today. Thumb, in which fragments of Dutch bullet are lodged, will take at least a fortnight to\n\nIan Morrison and family, circa 1950",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2001.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/zg651950g",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215769,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 68,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "1\n\nARTICLES\n\nTHE TRANSFER OF THE STRAITS SETTLEMENTS: A REVISIONIST APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF COLONIAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATION\n\nANDREW ABRAHAM\n\n[Hon. Ed. - The Straits Settlements was a former British crown colony on the Strait of Malacca, comprising four trade centres, Penang, Singapore, Malacca, and Labuan, established or taken over by the British East India Company. The British settlement at Penang was founded in 1786, at Singapore in 1819; Malacca, occupied by the British during the Napoleonic Wars, was transferred to the East India Company in 1824. The three territories were established as a crown colony in 1867. Labuan, which became part of Singapore Settlement in 1907, was constituted a fourth separate settlement in 1912.\n\nThe Straits colony, occupied by the Japanese during World War II, was broken up in 1946, when Singapore became a separate crown colony. Singapore attained full internal self-government in 1959, became a part of Malaysia in 1963, and became an independent republic in 1965. Labuan was incorporated in North Borneo (later Sabah) in 1946, which in turn became a part of Malaysia in 1963. Penang and Malacca were included in the Malayan Union in 1945, the Federation of Malaya in 1948, and Malaysia in 1963.]\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe Straits Settlements were transferred in 18671 to the Colonial Office's administration due to the dissatisfaction of the European merchants with the Indian government's rule. Their grievances were cited in a petition in 1857, the most contentious of which cover complaints of the East India Company's (EIC) attempts to introduce measures damaging to trade, problems with piracy and convicts, and failure of the Indian government to build up an influence in the Malay peninsula.\n\nHowever, a study of the history of the Straits Settlements shows evidence of a booming economy, many cases of intervention by the EIC in the affairs of the Malay states, and issues such as those concerning piracy, convicts and currency more or less resolved. Furthermore,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215770,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 69,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "Turnbull, an established historian, equivocally suggests that the transfer was based on an inaccurate and unbalanced feedback of the community's feelings:\n\nNo dissenting voice was raised in London and Calcutta, and the colonial office naturally had the impression that the demand for transfer was based on general dissatisfaction with rule from India, with the entire merchant body clamouring for change. In fact, it had required years of agitation on the part of Read, Woods and a small minority of enthusiasts in Singapore to arouse interest in the transfer, and apart from the brief period of panic in 1857 in when the petition was framed, the majority even of European merchants in Singapore were not actively in favour of the change, while the Asian merchants showed almost no interest in the movement.2\n\nIn spite of these conflicting points, I hold that the transfer was needed as the problems raised in the Straits merchants' petition were material and bona fide enough to necessitate the transfer of the administration from Calcutta to London. However, my essay attempts a revisionist's approach to the transfer controversy, questioning its necessity and examining its legal significance through an orchestration of the pot-pourri of relevant issues, in the hope that this methodology may help to provide a clearer awareness and legal understanding into this much taken for granted transfer, thus according it the new angle of attention it deserves.\n\nBackground history of the Straits Settlements3\n\nSingapore, Malacca and Penang were combined to form the Straits Settlements in 1826. The Straits Settlements became the fourth presidency of India, and remained an Indian dependency until 1867. The EIC obtained possession of Penang in 1786, as a base to protect the company's expanding China trade and a centre for the collection of Straits produce from the Malay peninsula and the eastern archipelago for shipment to China. When Singapore was founded in 1819, it was placed under the administration of Bencoolen (in Sumatra) where Raffles was lieutenant-governor. When he resigned and returned to England in 1823, Singapore was placed under the control of the Supreme Government of India. Singapore was ceded to the EIC in 1824 and",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215771,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 70,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "3\n\nbecame British territory. Malacca was administered by the Dutch until the signing of the Anglo-Dutch treaty in 1824, whereby it was ceded to the British among other terms. Two years later, Singapore and Malacca came under the Penang Presidency.\n\nAccording to Turnbull, the Straits Settlements were the East India Company's most incongruous offspring….The Straits Settlements formed a scattered unit, which was difficult to administer efficiently.” In legal terms, it included Western laws at constitutional level, and local legal systems under the control of sultans.\n\nPhysical/geographical problems\n\nPenang Island lay opposite Province Wellesley (a strip of land about 30 miles long and three miles wide) which the EIC acquired from the Sultan of Kedah in 1800. Malacca was about 260 miles to the south of Penang. Singapore Island was a further 120 miles south, at the tip of the Malay Peninsula.\n\nThere were problems of communication between these settlements, being only by means of sea. Until 1861, the Straits government possessed only two antiquated sailing gunboats and one steamer, used mainly to ferry the governor, recorders and senior officials between the three stations. Communications with the EIC's headquarters in Calcutta were also poor, and until 1864, a monthly steamer service between Calcutta and the Straits Settlements remained the only link with the seat of government.\"\n\nAdministration problems\n\nAccording to Turnbull, '[d]ivision of interest between the East India Company and its eastern dependencies was even more formidable than the geographical and physical problems of administration. The sole value of the Straits Settlements to the East India Company was to protect and stimulate the China trade. When [the EIC] lost its monopoly of this trade in 1833 Calcutta was left with an unrewarding and expensive burden. She could not abandon the Straits Settlements but constantly begrudged the drain they made upon India's financial resources and upon the time and attention of senior officials over the next thirty years.'",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215776,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 75,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "The EIC and relations with the Malay states\n\nIn the merchants' own words, 'The Supreme Government of India had uniformly discouraged the local Government at Singapore from interfering with matters beyond the limits of the Island. The cultivation of friendly relations with Native States and Chiefs has been neglected.'44 In this section, I will examine the merchants' reasons for this complaint, and also assess the accuracy of their claim. Rupert Emerson, a historian, calls the period during the Indian government's administration of the Straits Settlements 'a half-century of inactivity.' This is arguably the truth but not the whole truth, because DGE Hall, another historian, tends to disagree with Emerson's assertion. He says that 'one only has to glance through the many volumes of records relating to the period to realise that even if there was little or no spectacular achievement there was plenty of activity.' 'Even if by inactivity is meant the pursuit of non-intervention policy in native affairs, the term is misleading.\n\nPage 48\n\nThe Calcutta administration, wherever possible, adhered to a policy of strict non-intervention in the affairs of the Malay States. This policy had its roots in Pitt's India Act of 1784,49 which stipulated that the EIC's aim was peace, not interference in local politics or extension of the company's territories.50 The main reason for this policy was to avoid any form of entanglement in the internal troubles or wars of the Peninsula which could incur unnecessary expenses for the EIC,51 As it was, the EIC had lost its monopoly over the China trade in 1833 and, with this, the Straits Settlements ceased to be a source of direct profits, and were maintained at an annual loss.52\n\nPage 51\n\nYet despite the law on non-intervention, there was evidence that in some cases concerning threats to British interests, whether commercial, political or involving prestige, local administrators often found it necessary to intervene. In such cases, the actions were often condoned by the Supreme Government. Thus, there was a violation of Pitt's India Act (which eventually did lead to the change in British policy of non-intervention to intervention in 1874),54\n\nPage 53\n\nThio summarises the politico-legal scenario thus:\n\n...when responsibility for the Straits was transferred from the Government of India to the Colonial Office in 1867, the British were already bound by treaties with four of the five states south of Kedah, two of whom they\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215782,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 81,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "14\n\n8 ref. to the map of the Malay Peninsula\n\n9 under the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Alliance of 1800\n\n10 (Malacca's land area included the town and hinterland about 40 miles long, 25 miles wide)\n\n\"Turnbull, Ibid, p 3 cf. SSR, S 32, Items 105, 204; SSR, R 45, pp 246-7\n\n12 under the Charter Act of 1833; cf. Hansard Parliamentary Debates 3rd series vol. cxlix p 988\n\n13 Turnbull, Ibid, p 3\n\n14 Turnbull, Ibid, p 4\n\n15 Turnbull, Ibid, p 4\n\n16 Turnbull, Ibid, p 4\n\n17 Turnbull, Ibid, p 4\n\n18 Turnbull, Ibid, p 4; Thio Eunice British Policy in the Malay Peninsula 1880-1910 Vol. 1 Introduction pp xvi–xvii\n\n19 Parliamentary Papers, 1862, xl (House of Commons) 259, pp 585-8; Straits Times and Singapore Journal of Commerce, 13 Oct 1857; Buckley C, An Anecdotal History of Old Time in Singapore\n\n20 cf. Hansard Parliamentary Debates 3rd ser. cxlix, 986-90\n\n21 Buckley C, Ibid p 755\n\n22 Turnbull, The Straits Settlements 1826-67 Chap 2 p 59\n\n23 Mills LA, British Malaya 1824-1867 Chap 5 p 96-97; Jones W, Public Administration in Malaya, Chap 1 p 13; Parliamentary Papers, House of Commons No 259 of 1862, 13 (Vol. xl)\n\nI\n\n24 Ibid, Chap 5 p 89",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215787,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 86,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "19\n\nfrom Pitt's India Act. The EIC accordingly found itself guaranteeing some states protection from attacks, or pledging to uphold boundary settlements. (Thio, supra, p xvi-xvii)\n\nThere were cases of intervention for example, in Kedah, Perak and Selangor, brought about by Robert Fullerton, Burney, Anderson and James Low:\n\nWhen Robert Fullerton was governor of the Straits Settlements in 1824, he completely reversed the earlier British attitude of giving in to the claims of Siam, thus embarking on protection and expansion of British interests in the Malay Peninsula by checking Siamese attempts at extending their influence over the northern Malay states. Thus, when Ligor prepared to invade Perak and Selangor in 1825, he sent a Penang squadron to patrol the river mouths to prevent any attacks. (Mills L A, British Malaya 1824-1867, Chap 8 p 141; other examples of intervention included the following: Burney's Preliminary Treaty with Ligor in 1825. (Mills, Ibid, Chap 8 p 143-146); the Anderson Treaty (involving Selangor and Perak) in 1825. (Mills, Ibid, Chap 8, p 145-146; Purcell, supra, Chap 6, p 70)\n\nThe Burney Treaty of 1826 saw British attempts to secure independence for Selangor and Perak (Newbold, British Settlements in the Straits of Malacca Vol. 2 p 26); and later, the Low Treaty of 1826 promised British assistance in maintaining Perak's independence. These two treaties had more effect on the Malay States than any other treaties, the greatest consequence being a marked ending of Siamese southward ambitions, and thus securing the British position in expanding further into the Malay States at a later stage. However, signing these treaties showed non-compliance with Pitt's India Act. Thus, where Low's Treaty was concerned, the Supreme Government continued for some time to condemn it as unauthorised and never really ratified it. In effect, the intervention in the Malay States was still somewhat restricted by the Government's policy. (Mills, Op Cit. Chap 8 p 162) Other examples include Fullerton's challenge of Ligor's claim to the Kurau District in 1826, and the Burney Treaty of 1826 after which the British ceased to intervene in Kedah. (Mills, Ibid. Chap 8 pp 160-161)\n\nOther examples of intervention included those in Naning and Sungei Ujong: The British fought the Naning War in 1831-2 to establish British right to collection of revenue in Naning. In Sungei Ujong, the British squadron was called in 1857 to destroy the village of Pengkalan Kempas, in order to punish the chiefs who had been extorting British subjects. And again in 1860, Governor Cavenagh",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215795,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 94,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "27\n\nHooker, MB, 1969, \"The East India Company and the Crown 1773 - 1858', Ma-laya Law Review 11\n\nHui-Chen Wang Li, 1959, The Traditional Chinese Clan Rules, J J Augustin Publisher, New York\n\nHunter, Guy, 1966, Southeast Asia: Race, Culture and Nation, Institute of Race Relations, London Open University Press\n\nJackson, JC, 1968, Planters and Speculators: Chinese and European Agricultural Enterprise in Malaya 1786 - 1821, Oxford University Press, London, New York\n\nJones, S W, 1953, Public Administration in Malaya, London and New York\n\nKaye, John William, 1853, The Administration of the East India Company, A History of Indian Progress, Kitab Mahal, Allahabad, Delhi\n\nKeay John, 1993, The Honourable Company, A History of the English East India Company, Harper Collins Publishers, London\n\nKhoo Kay Kim, 1966, 'The Origins of British Rule in Malaya', IMBRAS, xxxix, no 1, 52-91\n\nKhoo, Kay Kim, (1972) 1975, The Western Malay States 1850 - 1873. The Effects of Commercial Development on Malay Politics, Oxford University Press, Bangunan Loke Yew, Kuala Lumpur\n\nMak, Lau Fong, 1981, The Sociology of Secret Societies, A Study of Chinese Secret Societies in Singapore and the Malay Peninsula, Oxford University Press, East Asian Social Science Monographs\n\nMaxwell, Sir George, (c 1943 Mimeograph) Problems of Administration in British Malaya, Institute of Pacific Relations, New York\n\nMaxwell, P B, 1859, 'The Law of England in Penang, Malacca and Singapore', JA, ns iii, 26 - 55\n\nMills, LA, 1966, British Malaya 1824 - 67, Kuala Lumpur\n\nMills LA, 1942, British Rule In Eastern Asia, Oxford University Press, London",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215797,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 96,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "29\n\nSeton, Sir Malcolm, 1926, The India Office, G P Putnam's Sons, London and New York\n\nStrang, Lord, 1961, Britain In World Affairs, Faber and Deutsch, London\n\nSwettenham, F, 1948, British Malaya - An Account of the Origins and Progress of British Influence in Malaya, Allen and Unwin\n\nTan, Ding Eng, 1986, A Portrait of Malaysia and Singapore, Oxford University Press\n\nTarling, N, 1962, Anglo-Dutch Rivalry in the Malay World, 1760-1824, Cambridge\n\nThio, Eunice, 1969, British Policy In the Malay Peninsula 1880-1910, Vol 1, University of Malaya Press\n\nThio, Eunice, 1960, 'The Singapore Chinese Protectorate: Events and Conditions Leading to its Establishment, 1823-77', Journal of the South Seas Society, xvi, 40-80\n\nTregonning, K G, (1964) 1972, A History of Modern Malaysia and Singapore, Eastern Universities Press Sdn Bhd, Singapore\n\nTripathi, Amales, 1956, Trade and Finance in the Bengal Presidency 1793-1833, Calcutta\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1960, 'Bibliography of Writings in English on British Malaya, 1786-1867', JMBRAS, xxxiii, no 3 327-424\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1958, 'Communal Disturbances in the Straits Settlements in 1857', JMBRAS, xxxi, no 1, 96-146\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1970, 'Convicts in the Straits Settlements, 1826-67', JMBRAS, xliii, no 1\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1969, 'The European Mercantile Community in Singapore, 1819-67', Journal of Southeast Asian History, x, no 1, 12-35\n\nTurnbull, C M, 1957, 'Governor Blundell and Sir Benson Maxwell; a Conflict of...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215799,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-2002",
        "page_number": 98,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "a_I \n\nPalegbor \n\nA \n\nKELAH TAN \n\nSELABO \n\n50 Meani \n\nLirik Lel \n\nTHENGUATAL \n\nTrenggena \n\nSegamat \n\n31 \n\nsung | Pakson) \n\nJ \n\nThe Malay Peninsula in the nineteenth century (Turnbull C.M., 1972, The Straits Settlements 1826-1867, Indian Presidency to Crown Colony, Oxford University Press)",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    }
]