[
    {
        "id": 205101,
        "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-1966",
        "page_number": 57,
        "title": "RAS-1966",
        "content_text": "52\n\nHERBERT FRANKE\n\nKhan of the Golden Horde (r. 1313-1340) is mentioned together with a very few notes on some nations which belonged to the Golden Horde, the Cherkess, the Alans and Ossetes, the Qipchaq Turks, the Russians (Wo-lo-ssu, from the Mongol Oros) and the Bulgars (Chinese Pu-li-a-êrh). Under the Qipchaq entry we find some data mentioning Russia and the Russians, such as Batus' conquest of Yeh-lieh-tsan which is the Chinese name for the ancient Russian town of Ryazan (1237), adorned with an Altaic prothetic vowel (like Oros from Ros, Rus). And in 1253 the Chinese annals record that a Mongol dignitary was dispatched to register the households of the Russians for taxation purposes. This was under the Great Khan Mongke (r. 1251-1259) under whom there was still a certain unity of command over the vast territories of the Mongol empire. But in later years the cohesion among the ulus was reduced more and more, and the Chinese official sources have little if anything to say of the West.\n\nThe multi-national auxiliaries of the Mongols included some Russians. These were mostly slaves, or prisoners of war, and repeatedly gifts to the Mongol rulers in China of Russian slaves are mentioned. In 1330 even a Russian guards regiment was established in Peking. There were other guards regiments in addition to the Mongol and Chinese soldiers at that time, consisting of Alans (i.e., Ossetes), Tanguts, Jurchen, Koreans, Qipchaq, and \"Western Regions People\", probably from Turkestan. And a Mohammedan (Hui-hui) artillery corps was equally a part of the Mongol armed forces. The Russians who served in the Peking guards regiment were given land north of Peking and settled there as military colonists. Their total number must have been something like 10,000 because the Yuan-shih mentions that figure in 1330. Other Russian troops were, together with Ossetes, dispatched to the Manchurian and Korean borders (Liao-yang Province), and to places in Northern China. As late as 1339 the Chancellor Bayan was appointed a commander of these Russian soldiers but after that date no more is heard of them. We do not know what became of these Europeans who had been a definitely Western element in the multi-national metropolis of Yüan China.\n\nIf official Chinese historiography as reflected in the dynastic annals did not display any great interest in the West, there are at least other fields where we find traces of broader world conception stimulated by a growing consciousness that the world did stretch",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207406,
        "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-1975",
        "page_number": 174,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "166\n\nDONALD C. BOWIE\n\nletter to our commanding officer, Colonel Shackleton, which he at once passed to the Japanese. In the letter we said that the progress to recovery of our wounded and sick patients was being impeded by a diet low in protein, vitamin and total calorie value and also by the difficulty of overcoming chronic sepsis on a deficient diet. We quoted League of Nations standards, well aware of the fact that Japan had left the League after her Manchurian adventure in 1933. We suggested a diet more suited to our habits and needs. Looking at this letter today I believe that we put our requests on a very moderate level.\n\nSome time in 1942, well before August, the Japanese began to pay commissioned officers both staff and patients. Our nurses were not paid nor were any of our working staff. We were paid in “military” yen, which at first I think had the same value as the yen, and Shackleton set up a patients' Comforts Fund and an Extra Diets Fund to which officers made contributions on a scale which at first lacked regularity. On 3 August 1942 Harrison and I wrote again expressing our disquiet about the whole patients and staff situation and advised that all efforts to improve conditions should be financed through a Central Hospital Fund supported by all officers. We identified the needs under four heads; those of patients for special diets during and after dysentery, surgery etc., those of staff upon whom the work fell, the need of every person for improved food value in the rations and variation in the monotony of diet, and lastly the need of our whole community for electric bulbs, sewing cotton, soap etc. We quoted our basic average diet for the months of April, May and June and July 1942 (see Appendix “A”, Table 1). Perhaps a clearer idea of the position is conveyed by the fact that in the week 23 July to 1 August 1942 we had fish twice, meat once and a sweet rice pudding once, the last being the only dish for mid-day dinner, while all other dinners consisted of boiled rice and boiled vegetables only. Breakfast and suppers were rice or bread and sugar, syrup or vegetables, the whole diet being ill calculated to appeal to a sick man. Many so-called well men ate only as a duty to themselves and certainly not as a pleasurable activity.\n\nThe hospital had narrowly escaped a further disaster during hostilities for a large shell, a four-inch I think, had pitched at the junction of the road above the hospital leading to the sisters' mess and the lower wall of the reservoir. Had it exploded the reservoir",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207523,
        "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-1975",
        "page_number": 291,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "Notes:-- \n\n10.\n\n11.\n\n12. Fresh Milk\n\nThe flour ration ceased at the end of February.\n\nIn August fully feathered Manchurian pheasants and partridges, (dated 1941 and obviously from a cold store) were received undressed; they provided one issue of 8.3 g. pheasant and 4.9 g. partridge in August, i.e. well under half ounce total but they made very acceptable stews.\n\nA total of 3958.9 litres was issued to patients only over the 10 months January to October. In addition each patient and each member of staff received a total of:-\n\n0.17 litre in January\n\n0.3\n\n0.25\n\n0.8\n\n71*\n\nFebruary\n\nMarch\n\n77**\n\nApril\n\n0.36 litre in May\n\n0.5\n\nJune\n\n**\n\n0.23\n\n39\n\nJuly\n\nNone thereafter.\n\nThe total thus issued to patients and staff was 802.4 litres.\n\nTable 4: 1945, 1 January - 23 March, at Bowen Road\n\n  \n    CAPTIVE SURGEON IN HONG KONG\n    Rice\n    Vegetable\n    Fish\n    Soy Beans\n    Peanut Oil\n    Curry\n    Sugar\n    Tea\n    Salt\n    Powder\n  \n  \n    \n    445.0\n    323.0\n    See Note 14\n    3.0\n    19.0\n    5.0\n    4.0\n    5.0\n    1.0\n    \n  \n\nNotes:-\n\n13.\n\n14. Fish\n\n15.\n\nDuring March 1945 the staff had extra (working) rations as follows daily for 14 days:-\n\nRice 120.0; Soy Beans 1.0; Peanut Oil 20.0; Sugar 10.0.\n\nIn January a daily average of 32.0 g. per day; in February, the fish issue was 4.0 grammes per day; there was no further issue while in Bowen Road.\n\nIn January, cockles were issued equivalent to 3.0 g. per head per day.\n\n283",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215955,
        "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": 254,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "188\n\ndeaths of Chinese persons within these fourteen personal absences Legge experienced, one stood out over time because it became so formative in shaping Legge's public image in Hong Kong. The images of both Legge and this seminal Chinese figure were first promoted through extracted letters and reading literature of missionary journals where the story about Ch'ea Kam-Kwong first appeared. After Ch'ea's murder, however, it became a festering and frustrating element within the larger political scenario of the unequal treaties period in foreign policy between the Qing Manchurian empire in China and the newly established British ambassador. Legge made the issue all the more prominent in 1863 by publicly challenging British officials' complacence about the matter and condemning attempts by Sir Frederick Bruce (1814-1867), the first British ambassador to the Qing empire, to defuse the whole tragedy by general claims about missionary incompetence.\n\nThe period from 1861 to 1863 was pivotal in Legge's missionary-scholar career because of three books and two supremely “felt” public absences. In February and November 1861 he published the first two of the eight-tome-five-volume series he entitled the Chinese Classics. In October and at the very beginning of 1862 he faced news about the deaths of Ch'ea Kam-kwong and his eldest brother George respectively, writing special memorials to both men in the subsequent months. In the latter case, James Legge edited and introduced his brother George's selected lectures and sermons (an introduction of just over 100 pages!), an act of filial respect simultaneously Scottish Nonconformist, Ruist/Confucian, and Victorian in style and content.\n\n2\n\nYet Ch'ea's death in October 1861 and its consequences had a power over Legge's career he himself could not fully anticipate. So influential was it that in the balance of the decade of the 1860s Legge was regularly referred to in local Hong Kong and overseas missionary literature as \"James Legge of Hong-kong and Poklo.\" Here we will explore the meaning of Ch'ea's death for Legge's life, and the broader implications it had on a surprising range of “larger issues\" in the study of cross-cultural interactions during the later decades of the Manchurian Qing dynasty. Part of the significance is shown in a negative fashion in Paul Cohen's early work of the",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215964,
        "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": 263,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "197\n\nPromises were made that other colporteurs would continue to stop by Poklo, and so Ch'ea left his Hong Kong connections to return to an uncertain future.\n\nPART THREE: Darkness outside, light within: Chinese cultural rejections of Ch'ea's Christian way\n\nNo further contact with Ch'ea occurred for nearly a year after he left for Poklo, partly because of changing circumstances in Hong Kong that prevented any more aggressive strategies from taking shape. Legge himself had already been living as a widower since October 1852, his wife Mary Isabella (1817-1852) succumbing to what was probably advancing tuberculosis during a burdensome delivery of a stillborn child.34 Longing to see his children who had been receiving their education in Scotland since 1853, but also anxious to show the first fruits of his plans for the Chinese Classics to the London Missionary Society Directors, Legge was predisposed to staying close to Hong Kong and not taking trips into the nearby mainland. The Arrow Lorcha affair in October 1856 heightened the political tensions over supposed conflicts in treaty provisions between the Qing and British empires, lending just enough reason for British officials to initiate full-scale war in December. Whatever plans there were for \"nurturing\" and \"supporting\" Ch'ea, the declaration of war made travel inside China for foreigners literally impossible.\n\n35\n\nIn the meantime, Ch'ea had to make his own way. Soon after he returned to Poklo he officially gave up his \"employment in the sacred temple [of Master Kong]\" and apparently devoted his free time to reading the books brought with him from Hong Kong. Family members charged him with following a foreigner's religion, suggesting that he had given up his allegiance to the Manchurian empire. Neighbours and others considered him either to be mad or possessed, the latter group throwing water on him (blessed in one of the Daoist temples?) to cast out the demons. What is significant, and may not be fully understood at first notice, is that these reactions occurred months before any outright military hostilities had begun (the so-called Second Opium War). \"Following",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215966,
        "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": 265,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "199\n\nto justify any kind of violence against that \"other\" as a form of cultural and social self-preservation. \"Foreign demons\" were constructs of a political discourse which played on the common people's fears, even to the point of instituting extensive studies in teratology (the study of monstrous forms of animals and plants) as a way of explaining the foreign \"things.\"\n\n39 In taking a \"China-centred approach\" to studying the implications of Ch'ea's Christian conversion, these factors should be explored in two areas: the teratologisation of Jesus and the whiplash of an earlier imperial racism expressed in Manchurian campaigns against any intellectuals who strongly supported Hàn cultural motifs.\n\n40\n\n41\n\nIn a rare picture of the transmogrification of \"foreign teachings\" in order to mark them out for vilification and destruction, Paul Cohen has illustrated how one Qing scholar, Tián Xingshu (1837-1877), produced a blistering lampoon of Christianity in publicly displayed placards during the 1860s. The \"Lord Jesus\" (Zhu Yésu) was depicted in cartoon-like caricatures as the \"Pig Jesus\" (Ju Yésu), worshipped by \"foreign devils\" in bizarre and salacious rites. Christian \"devils\" are depicted as cannibalizing unsuspecting children and religious seekers, using their religious rites as a cover-up for the most immoral and inhumane forms of treatment that a Chinese person could imagine. Near the end of his book, Bixié jìshí (The Truth about Records of Exorcising Evil Spirits12), Tián depicts a righteous mandarin ordering the \"shooting of Pig [Jesus] and the beheading of the Goats [foreigners].\" But this is not the end. Following long traditions found in many Chinese Buddhist or Daoist temple reliefs, Tián capsulizes the defamation by illustrating the terrible purgatorial punishments deserved by the \"Pig Incarnate\" (jujing) in some lower level of Chinese hells. Any partially literate and sensitive Chinese citizen would obviously want to be rid of such a terrible menace to their own society. How could any Chinese person, convinced that these claims were false and purposefully misleading derisions, seek to redirect mobs angered by these putative evils of \"foreign torturers\"743\n\nYet an even deeper level of antagonism and racism had been instigated from the highest imperial offices during the 17th and",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215967,
        "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": 266,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "44\n\n18th centuries. It is well documented now that the Manchurian despots who militarily overcame the weakened and corrupt Ming court were adamant in their efforts to rewrite the history of their forefathers in “angelic\" terms. Perhaps more than in any other previous dynasty, the Manchurian emperors destroyed pro-Ming and pro-Hàn culture books and documents, burning also any books which stood against their Manchurian ancestors, and censoring portions of books which touched on these topics.** In numerous cases the contemporary relatives of earlier authors were themselves detained, tortured, and given death sentences. Sometimes the penalties were completely inordinate, causing not only racial tension among the Hàn elite (between those supporting and those fearing this Manchurian method of \"intellectual cleansing\") but also a deep seated resentment among the common people. Understanding the harshness, breadth, and persistence of this long-term policy of the Qing government, the Tàiping Insurgents' anti-Manchu ideology appears to be a long submerged political whiplash against a racist regime.\" Yet it remained another facet of Qing social life during this chaotic period that \"the people become willing partners in their own subjection,\" very much in order to save their own lives as well as those who support them.46\n\nCh'ea's armoury against these tremendous cultural pressures and political dangers was his newly obtained Christian library and the inherent attractions of his alternative form of life. No precise details about what he brought back with him to Poklo in 1856 are available, but later records suggest that he and others had access to at least Ho Tsun-sheen's Introduction to a Comprehensive Commentary to the New Testament (Yīnyuē quánshū jiěshì xù), the Christian version of the Three Character Classic (Sānzì jing), and a translation of the first volume of Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, rendered by another Scottish missionary of note, William C. Burns (using the family name Bào, 1815-1868).47 This third work was given the Chinese title Tianlu lìchéng (lit., The Course along the Heavenly Road),48 and was probably read with a great amount of empathetic understanding by Ch'ea as he faced these daunting forces in opposition to his Christian associations and beliefs.\n\n200",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215968,
        "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": 267,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "201\n\nMore fundamental to Ch'ea's self-defence was a claim inherent in those translations of the Shengjing, the Chinese Christian Bible, which employed shàngdì as the key term for the Christian God. When Jesus spoke about \"conversion,\" the Chinese phrase suggested a “return” (gūixiàng) rather than a \"turning.\" One who \"turned\" to the Christian God through the sacrifice of Christ was \"returning\" to the Lord on High (shàngdì) worshipped by the ancient sages as mentioned in the Book of Historical Documents and Book of Poetry. For a Chinese to become a Christian was, in the final analysis, to return to the religious worldview of the sage kings and to experience a new fulfilment of their own Ruist cultural heritage.49\n\nPerhaps it was this strain of Chinese Christian theology which was partially influential, though never stated explicitly, in sparing Ch'ea from civil punishment. Probably some months after he had left his post at the local temple, Ch'ea was arrested by government officials and his Christian books were seized. Ostensibly the charge was that he had \"been deceiving the people with heretical doctrines,\" but there were probably other concerns also motivating the officials' harshness. After the initial battles of the new Sino-British war, issues probably not fully known by Ch'ea, all suspicious citizens with obvious foreign connections were being questioned. The threat of foreign invasion determined by the outcome of war and not restrained by any other known international legal institution greatly threatened the Qing hierarchy and Chinese citizens in the Manchurian empire. As a consequence, Ch'ea had this additional complication to face in addition to other, probably more expected, cultural oppositions. After \"squabbling for about three hours\" and trying to \"practice extortion\" on Ch’ëa, who “fearlessly” did not “answer them a word,” nothing could be found as evidence to place him in either a cangue or chains. Did the officials peruse the books and come up with other conclusions? Or was it merely that they found Ch'ea was a poor man without money, and so \"they pretended to be in a great rage\" and let him go?",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215993,
        "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": 292,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "226\n\nKangxi was an earlier Manchurian emperor who had followed the movements of Catholic missionaries with great interest, both impressed by some and later revolted by others. His imperial son and successor, the Yongzheng emperor (ruling from 1723-1736), castigated those following the \"Lord Of Heaven\" as heretics (viduan) in his commentary to the seventh maxim of his father. Legge translated and commented on Yongzheng's authoritative interpretations of the Sacred Edict in lectures presented at Oxford's Taylor Institute in 1877, and later published them in Hong Kong under the title \"Imperial Confucianism\" in the sinological journal, China Review 6:3-6 (1878), pp. 147-158, 223-235, 299-310, 363-374. A good discussion of the impact of the Sacred Edict as part of the educative dimension of the Qing dynasty's civil servants is provided in Victor H. Mair, \"Language and Ideology in the Written Popularizations of the Sacred Edict,” in David Johnson, et al., eds., Popular Culture in Late Imperial China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), pp. 325-359.\n\n20. See the description and reflections of a British journalist at the scene in China Mail #803 (July 5, 1860), pp. 106-107.\n\n21. His age was given in Legge's writings on Ch'ea. The fact that he had a son is verified through the records of the Chinese congregation of Union Church in Hong Kong, where a man named Che who joined the church in the late 1860s is identified as \"the son of the martyr.\" This information was gleaned from Carl Smith's archives.\n\n22. Following Lewis Rambo's lead, we will assume that conversion is a “dynamic, multifaceted process of transformation\" including, at the very least, elements of \"cultural, social, personal, and religious systems.\" See Lewis R. Rambo, Understanding Religious Conversion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993), pp. 6-7.\n\n23. This is one possible literal rendering of the translated title for the \"Bible\", the phrase also being used as a general reference term in traditional China for the Ruist canon. In contemporary China, that latter association is almost completely lost.\n\n24. One Chinese scholar believes that Wang's influence on Walter Medhurst's translation commitments in the Delegates' Committee were very extensive, but offers no precise historical documentation to support the claim. It is certainly sufficient to know that Wang was Medhurst's \"native informant,\" for the influences could not help but be there, especially when questions of style and phrasing more suitable to Ruist tastes were raised. See Lee Chi-fang, Wáng T'ao (1828-1897): his life, thought, scholarship, and literary achievement (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms International, 1992, printing 1973).\n\n25. This is very generally confirmed in I-Jin Loh's essay, \"Chinese Translations of the Bible\", published as part of An Encyclopedia Of Translation: Chinese-English, English-Chinese, eds. Chan Sin-Wai and David E. Pollard (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 1995), pp. 54-69. Loh explicitly states, \"It is generally agreed that the literary style of this version [in both Old Testament and New Testament], which had the benefit of help from a Chinese scholar by the name of Wang Tao, was superior to the rival version [later prepared by American missionaries]\" (p. 57). The \"literary style\" was the form of literary conventions.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 215997,
        "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": 296,
        "title": "RAS-2002",
        "content_text": "230\n\nChinese Son, pp. 115-116). For a fuller account of Taiping demonology, see the article on “Taiping Tiânguó de 'móguï'” (“The ‘Devil' in the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom\") by Wang Qingchéng in his book, Taiping Tianguó de lìshí hé sixiang (The History and Ideology of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom) (Běijing: Zhōnghuá Book Co., 1985), pp. 328 ff.\n\nFrom another perspective it must be remembered that Christian missionaries in the 19th century also regularly employed demonology to express their frustations with obstructive Qing officials, Chinese cultural attitudes, and opposing religious alternatives.\n\n46. Quoted in David Johnson, “Communication, Class and Consciousness in Late Imperial China,” p. 47,\n\n47. A helpful biographical account of Burns' career is written by I. Hamilton, \"Burns, William Chalmers\" in Nigel M. de S. Cameron, et. al., eds., Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), pp. 114-115.\n\n48. First published in Amoy (now Xiàmén) in 1853 and repeatedly published in various revisions in Hong Kong, Canton, and Shanghai for many years, the copy of this work I have seen is entitled Tianlu lichéng túhuà (Pilgrim's Progress in the Local Language [Cantonese]) (City of Sheep [i.e. Canton]: Huishi litang, tenth year of the Tongzhi reign [i.e. 1871]).\n\n49. This Chinese conception of conversion has also been discussed in Lauren Pfister's \"A Transmitter but not a Creator.\"\n\n53\n\n50. According to Paul Reuter, international standards and institutions for settling treaty disputes were first put into place in Europe in the 1870s, and so the only formal way of advancing political agendas at this time was through war. This single and often overlooked historical fact manifestly shaped the whole situation, so that local Chinese residents could only consider the foreign military presence as a preamble to a full invasion by an even \"more foreign\" power—the Manchurian elite. Consult the initial pages of Paul Reuter, Introduction to the Law of Treaties, trns. José Miro and Peter Haggenmacher (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, 1995).\n\nthan\n\n51. EMMC/MM (September 1857), p. 207, the quotations coming from the translation of a dictated document prepared by Ch'ea for Legge and Ho in May 1857.\n\n52. Legge himself had vomited twice from consuming some of the bread, one of the first to feel its effects because it was his habit to rise early and work on his project related to the Chinese Classics. See reports of the trial against Cheong Alum in the China Mail, a three-page \"Extra Edition,\" dated February 7, 1857, and Legge's own recollections in his public lecture (presented on November 5, 1872) entitled \"The Colony of Hong Kong.\" Legge's lecture was later published in the China Review 1:3 (1872-1873), pp. 163-176. An edited version of this essay was published as a centennial recollection in the Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 11 (1971), pp. 172-193. A helpful article revealing details about this event is \"Cheung Ah-lum: A Biographical Note”, Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 24 (1984), pp.\n\nand\n\n53. The last phrase is quoted in Helen Legge, James Legge: Missionary Scholar, p. 103, from an unknown letter she claims came from a missionary in",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2002.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/mp4901278",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216421,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 180,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "130\n\nThe Treaty showed Japan that white races would stand together against the yellow, and the Japanese as a race were mortified at what they were convinced was a dishonourable peace.\n\nThe peace treaty provided for, amongst other things, the mutual withdrawal of Russian and Japanese armies from Manchuria within eighteen months; and the return of Manchuria to China except for the leased territories of Liaodong (Guandong) and the southern section of the Manchurian Railway which was transferred to Japan by Russia.\n\nHowever, at a Conference held in Peking in December 1905 at which the Chinese government approved the Treaty, the now enfeebled and impotent Qing dynasty gave Japan even greater rights in Chinese territory than had been agreed in Portsmouth. The Japanese had now acquired rights and concessions on Chinese territory for the first time.\n\nChinese involvement\n\nIt has not been my intention to describe the detailed progress of the war as this has been covered in numerous books and articles, but to highlight how the Chinese were involved. It has proved disappointing to find that even when China and the Chinese position are referred to, writers usually skim over the subject in a single page or two.\n\nThe Russian promise to evacuate territories in Manchuria occupied after the Boxer insurrection was ignored and the progressive Russification of the Three Provinces could only mean one thing - that the Russians had no intention of withdrawing. During 1903 the Chinese Government showed a firmer attitude in their request for promises from the Russian Minister relating to the evacuation of Manchuria. Japanese strong moral support acted as an incentive to the more progressive Chinese to strengthen the influence of the few patriotic Chinese statesmen who had the welfare of the Empire at heart. Meetings of the literati in most of the larger cities in China during October 1903 denounced Russia in no uncertain terms. Little could be expected from the Empress Dowager and her clique. One day she ranted on hearing some real or fancied desecration by Cossacks in the former Manchu capital at Mukden where the ancestors of the Manchu ruling clan were buried, and threatened reprisals; the next day she was considering possibilities of closer links between Russia and China and even, perhaps,\n\nPage 180\n\nPage 181",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216427,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 186,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "136 \n\nwhich they searched the holds for contraband and pulled the pigtails of the Chinese crew to see if they came off, and thus discover a Japanese on board in disguise.\n\n5 \n\nThere were few descriptions of the experiences of Chinese townsmen or peasants during the battles between Japanese and Russians, and the passage through their land by the armies of the two contenders. Several short paragraphs in the contemporary illustrated volumes simply mention in passing how in, for example, the old walled town of Port Arthur, the Russian residents started to flee north at an early stage and those who had hung on had finally to be evacuated on crowded trains, leaving behind their property and livelihoods. Also, there were several passing comments that after each battle there were Chinese loitering, waiting to loot.\n\nAs the winter set in Russian troops tore down many Chinese villages to provide material for quarters for their Army, and cut down trees for firewood, commandeered pigs, cattle, chickens and grain. Chinese refugees fled from Mukden ahead of the Japanese to avoid being caught up in the fighting, and nearby the Russians looted Chinese houses for food, clothing and women.\n\nIn contrast - as the Russian reinforcements arrived in Manchuria across the Trans-Siberian Railway so the requirement for accommodation and stores fell upon the Chinese population. \"The Chinese village of Mudzetun, a short distance to the south-east of Mukden, was utilised as a Cossack camp. The Chinese inhabitants had disappeared in a body, and their old quarters had been swept and garnished; the little courtyards had been cleansed of filth in which pigs and children had played together; several Russian baths had been constructed and strict sanitary regulations enforced. Sometimes some miserable-looking Chinese might be seen collecting from the banks of the frozen stream the discarded entrails of the cattle that had been killed for food, accompanied by outcast dogs that had been ousted from the village by its new masters.\"\n\nManchurian native bandits\n\nSparsely populated, and wild and poverty-stricken, Manchuria was a natural breeding ground for bandits, either as individuals or gangs.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216428,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 187,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "137\n\nMost were mounted on Manchurian ponies, and were rough, brutal and, beyond the bounds of towns, unrestrained. Occasional bandit-suppression campaigns and schemes to tame or buy off thugs were only temporary checks. There were two generic names for bandits in Manchuria, one mainly reported across the south, was Red Beards, Hong Huzi (in the romanisation of the day - Hung Hutse) while the less well-known term for those across the north was Chunchuse. Red Beards included a mixture of seasonal bandits who came over to rob and pillage from Shandong. This mutated into the Red Beards, local criminal thugs, both individual groups and those part of a larger network, thieving as a way of life due to endemic poverty.\n\nAny act of brigandry in southern Manchuria was blamed on the Hong Huzi; hence, sketches in British illustrated journals of Chinese robbing the dead and dying on the field of battle all bore the caption naming the robbers as Hong Huzi.\n\nOne of the better-known Chinese \"brigands,\" a seasonal worker from Shandong, was Wang Delin.* By 1899 he had established a considerable following among Chinese workers in Manchuria opposed to Russian encroachment, and in 1903 he openly declared his opposition to both the Russians and the non-Chinese Qing dynasty. His band operated along the eastern part of the China Eastern Railway, attacking trains and Russian shipping on the rivers. His men had a code of conduct based on three rules:\n\nThey were forbidden to harass or harm Chinese\n\nThey should not kill captured Russians without reason\n\nAnd, they should assist the poor and helpless.\n\nHis band was typical of the gangs roaming Manchuria with their various motives, some simply thugs and robbers others political, but all were generically referred to as Hong Huzi.\n\nWesterners writing about their travels in Manchuria were not slow in providing valid reasons for their nickname. Harvey Howard in his Ten Weeks with Chinese Bandits [1927] explained that 'during the 18th and 19th centuries roving bands of unshaven, red-bearded Russians",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216429,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 188,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "138\n\npreyed on the Chinese who had settled in Siberia, north of the Amur River, and every now and then, upon those who lived in Manchuria just south of the river. The Russian bandits gradually disappeared from this region, and their place was more and more taken by Chinese, and so the term Hung Hutse came to be applied to Chinese bandits as well, even though the latter with rare exception have no beards.'\n\nAnother version provided by an American reporter with a vivid imagination explained that the bandits painted their faces red and wore false beards to engender fear in the hearts of all and sundry.\n\nBrindle related the story of two Hong Huzi chiefs who held high positions in the Imperial Army of China, and periodically visited Peking. They had organised large bands of Hong Huzi during the summer and autumn of 1904, the result being a determined and continual harassment of outlying Russian camps. The Hong Huzi, he wrote, 'were splendid horsemen, well armed and mounted on Manchurian ponies, and made admirable irregulars.'\n\nTwo early French travellers, Ular and Mury, described a community in northern Manchuria as 'Zheltuga, the republic of the Chinese bandits, the Hong Huzi'. Zheltuga was the community of illegal Chinese gold miners which existed on the banks of the Heilongjiang [Amur], the border between Manchuria and Russia, between 1883 and 1886. It consisted of Russians and Chinese who flocked into the area from Siberia and Manchuria when gold was found in the area of the present Chinese town of Mohe as far north as one can get in Manchuria. Zheltuga lasted three years and was destroyed by the Qing in 1886. There would appear to be no corroboration of the French claim, and the miners so described consisted of unauthorised speculators who doubtless were referred to as bandits by the Qing authorities and by extension as Hong Huzi. They may, perhaps, have been a community dominated by Hong Huzi but it is doubtful whether they were an organised community of Red Beards.\n\nGeneral Ma, one of China's generals stationed in northern Manchuria near its border with Mongolia, attracted significant attention of the Russians as he was one of a small but powerful party who urged the Chinese Government to cast her lot with the Japanese, making common cause against the encroaching northern Power. Many of his",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216432,
        "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-2003",
        "page_number": 191,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "141\n\nOne such snippet dated 12 May, 1904, described how 'when the Russians withdrew from Wafangtien, contemporaneously with the Japanese advance, bands of Hunhuses throughout Manchuria began to show great activity, especially in the region of Yantai, a station between Mukden and Liaoyang, thus adding enormously to the dangers and preoccupations of the Russians. There were reports that these bands were led by Japanese, which were not improbable, since the Japanese had a perfect right to make use of their hostility to the Russians of the population of Manchuria. At the same time, in all directions, attacks on the railway began, under the direction of officers of the Japanese General Staff. Two such officers had been captured by General Kuropatkin in April and, as there was no doubt as to their mission since they had upon them a large quantity of dynamite, fuses and tools for destroying the line, they were promptly executed.' On the page facing this snippet is a photograph of the decapitation of several Hong Huzi with the caption 'How Russians deal with the Hunhuses who destroy the railway.'\n\nAlthough it does not in any way help clarify the employment of Chinese bandits as irregular troops by the Russians, a British observer writing on the horsemanship of the Cossacks, noted that ‘after a comparatively small force of Japanese cavalry at Sha-ho had acted as a sufficient counter-check to the larger masses of Russian horsemen, the Cossack was deficient in courage and staying power, but was well mounted. There was a long and exposed line of the Manchurian Railway for them to guard, and the Russian cavalry had the Hunhutses [sic] always with them, but these marauders on their diminutive horses should not have been able to ride round the horsemen of the steppes in the manner they seem persistently to have done.'\n\nAlthough captions on photographs of captured Chinese claim they were being executed for espionage, mainly spying for the Japanese, it tended to have been more a matter of individual banditry and any resultant monetary reward rather than prisoners having been 'resistance fighters.'\n\nThere is also a photograph of \"The Head Chief of the Hunhuses.' It shows four Chinese and one Japanese (said to have been an Intelligence Officer, who worked in Newchwang [Niuzhuang] during the Russian occupation as a shoemaker). The central figure is described as 'the chief named Chin, said to be in Japanese employ who is a well-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    }
]