[
    {
        "id": 205133,
        "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": 89,
        "title": "RAS-1966",
        "content_text": "84\n\nHOLMES WELCH\n\nTT\n\nalso Mahayanists, to have a close relationship. The same did not apply to the Theravadins of Southeast Asia of Burma, Ceylon, Thailand, and Indo-China. Not only did they have a different kind of Buddhism (which many of them regarded as \"pure\" in contrast to the \"corrupt\" Mahayana), but there was a much greater language barrier than between China and Japan, which both used the same ideograms. Until Dharmapala's abortive visit to Shanghai in 1893, there had been virtually no contact between Chinese and Theravada Buddhists for many hundreds of years.\n\nIt was therefore a significant event when in 1930 Huang Mao-lin (Wong Mou-lam) was sent to Ceylon by the Pure Karma Association in Shanghai. His mission was to study Theravada and explain Mahayana or, as we might say today, to start a dialogue. In 1934 the Ceylonese bhikkhus Soma and Kheminda returned his visit. Unfortunately when they reached Shanghai they found no facilities for study and went on to Japan. Nonetheless, during their brief stay they spoke on the Buddhist radio station, XMHB, and met many Chinese devotees. They were followed the next year by Narada, another bhikkhu from the same temple (that is, the Vajirarama in Colombo). Narada visited Shanghai, Hangchow, Soochow, Hankow, and had a meeting with T'ai-hsü. In 1946 Soma and Kheminda again went to China, this time accompanied by Pannasiha, to start a Pali college in Sian at T'ai-hsü's invitation. When they arrived they found that the civil war had broken out in Shensi and that Sian was inaccessible. After spending three months in Shanghai they returned to Ceylon.\n\nWhereas Asian Buddhist visitors to China came mostly from Ceylon, Chinese Buddhists went not only to Ceylon, but to Thailand, Burma, India, and Indo-China. Usually they went as pilgrims or for re-ordination or to minister to the overseas Chinese, but sometimes their purpose was to study the Pali language and Theravada doctrine. This did not always work out too well.\n\nIn December 1935 four Chinese monks left for such study in Thailand, where they were welcomed by the Supreme Patriarch and lodged in a royal temple.33 Shortly thereafter five other monks were sent to Ceylon, where they received a Theravada",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207568,
        "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": 336,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "BOOK REVIEWS\n\n\"A THOUSAND PEAKS AND MYRIAD RAVINES, by CHU-TSING LI, Zurich Artibus Asiae, 1974 (Vol. 1, pp. xi + 319, Vol. 11, 104 plates, signatures and seals, maps)\n\nIn studying the history of Chinese art, particularly that of painting, Professor Chu-tsing Li of the University of Kansas is an active scholar. Formerly his main field of study was the Yuan Dynasty (1280-1368); and for this period his thorough studies on Chao Meng-fu (1254-1322), Tsao Chih-po (1272-1355) and Hsueh Ch'uang (active ca. mid-14th century), as well as a general, but extensive, study about a group of artists active in the late Yüan period in Soo-chou area, are all highly regarded. However, in studying the history of Chinese painting, he seems now no longer to confine himself to individuals of the Yuan Dynasty but has begun to focus on other aspects of the later periods of Chinese art history, c.f. his latest monographs on Ting Yun-peng and Chin Nung (1687-1765). Following this, his latest publication; A Thousand Peaks and Myriad Ravines, a voluminous work in two volumes, deals, with the exception of one painting by a late Yüan artist, many different types of Chinese paintings of either Ming or the Ch'ing Dynasties. It was published in 1974.\n\n5\n\nBeginning from the late 19th century, when private collecting of Chinese art reached its climax, in the East as well as the West, a detailed illustrated catalogue, more commonly edited by a specialist in the field rather than by the collector himself, was published. A few examples for ancient Chinese bronzes are those essential works contributed by Professors Kosaku Hamada,1 Yoshito Harada,2 and Sueji Umehara3 in Japan, and those works by Professors Bernhard Karlgren,4 Gustav Ecke, and Chen Meng-chia in America or other countries; all well-edited bronze catalogues on private collections. For archaic Chinese jade, the catalogue produced by Professor Alfred Salmony is also well known. In addition to those cited which always deal with a specific subject of Chinese art, there are also some catalogues characterized by dealing with more than two branches of Chinese art in the one publication, or separately devoted to Chinese art and art objects in another Asiatic country. For the former, the over-sized catalogues about the famous collection",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 207581,
        "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": 349,
        "title": "RAS-1975",
        "content_text": "340\n\nBOOK REVIEWS\n\nChinese bronze is again by Prof. S. Umehara and was separately published in Kyoto in 1961.\n\n2 The Senoku Seisho is sub-divided according to nature of bronzes, into two parts. The first part dealing with ritual vessels is by Prof. K. Hamada while the next part, devoted to Chinese bronze mirrors, is edited by Prof. Yoshito Harada.\n\n3 In addition to these catalogues about the Sumitomo collection, in 1951 Prof. S. Umehara has also edited Kakkaku Kikkin Senshu (Selected specimens of the Chinese Bronze collection in the Hakkaku Art Museum), an illustrated and descriptive catalogue on Chinese bronzes housed in a private museum possessed and financed by Mr. Jihei Kano in Kobe.\n\n4 For instance, among his various studies on ancient Chinese bronzes, there are three catalogues. The first, \"Bronzes in the Hellström Collection\", is in the Bulletin of Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (hereafter abbreviated as BMFEA) (1948, Stockholm), No. 20, while the second, \"A catalogue of the Chinese Bronzes in the Alfred F. Pillsbury Collection\" was published in Minneapolis in 1951. The third, \"Bronzes in the Wessen Collection”, is in BMFEA, (1958, Stockholm), No. 30.\n\n5 For instance, his Fruhe chinesische Bronzen aus der Sammlung Trautmann (1939, Peking).\n\n6 For instance, the Chinese Bronzes from the Buckingham Collection, (1946, Chicago), jointly edited by M. C. Chen and Charles F. Kelley.\n\n7 Alfred Salmony (1890-1958): Archaic Chinese Jades from the Edward and Louis B. Sonnenschein Collection (1952, Chicago).\n\n8 W. Perceval Yetts (1878-1957): The Georg Eumorfopoulos Collection: Catalogue of the Chinese and Corean Bronze, Sculpture, Jade, Jewellery, and Miscellaneous objects (1929-32, London).\n\n9 Howard Hansford: The Seligman Collection of Oriental Art, Vol. I, (1957, London).\n\n10 Yoshito Yonezawa: Painting of the Ming Dynasty, (1956, Tokyo).\n\n11 Osvald Siren: Chinese painting, Vol. VII, (1958, London).\n\n12 Victoria Contag: Chinese Masters of the 17th Century (1969, London).\n\n13 The date of Hsuan-ho hua-p'u is not known. But a general date, 1120, the second year of the Hsuan-ho era during the reign of the Emperor Hui-tsung of the Northern Sung Dynasty, associated with its preface, is normally considered to be the date of completion of its compilation. Regarding its authorship, it has been previously suggested by scholars in the Ch'ing Dynasty, such as Wang Wan, as having been edited by Emperor Hui-tsung himself, and by Chou Chung-fu as being by Tsai Ti, and by Pien Yung-yu as being by Hu Kuan. But according to Yu Shao-sung, a 20th-century specialist on the historiography of Chinese art, none of these old identifications are reliable. Instead, a possible editor of this imperial catalogue is perhaps an anonymous eunuch of the Northern Sung palace. For detailed discussion see his Shu-hua shu-lu chieh ti (hereafter abbreviated SHSLCT), \"A Collection of Summary of content and Studies of Titles of Books on Chinese calligraphy and painting\", (1931, Peking).\n\n14 Although it carries a preface by the author, this book is undated. In general, as Yu Shao-sung has suggested (SHSLCT Chuan 12, p. 9), Hsu Hsin must have lived in the transitional period of Ming and Ch'ing but the book itself is written in early Ch'ing.\n\n15 See Yen-Tzu chun-chiu, Nei pien, 10th chapter of the Tsa-hsia section. This book is generally regarded as a work of the 6th century B.C.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d",
        "rank": 0
    }
]