[
    {
        "id": 206828,
        "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-1973",
        "page_number": 105,
        "title": "RAS-1973",
        "content_text": "# FIVE ART CATALOGUES\n\n99\n\ndiffered somewhat from the two catalogues of Sun and Kao, by the time Kung Kuang-tao compiled his art catalogue, the editing method he adopted seemed to be, if not a continuation of that used in Sun's Kêng-tzŭ hsiao-hsia-chi and Kao's Chiang-ts'un hsiao-hsia-lu, at least unrelated to Pien Yung-yü's Shih-ku-t'ang hua-k'ao.\n\nIn a word, although these five Kwangtung art collectors had adopted a new editing system in their catalogues, they had not referred to the work of the compiler who first introduced this system. This is no different from one who counts the records but has forgotten one's ancestors, and can but be regarded as a very unreasonable incident in the history of art catalogue compilation.\n\n## III\n\n## Defects in the Catalogues\n\nAs mentioned above, though the five Kwangtung collectors' catalogues were all compiled by following the new editing method introduced in the compilation of art catalogue, it should be pointed out here that they are not without shortcomings and errors. These, on the whole, can be divided into 3 types, namely: unsuitable compilation method, carelessness in proof-reading, as well as erroneous chronology. Each of these will be discussed below.\n\n### A. Unsuitable Compilation Method\n\nIn Wu Yung-kuang's Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi, paintings done by the same artist are mostly grouped together. However Wu had at least in two instances separately recorded the paintings of two artists. As a result, the reader would feel rather confused when using this catalogue. For example, this catalogue has recorded two paintings by Ni Tsan (1301-1374) in chüan 4. One of these, the Yu-po-t'an-hua-t'u appears in chüan 4, p. 22b, and the other, Ho-lin-t'u, on p. 41a of the same chüan. They are thus nearly twenty pages apart. Between these two paintings, Wu recorded accordingly the hanging scrolls of calligraphy respectively done by Kung Su, Fêng Hai-su and Nao Nao, as well as a handscroll including calligraphies written by Liu Yu-ch'ing, Fan Kuo, Ouyang Ying, Yü Chi, Wu Ch'uan-chieh, Yü-fu-t'u, and Liu Kuan. In addition, in the space of nearly twenty pages, Wu also recorded Wu Chen's and Wang Fu's (1362-1416).\n\nPage 105\n\nPage 106",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1973.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8910rj06r",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211348,
        "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-1988",
        "page_number": 64,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "40\n\nwas easily dismissed by exponents with the reasoning that the illustrators of the Ming era had not the slightest idea what they were doing. Others, more sceptical, on the other hand, came to a different conclusion. The existence of this picture obviously proved that mo, like pixiu, was only a legendary animal.\n\nZhouyu\n\nThe third animal offered by scholars as the giant panda in Chinese history and literature was zhouyu.\n\nIn the Book of Odes, the zhouyu was depicted as \"A giant animal that could be as large as a tiger, that had white fur but was black in certain areas. It was not carnivorous, and displayed a gentleness as well as a sense of trustworthiness\".\n\nSo far, this portrait fitted the modern giant panda. There was one flaw, however, as the description of the animal went on to say that **its tail was even longer than its body**.\n\nSubsequent writings on the zhouyu, claiming to be based on actual sightings, however, did not mention the impressive length of its tail.\n\nIn one of the Confucian ritual texts, the Rituals of Zhou, it was stated that the term zhouyu was adopted as the title for the imperial official whose responsibilities were the upkeep of the emperor's menagerie of animals and birds. This use of the term implies that the animal of the same name was rare and valuable.\n\nIn the History of the Eastern Jin Dynasty, it was recorded that the zhouyu was sighted in 333 A.D. in Liaodong in eastern China, where fossil remains of the giant panda had been found. In the History of Five Dynasties, by the noted stateman and scholar of the Song era, Ouyang Xiu (1017-1072), the zhouyu was recorded to have been seen two times. In 908 A.D., residents of two localities reported sighting the zhouyu. These localities were Wuding and Bishan, both in Sichuan. Five years later, in 913 A.D., the animal again was seen by residents. (It is regrettable that the Chinese language makes no distinction between singular and plural nouns. Therefore it is not clear whether residents",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211349,
        "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-1988",
        "page_number": 65,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "41\n\nsaw one or more zhouyu at one time.) Ouyang Xiu had not chosen to provide a description of the animal. He was supposed to have made the remark: “Zhouyu? What is a zhouyu? I haven't the slightest idea\". \n\nMing dynasty accounts of the chouyu were much more specific,\n\nDuring the second year of the Yunglo reign (1404 A.D.), Zhu Su, an imperial uncle who had been in exile in Yunnan, today's panda country, brought into Beijing two rare animals, which he called shouyu. Unfortunately, there was no physical description of these animals.\n\nIn 1413, a zhouyu was seen in Shandong. Again, there was no description of the animal.\n\nIn 1429, however, the military governor in the region of Jiangsu and Anhui sent into Beijing two zhouyu by a \"special courier\". The Xuande Emperor was so excited that he called together all civil and military officials then at court, as well as all tributary envoys in the capital, to witness such a wondrous sight”.\n\nOne eye-witness reported that these animals were \"white and gentle\". Another official present, the Minister of Finance, who, more likely than not, had never seen a wild animal before, but knew what they had looked like from his readings, proclaimed that the zhouyu had \"a leopard's head and a tiger's body\". He continued, \"They were white, with black limbs. Such gentleness! Their appearance at this time must be harbingers of a bountiful harvest!\"\n\nConclusionS no winners\n\nWhile one must give credit to these research scholars of the 1930s for their diligence and ingenuity in lining up classical scholarship and historical sources in their corner, it is difficult for an objective observer today to accept their conclusions without demanding more convincing evidence. The pixiu was a legendary animal. Neither version of the mo seems completely fault-free. The zhouyu, if any of these animals has to be accepted as the giant panda, would be the least grudging choice. Still, powerful arguments can be mounted against such a selection.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 211350,
        "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-1988",
        "page_number": 66,
        "title": "RAS-1988",
        "content_text": "42\n\nThe search for the giant panda through Chinese historical records and ancient writings represented an interesting exercise. Nevertheless, no positive statement can be made that the Chinese had known about the giant panda before the pelt was brought to western attention.\n\nPère David, it is safe to say, may continue to bask in glory as the discoverer of the giant panda for the whole world, including China.\n\nbaixiong 白熊 Bishan 璧山\n\nBishi 壁溪\n\nGLOSSARY\n\nErya 爾雅\n\nLi Shizhen 李時珍\n\nLiaodong 遼東\n\nLolo 玀羅\n\nMing 明\n\nmo 貘\n\nOuyang Xiu 歐陽修\n\npixiu 貔貅\n\nSima Qian 司馬遷 Sichuan 四川\n\nShandong 山東 Xuande 宣德 Wuding 武定\n\nYunglo 永樂\n\nYunnan 雲南\n\nZhou 周\n\nzhouyu 州圉\n\nZhu Su 朱橚\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\nBrightwell, L. R., \"The Giant Panda, Its History in Ancient China and Modern Europe”, Field 187:497-498 (London, 1946)\n\nDavid, Armand, \"Journal d'un Voyage dans le centre de la Chine et dans le Thibet Oriental\", Nouvelle Archives Musée Naturelle de Paris (Bulletins) 10:3-82 (Paris, 1874)\n\nFox, Helen (editor and translator), Abbé David's Diary, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1949.\n\nDictionary of Ming Biography 1368-1644, New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1976. Essay on Li Shih-chen (1518-1593) by L. Carrington Goodrich and Chaoying Fang, I:859-865.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1988.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ft84gb83q",
        "rank": 0
    }
]