[ { "id": 204482, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1962", "page_number": 114, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "103\n\nEXCAVATIONS AT MAN KOK TSUI ON LANTAU ISLAND\n\nELSPETH MANEELY *\n\n[On 13 May 1961 over fifty members of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society landed from a launch at Man Kok Tsui, a promontory on Lantau facing Hong Kong. Here Professor S. G. Davis and Dr. S. M. Bard explained to the members of the Society how the excavations were carried out and what objects had been discovered. Later the party walked over the hills to Silvermine Bay. This article gives an account of the excavations carried out there in 1958, Ed.]\n\nTo date, the investigation of Neolithic remains in China points to the existence of three main Neolithic cultures.' This broad classification depends largely on differences in the types of fine pottery. In the north-west traces of the Painted Pottery Culture were first noted by J. G. Andersson at Yang Shao, Honan in 1920, and three years later at the Tao river sites, Kansu. In the north-east, traces of the Black Pottery Culture were uncovered in 1928 at Lung Shan, Shantung. The finds at Man Kok Tsui belong to the third of these Neolithic traditions: the South-East Neolithic, and the characteristic fine pottery found is a hard stoneware bearing a variety of impressed designs. This type of impressed pottery was first discovered in Hong Kong by Dr. C. M. Heanley in 1926 and it was associated with several kinds of stone artifact. It is interesting to note that the traces of these three Neolithic cultures were uncovered within a period of eight years and that in 1926—the year in which Dr. Heanley began his work on pre-historic remains in Hong Kong—the exciting discovery of \"Peking Man\" took place at Chou Kou Tien, south-west of Peking.\n\nDr. Heanley was joined in his systematic survey of the Hong Kong area by Professor J. L. Shellshear and Mr. W. Schofield and they soon established that the Colony was rich in scattered finds, in general concentrated near the beaches and on the low\n\n* Mrs. Maneely has lived in Hong Kong since 1956, and is the Hon. Secretary of the Hong Kong University Archaeological team.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204483, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1962", "page_number": 115, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "104\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\n16\n\nhill slopes of the western islands and in the Castle Peak area; but perhaps only four places investigated since archaeological work began in the Colony may be dignified by the term \"site\". These are: So Kun Wat #, a series of low hilltops to the west of the Tai Lam Chun reservoir; Lamma Island (Pok Liu Chau14), which really comprises several distinct sites; Shek Pik and Man Kok Tsui, both on Lantau Island (Tai Yu Shan). A report on the findings at So Kun Wat was presented by C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear in 1932 at the first Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East held at Hanoi. Father Finn's publications on the Lamma sites, begun in 1932, have recently been reprinted in one volume, Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island Near Hong Kong.3 The Shek Pik site, on the south-west coast of Lantau Island, was excavated by W. Schofield and J. G. Andersson in 1937 and a report was published in the Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, in 1938. The artifacts uncovered at Man Kok Tsui are similar to those found at these earlier sites and are of three kinds: stone tools and ornaments, pottery and bronze.\n\nBefore describing the discovery of Man Kok Tsui in more detail however, reference should be made to Father R. L. Maglioni's extensive discoveries in Hoifung as they bear a definite relationship to finds in the Hong Kong area. Hoifung lies on the China coast about one hundred miles north-east of Hong Kong. In 1934 Fr. Maglioni, then a priest in the Hoifung region, embarked on a thorough search for prehistoric remains. He located as many as twenty distinct sites. In general the finds were of the same type as those described by archaeologists working in Hong Kong, but Fr. Maglioni was able to distinguish three separate Neolithic cultures. These three he called the SON, SAK and PAT cultures from the capital letters of the romanized names of villages adjacent to the sites. So far Neolithic remains in Hong Kong resemble closely those of Fr. Maglioni's PAT culture, the latest of the three.\n\nIn April 1958, Dr. S. M. Bard first reported Man Kok Tsui as a possible area for investigation by the University Archaeological Team. The site, given the number 30 by the Team, lies at the extreme tip of the northern arm of Silvermine Bay, Lantau Island. It consists of two sheltered, sandy beaches, a flat fertile valley", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204485, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1962", "page_number": 117, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "106\n\nBRONZE\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\nThe bronze, though small in amount, was an interesting and exciting discovery. Fr. Finn at his Lamma sites, and Schofield and Andersson at Shek Pik also found bronze associated with pottery and stone of similar workmanship to the Man Kok Tsui material. The Man Kok Tsui bronze: two pieces of a lanceolate knife, and a fine patinated fishhook, were found in the vegetable fields of the central valley. In considering the age of the site the presence of these three pieces of bronze is important despite the fact that they must be regarded as surface finds.\n\nSTONE:\n\nThe stone artifacts found at Man Kok Tsui consisted of grinding, hammering and polishing tools of local granite and sandstone; polished adzes, knife edges, roughly chipped discs, polished discs and rings. The most interesting of these were perhaps the adzes and the rings, showing as they did the advanced nature of the stone industry achieved by these Neolithic people. The adzes were of most of the types found in South East Asia, including some rectangular in cross-section, a type Fr. Maglioni has linked with his Late Stone Age PAT culture. The rings varied in size and shape, and mostly were of quartz or black dolorite. Some were very finely finished, one particularly fine slotted quartz ring varied in section thickness by only 0.004 of an inch.\n\nPOTTERY:\n\nTwo varieties or qualities of Neolithic pottery were encountered at Man Kok Tsui; a hard resilient stoneware, grey or buff in colour often with a purple tinge and frequently speckled through and through with blackish spots; and a soft, coarse, friable sand-mixed ware. No complete soft pots were found but, judging from pieces of lip and concentrations of sherds found, some of these pots must have been large. Man Kok Tsui yielded eleven whole, nearly whole, or reconstructable hard pots. Some of these looked as if they had been finished on a turn-table and some seemed entirely hand-made. The two largest hard pots, one eighteen and the other sixteen inches high, appeared to have traces of glaze. The shapes of the pots corresponded to those described by Finn, Shellshear, Schofield and Heanley from other sites in Hong Kong.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204489, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1962", "page_number": 121, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "108\n\nELSPETH MANEELY\n\nThe suggestion of glaze on two of the pots, the bronze, the variety of shapes of the polished stone adzes, and the impressed patterns on the pottery similar to Fr. Maglioni's PAT culture, all indicate a Late Stone Age or Early Bronze Age date (Warring States, 481-221 B.C.) for the Man Kok Tsui site. However, the people living in this area may have continued to use stone tools and pottery of this type well into the Han period.\n\nREFERENCES\n\n1 William Watson, Archaeology in China, Max Parrish, London, (1960).\n\n2 C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear, “A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hong Kong and the New Territories\", Proceedings of the First Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Hanoi, (Jan. 1932),\n\n3 Daniel J. Finn, S. J., Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island Near Hong Kong, Ricci Publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, (1958).\n\n4 W. Schofield, \"A Protohistoric Site at Shek Pik, Lantao, Hong Kong\", Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, (1938).\n\n5 R. L. Maglioni, S. J., \"Archaeology in South China\", Journal of East Asiatic Studies, Manila, II, No. 1, (Oct. 1952).\n\n6 R. L. Maglioni, S. J., \"Archaeology Finds in Hoifung\", Hong Kong Naturalist, VIII, Nos. 3-4, (March 1938).\n\n7 S. G. Davis and Mary Tregear, \"Man Kok Tsui, Archaeological Site 30, Lantau Island, Hong Kong\", Asian Perspectives, IV, Nos. 1-2, (1960), 183-212.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204908, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1965", "page_number": 16, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY\n\n11\n\nfound. The explanation for this is that this part of South China has been rising relative to sea level. This positive rise is connected with isostasy and eustatic movements of the oceans that cause cycles of submergence and emergence. Assuming a rise of one foot every hundred years then, Hong Kong in the last 2,500 years has risen 25 feet,\n\nDr. Heanley and his friend Mr. Walter Schofield, a government administrator, gathered a large and varied collection of celts from Kowloon, Cheung Chau and Lantau Island. Examination of this collection by experts soon established that they were not just freaks of nature but definite human artifacts. Since Heanley's first notification, other workers have found them in practically every part of the Colony, and contrary to his belief that they were principally found on granite hills, they have been found often in abundance on every other rock outcrop represented in the area — especially volcanic rock. It may be that because of the extreme susceptibility of granite to erosion, which causes 'badland country' with thin or no vegetation cover, the celts can be seen more easily,\n\nIncluding the places mentioned by Dr. Heanley, celts can still be found in the fields, on raised beaches or on low hills at Tai Wan, Hung Shing Ye, Yung Shu Wan, Aberdeen, Tai Po, Castle Peak, San Hui, So Kun Wat, Tsun Wan, Shatin, Shataukok, Man Kok Tsui, Ha Tsuen, Sheung Shui, Shek Pik, Sai Kung, Lai Chi Chung, Sok Ku Wan, Fanling and Kau Sai Chau.\n\nMuch is owed to Dr. Heanley, Mr. Schofield and Professor J. L. Shellshear, who was head of the Anatomy Department in the University of Hong Kong, for their conscientious and patient work in combing the Colony for other archaeological remains and sites after the celts had been identified. I have been told by our Vice-President, Sir Lindsay Ride, who knew all three intimately and often accompanied them on their field trips, that they were superbly energetic and covered tremendous distances in a day at great speed. Only fit and enthusiastic walkers could hope to last a whole day with them. They located several prehistoric sites, the most notable being So Kun Wat, Shek Pik and those at the northwest end of Lamma Island.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204909, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1965", "page_number": 17, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "12\n\nS. G. DAVIS\n\nThe sites at Tai Wan, Hung Shing Ye and Yung Shu Wan on Lamma Island have been most fruitful and have provided the material that was excavated and studied by Father D. J. Finn, which is partly on display today. The report of finds at Tai Wan came in a most interesting way. Mr. Tom Man Long (who happily is present with us tonight) was building the service reservoir in the Botanical Gardens opposite Government House when he noticed that the sand being used for the concrete had fragments of pottery and several axe-heads. Mr. Tom, as a keen collector of Chinese art and pottery, recognized the antiquity of the pottery and reported his discovery to the Waterworks Department who in turn notified Professor Shellshear. He visited Tai Wan and immediately recognized the richness of the site. At a later date Father Finn was asked by Professor Shellshear, who was going on leave, to interest himself in the finds. Father Finn wrote, \"I was very glad of the invitation and luck seemed to confirm the vocation. A few days after that, while I was still regarding any active participation as remote, I almost crushed a piece of obviously old pottery under foot as I walked past a sand-heap on a jetty at Aberdeen. The next step was to find where the sand came from. Having found out that and having got there, I found myself at the site from which I knew Professor Shellshear and his friends had already reaped a rich harvest.”\n\nIt was a fortunate day for archaeology when Father Finn began his work on Lamma. He brought an expert knowledge to the study and rapidly revealed tremendous archaeological treasures by thorough, careful digging. The results of this work were meticulously reported in The Hong Kong Naturalist from 1933 to 1936 and still later combined in one complete volume under the editorship of my friend, Father F. Ryan, S.J.\n\nMany of the best finds from the Lamma sites are in the British Museum. They were sent there by Professor Shellshear and were examined by Mr. Soame Jenyns, the curator for the Far East section. Mr. Jenyns had been in Hong Kong as a young administrator and had studied Chinese art. Outstanding among the specimens is a bronze sword about eleven inches long and distinguished by a zoomorph design in three panels along the blade. This sword has been dated as Warring Kingdoms Period, (421-221 B.C.). A bronze-socketed celt with a distinctive design", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204915, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1965", "page_number": 23, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "18\n\nS. G. DAVIS\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\n1. Bard, S. M., Chiu, T. N., and So, C. L. \"Stone Ring at Loh Ah Tsai, Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, VIII.\n\n2. Ch'en Kung-che (1957). \"Archaeological Surveys and Excavations at Hong Kong,\" Kao Koo Hsueh Po, No. 4.\n\n3. Davis, S. G. (1952). The Geology of Hong Kong (Archaeology), Government Printers, Chapter XI, pp. 188-194.\n\n4. Davis, S. G. and Tregear, M. (1961). \"Man Kok Tsui. Archaeological Site, 30, Lantau Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, IV.\n\n5. Davis, S. G. (1962). \"Hong Kong University Team Archaeological Activities for Period 1958-61,\" Asian Perspectives, V, 53.\n\n6. Davis, S. G. (1964). \"Rock Carvings at Shek Pik, Lantau Island, Hong Kong,\" Asian Perspectives, VII, 19-21.\n\n7. Finn, D. J. (1933-1936). \"Archaeological Finds on Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, Reprinted 1958, Ricci Hall Publications, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.\n\n8. Heanley, C. M. (1928). \"Hong Kong Celts,\" Bull. Geol. Soc. of China, VII, 209-214.\n\n9. Heanley, C. M. and Shellshear, J. L. (1932). A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hong Kong and the New Territories.\n\n10. Heanley, C. M. (1935). \"Fields of Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, VI, 233-239.\n\n11. Heanley, C. M. (1938). \"Letter to the Editor on Archaeological Finds in Hoifung,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, IX.\n\n12. Laufer, B. (1909). Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty, American Museum of Natural History Publication, East Asiatic Committee.\n\n13. Laufer, B. (1914). Chinese Clay Figures, Part I, Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 154.\n\n14. Laufer, B. (1917). The Beginnings of Porcelain in China, Field Museum of Natural History, Publication 192, Anthropological Series, XV, No. 2.\n\n15. Lo, H. L. (1956). \"The Sung Wong Toi and the Location of the Travelling Courts by the Seashore in the Last Day of the Sung,\" Journal of Oriental Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2, 185-217.\n\n16. Maglioni, R. (1938). \"Archaeological Finds in Hoifung District, China,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, No. 8, 208-214.\n\n17. Maglioni, R. (1940). \"Archaeology: New Nomenclature,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, X, No. 2, 130-133.\n\n18. Maglioni, R. (1940). \"Some Aspects of South China Archaeological Finds,\" Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, 209-229.\n\n19. Maglioni, R. (1952). \"Archaeology in South China,\" Journal of East Asiatic Studies, No. 2, University of Manila, Philippine Islands, 1-20.\n\n20. Meanelly, E. (1962). \"Excavations at Man Kok Tsui on Lantau Island,\" Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 2, 103-108.\n\n21. Schofield, W. (1935). \"Implements of Palaeolithic Type in Hong Kong,\" The Hong Kong Naturalist, VI, Nos. 3-4, 272-275.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204916, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1965", "page_number": 24, "title": "RAS-1965", "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERY\n\n19\n\n22. Schofield, W. (1938). \"The Proto-historic Site of the Hong Kong Culture at Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore, 235-305.\n\n23. Schofield, W. (1938). \"Report of Ancient Beads Found Near Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of the Third Congress of Prehistorians of the Far East, Singapore,\n\n24. Seligman, C. G. (1935). \"Early Pottery from Southern China,\" Transactions, Oriental Ceramic Society, London,\n\n25. Shellshear, J. L. (1928). \"Pottery Associated with Bronze Implements from Hong Kong,\" Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Proto-historic Sciences, London,\n\n26. Weinberger, W. (1949). \"Some Notes on Early Pottery and Stone Artifacts Excavated on Lamma Island, Hong Kong,\" Transactions, Oriental Ceramic Society.\n\n27. Welch, M. W. (1962). “A New Archaeological Site in Hong Kong,\" Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 2, 109-114.\n\n28. Yuen, P. L. (1928). \"Review of the Hong Kong Neolithic Collection,\" Bull. Geol. Soc. of China, VII, Nos. 3-4, 215-220.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1965.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s752cj653", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205766, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1969", "page_number": 72, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "66\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nsmall plateau averaging some 10 to 12 metres above sea level. This is a plane of marine denudation dating from a time when the sea level stood 12 metres higher than now, perhaps during the last great inter-glacial period (Riss-Würm), some 100,000 years ago. From this lower area much less clay could be washed than from the higher and steeper hill to the north; and the gentler wave-action on the west beach, normally on the lee of the island, made it about five times as long as that on the east of the isthmus, with very few large boulders. Somewhere on the west side of the 12 metres terrace, between about 1100 and 1500 A.D., there was at one or more times a small settlement, perhaps no more than one or two fishermen's huts; for at this point on the west beach are found pieces of Sung and even Ming pottery lying on the beach and in the cliff, which here is largely built up of coarse rainwash from the hill behind. There is, however, no modern settlement and no cultivation, and the island appears to be used only by boat-people, either for fishing or for burial of their dead; for on one visit Prof. Shellshear, who was with me, discovered a human skeleton of recent date two feet below the top of the sand cliff.\n\nMETHOD OF INVESTIGATION\n\nThe site was first discovered and investigated by Dr. Heanley and Prof. Shellshear, who worked together from about 1925 in looking for sites showing early human occupation. Much of what they found lay on the surface of the beaches, but wherever possible they noted the depth from the soil surface of objects found in the sand cliffs. Part of their material was presented later to the British Museum, and some to Mr. Eumorfopoulos and others, but the rest seems to have disappeared during the war in 1941 when the Hong Kong University was wrecked. Their code number for the site was 123, which points to a comparatively later discovery: the Tai Wan site on Lamma, for example, is numbered 83.\n\nThe technique employed by the writer at Tung Kwu was as follows. Objects not found in situ were collected and the initials of the site were painted on them in Chinese ink. If a single object was found in situ, its depth from the surface was measured in inches or centimetres; it was extracted; the depth and initials of the site were written on it or its wrapping paper, and later were recorded in Chinese ink on the specimen. In 1935, by which", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205772, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1969", "page_number": 78, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "72\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nThe above are in the writer's collection.\n\nThe following were in Father Finn's collection:\n\nStone hoe, triangular, slightly bruised at its points, from 114 cm. level, nearly 9 cm. long and quite light.\n\nAnother hoe, more worn, nearly 10 cm. long, from 122 cm. A cup-marked stone, nearly round, and fine-grained, from 92 cm.\n\nSmooth flat stone 4.5 cm. long, like a spatula, from 114 cm. Three adzes, all from 114 cm. depth: the first is roughly rectangular, its upper surface polished, but the lower entirely flaked except for the bevelled cutting edge. The second has diverging flattish sides, butt slightly rounded, and was polished on its surfaces after being flaked to shape. The third, which is only the butt-end of a fairly large adze, has slightly divergent sides, is polished on front and back, and is much flaked on one side. It is of bluestone and was found on the west side of the isthmus. The other two are of fine-grained acid rock.\n\nOne adze, found loose, of bluish ash-rock or hornstone, has rounded edges, slightly diverging, and convex butt and edge.\n\nThe writer also has a note of a flat sided and grip-marked stone in Prof. Shellshear's collection at Hong Kong University having been found at this site.\n\nB. ANCIENT POTTERY\n\nThis is by far the most numerous group of objects found on the site and the most numerous class of finds of pottery is the coarse string-marked type, which was so abundant that many pieces were considered not worth collecting. The same was true of the unornamented coarse pottery, some of which bore basket-work or nail-mark impressions in places, so that exact figures of the relative abundance of the fragments of different classes of pottery, whatever such statistics might be worth, cannot be furnished.\n\nThis rejection of coarse plain or cord-marked pottery only applies to fragments lying loose on the beach. All such pottery seen in the sections of cliff left by sand diggers was carefully collected, in the manner described in the section on methods of investigation. From these data it has been possible to draw up a scheme* showing the distribution in depth of the various classes of pottery grouped according to texture (coarse or fine) and ornament.\n\n* See Figs. 2 and 3.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205778, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1969", "page_number": 84, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "78\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nbears glaze, mostly gray, yellow, brown or blue, and was made on the potter's wheel. The levels of seven pieces are recorded: the rest were picked up loose.\n\nMost of the pieces found, both loose and in situ, can be fairly safely ascribed to the Sung dynasty. Two of those from known levels are more doubtful; one jar fragment, with a band of four shallow grooves, horizontal, round the exterior, which is covered by worn black glaze, may be older, and was found at 122 cm., the other, found in two pieces at 97 and 107 cm., has been ascribed to the Yuan dynasty. It is part of the lip and body of a brown-glazed vessel with rounded lip and one loop just below the junction of the lip and body, rising vertically in the centre, intended to hold a cord for keeping in place a stopper dish covering the mouth. Three shallow grooves decorate the neck, and three go round the body below the undecorated zone in which the loop is attached. The whole piece is glazed brown outside, and this extends to half way down the inside of the neck.\n\nAll but these two fragments were found at an average depth of 60 cm. in the bank. One of them was believed to be of Ming date by Professor Shellshear, who found and kept it; and the small fragment of a bowl lip from 41 cm. may well be from the large piece of a Sung tea bowl with wave ornament under the glaze inside, found loose on the beach, although they cannot be precisely fitted together. The depths of all these pieces cannot be fully relied on as indicating the time of their original deposition in the bank, as the upper levels down to about one metre have often been disturbed by later burials of bodies by boat people. Of the other pieces found loose, one had a flat unglazed foot, a kiln mark inside, at the bottom, and dark brown glaze and was undecorated: it was a small shallow dish about 10 cm. across the rim, and might well be of Tang date. Another bore typical Sung type underglaze flower ornament, made partly with a 16-tooth comb; it may have been a large tea-bowl, and its glaze was of the celadon shade. One large yellow-glazed rice bowl, its foot and foot-rim fully glazed, was undecorated and could be almost any date between Sung and early Ming.\n\nFinally there are three pieces which may well be considered modern. Two were picked up loose; one a complete small duck-egg blue wine or spirits bowl; another the bottom of a rice bowl", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205780, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1969", "page_number": 86, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "80\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nAntiquities in 1939, bulletin no. 11. On the Danh Do La site, a sand-bank, he describes a section 4.5 m. above sea level, where at 45 to 89 cm. below the ground surface is a culture stratum with potsherds, stones and pumice. His derivation of the pumice from the East Indies, while possible, is perhaps less likely than my suggestion of a more northern origin, as the prevailing winds in the South China seas are undoubtedly north-east to south-east, and typhoons generally make their approach felt by violent easterly gales. All but three of the pumice-bearing sandbanks in Hong Kong face east, and one of the three, Tai Wan in Lamma, faces south.\n\nLIFE AND INDUSTRY OF THE INHABITANTS\n\nThe only industry of which we can be certain is that still carried on by boat-people living near Tung Kwu, namely, fishing: yet there is little direct evidence of it in the finds. A rough stone ring collected by Professor Shellshear, and a stone axe blunted almost beyond recognition, with a notch on each side for attaching a rope or rattan, most likely used as a net sinker, and found loose on the surface of the isthmus during a visit by Professor Andersson, are the only direct traces. Yet if people ever lived on the island, this was almost the only resource open to them apart from the primitive 'slash and burn' cultivation indicated by the digging-stones. The food vessels left for the dead, the store jars, and the cooking stands they placed their hot round-bottomed caldrons on, indicate not only a settlement, probably shifting, but a cemetery. Tiled houses were no doubt a later development, going back no further than the Tang dynasty. The main interest of the relics found lies in the light they throw on the culture and life of the men who lived there before the coming of the colonists from the feudal principality of Yuet, and so before Chinese influence was strongly felt.*\n\n* James Watt writes:\n\nL\n\nSince Mr. Schofield worked on this site, later excavations in China have confirmed that the whole class of stamped designs found on the soft pottery of Tung Kwu (Plates 7 & 8) is unmistakably derived from the decorative art of the Shang culture in the north. Similar, and some identical, designs are found on Shang pottery of all periods (including those from the recently discovered early Shang site at Erh-li-t'ou in north-western Honan). The pattern of raised studs set in the meshes of a rhombic lattice or a \"compound lozenge\" is also one of the chief decorations appearing on bronzes of the Anyang phase of Shang culture. Further evidence of Shang", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205781, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1969", "page_number": 87, "title": "RAS-1969", "content_text": "TUNG KWU ISLAND\n\n81\n\ninfluence is provided by the recent discovery (in 1968) of a Shang-style stone ko (dagger-axe) on Sha Chau in association with the same soft pottery. The affinity between the decoration on the pottery of Sha Chau and Tung Kwu and Shang pottery is therefore rather stronger than Mr. Schofield's last sentence in the present article suggests. Perhaps his statement made thirty years ago in his classic report on the Shek Pik site remains true: \"From the earliest period to which the Hong Kong culture can be dated a trace of Chinese influence is present.\"\n\n++\n\nPre-war writings on Hong Kong Archaeology include:\n\n(1) J. G. Andersson — “Topography of the Hongkong Sites\" in Bulletin No. 11, Topographical and Archaeological Studies in the Far East, of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, Stockholm, 1939.\n\n(2) S. F. Balfour Section II, \"Archaeological Evidence\" at pp. 336-341 of his article \"Hong Kong Before The British” between pp. 330-352 and 440-464 of T'ien Hsia Monthly, Shanghai, 1941.\n\n(3) Fr. D. J. Finn — various articles in The Hong Kong Naturalist between 1933-36. These are now reprinted in (ed. T. F. Ryan, S.J.) Archaeological Finds On Lamma Island (Akhio) Near Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Ricci publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, 1958.\n\n(4) C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear \"A Contribution To The Prehistory Of Hongkong And The New Territories”, Praehistoria Asia Orientalis, I, Premier Congrès des Pré-historiens d'Extrême-Orient, Hanoi, 1932.\n\n(5) W. Schofield — \"Implements Of Palaeolithic Type In Hong Kong\" at pp. 272-275, The Hong Kong Naturalist, December, 1935.\n\n(6) W. Schofield — \"The Proto-Historic Site Of The Hong Kong Culture At Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong\" at pp. 235-305 of Proceedings of the Third Congress of Pre-historians of the Far East, Singapore, Government Printing House, 1940.\n\nA photograph of Mr. Schofield taken at Tung Kwu by Professor Shellshear on 9 December, 1931 is at Plate 9. Ed.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1969.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9g553n20d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206612, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1972", "page_number": 160, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "ARCHAEOLOGY IN H.K. AND SOUTH CHINA\n\n163\n\nquartz and jade, and stone beads, adzes and lance heads were discovered. Some of the pottery bore makers' marks, which seemed in some cases to resemble archaic Chinese characters. To deal with the problems raised by these and the ornaments on much of the pottery, the chief of which was a symbol resembling a long f and showing several variations, Prof. Shellshear invited the collaboration of the late Father Finn, S.J., a distinguished scholar in the Regional Seminary at Aberdeen, Hong Kong, and a lecturer at the University of Hong Kong. Father Finn devoted himself thenceforward to a careful study of this site and its culture, and published thirteen papers in the Hong Kong Naturalist on the subject, basing his work on a profound study of archaeological literature in neighbouring countries, Japan, China, Indo-China, the Straits and elsewhere.*\n\nThis study was greatly aided by the decision of the Hong Kong Government to have the site excavated at its own expense. In five weeks' work about half the undug portion of the sandbank was excavated to a depth of 6 to 7 feet, and some thousands of pottery fragments, a large number of other objects of stone, quartz, jade, bronze and even two or three partly of iron, were unearthed. Father Finn conducted this excavation, and included the description of the results in his articles.\n\nFather Finn also worked at other sites on Lamma and Hong Kong islands, and during visits to St. John's Island (where St. Francis Xavier died), and the Swabue district near Swatow, discovered more sites. The latter district gave very interesting and important results, which have recently been outlined in a paper by Father Maglioni in the Hong Kong Naturalist.\n\nIn 1932 Professor Shellshear brought the facts then known about Hong Kong's prehistory before the scientific world at the Prehistorians' Congress at Hanoi, whose proceedings were published by the École Française d'Extrême Orient as the Praehistorica Asiae Orientales (Hanoi, 1932). Father Finn summed up the results of his work at the Lamma Island site at the Manila Congress of the same body in 1935.†\n\n* A list of publications on local pre-history that includes those mentioned at various places in this article can be found at the end.\n\n† Whose proceedings were not published. I have Mr. Schofield's notes and can make them available to anyone who may wish to consider filling a gap in our published records.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206620, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1972", "page_number": 168, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "162 \n\nW. SCHOFIELD \n\nthought to be older than the Han dynasty (210 B.C.). It was known to have been conquered by the First Emperor and added to China, but even history is silent on it prior to that time (220 B.C.). Hence its prehistory lay shrouded in almost darkness, with only a few vague traditions and scanty ethnographic and linguistic data to shed light upon it. \n\nThe first beginnings of enquiry into the pre-Chinese culture of South China date back to about 1926 when Dr. Heanley, then investigating the geology of Hong Kong as an amateur, noticed lying here and there on hills of gravelly clay formed from decayed granite, stones which could not have been formed and left there naturally, and which clearly had the shape of stone adzes, as a rule smoothed and polished. Realising the importance of these finds, he devoted much of his leisure to a careful search for more of them, and in so doing discovered a number of sites, which included an axe factory, a workshop for jewellers working in quartz and other stones, and shore settlements, presumably of fishermen, as well as hill settlements. In this work he was associated with Prof. Shellshear, of Hong Kong University, and shortly before leaving Hong Kong in 1930 he interested me in the subject. I had for some time been investigating the geology of the Colony, and started this new line in association with Dr. Heanley and Prof. Shellshear. My contribution consisted mainly in discovering new sites, chiefly in sandbanks on the coasts and islands of the New Territory. Special attention was paid to these for two reasons; first, the beaches were being vigorously dug for sand to be used in building and public works; second, these sandbanks were the only places where a succession of layers containing objects of different ages could be found. As no beds of limestone exist in the Colony, it was vain to look for caves. \n\nIn my explorations I had occasion to examine a beach site discovered by Dr. Heanley on the island of Lamma close to Hong Kong. This had been dug back a considerable distance further, and I saw, littered over the beach, vast quantities of pottery, with more projecting from the sandy cliff behind. One piece of a cup I found was covered with a bottle-green glaze, a ware which was later found to be a feature of the culture at this and several other sites in Hong Kong. Later visits to the site revealed that bronze weapons and tools were to be found in fair number; in addition, rings of", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206626, "series_id": 26, "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine", "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊", "series_use_hku_proxy": false, "document_key": "RAS-1972", "page_number": 174, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "168\n\nW. SCHOFIELD\n\nEditor's Note The manuscript breaks off abruptly at this point, and since it was passed to me after Mr. Schofield's death in December 1968 and I was hitherto unaware of its existence there is now no means of knowing whether it was completed or finished in part only. It is reproduced here for its interest as a contemporary statement of the progress of the archaeology of Hong Kong and South China by about 1938, when it was written, and for the useful account it provides of the part played by Schofield, Shellshear and Heanley in the early period of Hong Kong archaeological studies.\n\nPRE-WAR WRITINGS ON HONG KONG ARCHAEOLOGY INCLUDE:\n\n(1) J. G. Andersson — \"Topography of the Hongkong Sites\" in Bulletin No. 11, Topographical and Archaeological Studies in the Far East, of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, Stockholm, 1939.\n\n(2) S. F. Balfour Section II, “Archaeological Evidence\" at pp. 336-341 of his article \"Hong Kong Before The British\" between pp. 330-352 and 440-464 of T'ien Hsia Monthly, Shanghai, 1941. [Since reprinted in Vol. 10 (1970) of this Journal -Ed.]\n\n(3) Fr. D. J. Finn — various articles in The Hong Kong Naturalist between 1933-36. These are now reprinted in (ed. T. F. Ryan, S.J.) Archaeological Finds On Lamma Island (Ai》) Near Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Ricci publications, Ricci Hall, University of Hong Kong, 1958.\n\n(4) C. M. Heanley and J. L. Shellshear “A Contribution to the Prehistory of Hongkong and the New Territories\", Praehistoria Asia Orientalis, I, Premier Congrès des Préhistoriens d'Extrême-Orient, Hanoi, 1932.\n\n(5) W. Schofield — \"Implements Of Palaeolithic Type In Hong Kong\" at pp. 272-275, The Hong Kong Naturalist, December. 1935.\n\n(6) W. Schofield \"The Proto-Historic Site of the Hong Kong Culture at Shek Pik, Lantau, Hong Kong\" at pp. 235-305 of Proceedings of the Third Congress of Pre-historians of the Far East, Singapore, Government Printing House, 1940.\n\nJ. W. H., Hong Kong, 1972.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 } ]