[ { "id": 204395, "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": 27, "title": "RAS-1962", "content_text": "18\n\nF. S. DRAKE\n\nworking with their hands in the well-kept vineyards, the cherished penmanship and the care of ancient manuscripts reminiscent of 'the knowledge and zeal, which once so eminently distinguished the Chaldaean priesthood'.\n\n4\n\nThis is the Church which evangelized the greater part of Asia during the ancient and mediaeval periods, truly it has been called a Church on Fire, and the Great Missionary Church of Asia. But that the fruit of its labours are no longer manifest is because no Church has suffered martyrdom as this Church has; it has become the great martyred Church of the world.\n\nIII. THE NESTORIAN CHRISTIANS OF THE ORDOS REGION\n\nThe story of the Nestorian missionary movement before the Mongols conquered Central Asia and established the Yüan Dynasty in China (A.D. 1260 to 1368) can be pieced together with difficulty from scattered references in the Syriac records; but during the Mongol domination vivid descriptions of their activities have been left to us in the pages of the Mediaeval travellers from Europe to the courts of the Mongol Khans. These can be divided into two groups: Franciscan Friars and travelling merchants.\n\nIt was the time of the Crusades, and the great widening of men's horizons that these brought about. The enlightened policy of the Arabs had been followed by the restrictive measures of the Turks, now converted to Islam. Europe was stirred by the danger. The astonishing success of the First Crusade (1096-1104) was followed by the failures of the Second (1146-1187), and Third (1189-1192). The Fourth Crusade was diverted against Constantinople (1200-1205); shortly after, the Mongols appearing from the ends of the earth ravaged Armenia, and crossing the Caucasus, penetrated into Southern Russia in 1232. The great invasion followed in 1238—Russia, Poland, Hungary. At the\n\n11 A. H. Layard, Nineveh and Its Remains, London, Murray, 1849.\n\n12 Stewart, The Nestorian Missionary Enterprise, 1928.\n\n13 These have been collected by Assemanni, Bibliotheca Orientalis, Rome, 1728 (4 vols.). See also Mingana, The Early Spread of Christianity in Central Asia and the Far East, Manchester Univ. Press 1925, and Bull. of John Rylands Library, July 1925.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1962.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/9s166f47f", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 204597, "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-1963", "page_number": 78, "title": "RAS-1963", "content_text": "BRITISH LEGATION AT PEKING\n\n67\n\nran parallel to the wall of the Legation in which the main gate was situated, and in summer often flooded the road, and at times gave off a horrible stench since many drains ran into it. Meanwhile repairs to the Legation proceeded and Rennie describes, among other things, Colonel Neale doing his accounts, the five hundred Chinese coolies being paid, a temporary strike, and continual trouble over 'squeeze'. The part intended for the members of the Legation to live in was now called 'Legation Court' and Rennie preserved, in translation, an estimate for redecorating the front of these buildings in the Chinese style, the total being one thousand and fifty Mexican dollars.\n\nBy mid-April the weather was growing hot and on April 26th Parkes, Wyndham, Lt. Gow (in charge of the guard) and Rennie made a trip to the Western Hills in search of a temple which could be adopted as a residence during the extreme heat of the summer. The Russians, who had maintained an ecclesiastical mission in Peking since the Treaty of Kiakhta in 1727, had been in the habit of going to the Western Hills in the summer, and probably gave the newly arrived English this tip. Henceforth this was to become the yearly practice of foreign legations in Peking. Meanwhile the first mail from home arrived on April 27th, having been posted in England on February 26th. In this way Rennie's account is full of interesting detail. For instance just near to the entrance to the Legation there was now a line of Peking carts for hire, just as later there was a rickshaw stand, and more recently pedicabs. From this time onwards Rennie described the arrival of various English visitors who were entertained at the Legation.\n\n* Rennie visited it in March, 1861. It was situated in the same street as the newly acquired French Legation, and the members consisted of an Archimandrite together with three ecclesiastical and six lay members. (Rennie, I, 43-4.). This place, known as the Nan-kuan (\"Southern Hostel\"), was originally a hostel for Russian envoys and, since it had a large compound, it was used by Russian merchants who after 1698 received the privilege of sending a trade caravan to Peking at regular intervals. It was situated near the Mongol market. As a result of the Treaty of Kiakhta (1727) two hundred Russian merchants were allowed to come to Peking every third year to trade, and Russia was permitted to build a church in the grounds of the Nan-kuan, and appoint priests. In addition four Russian students and two tutors were allowed to reside there and were subsidized by the Chinese government to study the Chinese, Mongol and Manchu languages. When the first Russian minister to Peking, Colonel Balluzeck, took up residence there in July 1861, the Nan-kuan became the Russian Legation, and the ecclesiastical mission then joined up with another Russian mission at the Pei-kuan (\"Northern Hostel'). See footnote 29 below,\n\n}\n\nI\n\n:\n\nJ", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1963.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/4m90m091v", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205098, "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": 54, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "49\n\nSINO-WESTERN CONTACTS UNDER THE\n\nMONGOL EMPIRE*\n\nHerbert FRANKE\n\nContacts between Chinese civilization and that of the West, whatever we take \"West\" to mean in this context, have a long and tortuous history which, for some periods, is still far from sufficiently studied. All historians, however, even the most Europe-centered ones, do agree that these contacts reached a pre-modern, all-time high under the Mongol empires in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and even the most superficial or condensed textbooks of world history have a few words to say about East-West relations following the conquests and campaigns of Chingis Khan. In such books, we frequently encounter the statement that this period facilitated intercourse and exchange because of the so-called Pax Mongolica, \"Mongol Peace\", when the Mongol domination of East and Central and even great parts of West Asia crystallized into an empire stretching from the Yellow Sea to Southern Russia. Like so many historical tags, this is, however, a statement that loses much of its seemingly uncontrovertible truth when one considers the historical facts. If it is really the task of the historian to reconsider from time to time historical writings and historical dicta, and to debunk history if necessary, then this notion of Pax Mongolica requires qualification.\n\nA historian of China will therefore perhaps ask if cultural contacts and interchange between China and the non-China West were really more frequent and easy under the Mongols in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries than under the Six Dynasties and the T'ang when no Eurasian universal empire like that of the Mongols existed. We know that a great number of travellers, missionaries, and merchants from the Western Regions came to China between the late second and the ninth centuries A.D., and that many non-Chinese cultural elements penetrated East, among them the world religion of Buddhism that became such an important part of Chinese culture. Most of the early Buddhist\n\nText of the Hume Memorial Lecture delivered at Yale University, February 5th, 1965. The author is Director of the Institute for East Asian Cultural and Linguistics Sciences, University of Munich.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205117, "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": 73, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "68\n\nHERBERT FRANKE\n\nadministration of the local rulers of the Tun-huang region who were descended from the Chagatay branch of Chingis Khan's clan was still modelled after the Chinese prototypes. The names of offices mentioned in this Mongol letter written in the Mongol script are transcriptions from Chinese. The same applies to the feudal titles of these local rulers: they are Chinese and can be identified through Chinese sources. The document must have been written about 1355 or 1360, that is, rather late and at a time when the Tun-huang and Turfan regions were certainly not under direct control from Peking. Another document found in Turfan and dating from the same period has furnished evidence for another set of Chinese titles, in a context which is, linguistically, a strongly Turkicized Mongolian. The names of offices mentioned show that the administration of these Chagatay kings was a replica of the Chinese central and provincial government organization. Even the disposition of the Mongol documents found in Central Asia shows Chinese influence: wherever the name of a Khan occurs, a new line is begun.23 This same feature occurs also in the Mongolian letters written by the Ilkhans of Persia to the King of France and to the Pope. The presence of Chinese chancellery practices in Persia under the Ilkhans is further shown by the Chinese seals or rather stamps on these letters.24 We could even go one step further and ask how much of the government and taxation practices of the Golden Horde rulers in Southern Russia is of Chinese origin. It is generally recognized that medieval Russia, that is, the Muscovite kingdom of the Ruriks, was deeply influenced by the \"Tatar\" domination and took over some of the Tatar or Mongol patterns of government. The tendencies toward centralization in sixteenth century Russia can be explained by these Tatar influences which might eventually go back to Chinese administrative patterns.\n\nChinese art forms too have spread West under the Mongols. A good example is Persian miniature painting. It is not necessary to be a trained art historian or a specialist in Islamic art; even a layman would notice that thirteenth and fourteenth century Persian miniatures were deeply influenced by Chinese painting. On some early miniatures we find trees, rocks and clouds painted in the same way as Chinese painters did. Chinese painting must therefore have been known to the Persians under Mongol rule. Recently unassailable proof for the presence of Chinese art in Persia has", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 205119, "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": 75, "title": "RAS-1966", "content_text": "70\n\nHERBERT FRANKE\n\ncountry which had direct contacts with Europe, China and India and where information on all these parts of the world was available that went beyond the hazy and fanciful notions which existed in the other civilizations on foreign and distant countries. The geographical situation of Persia evidently favored this universal outlook on history as much as the Mongol domination over great parts of Asia had contributed to it.\n\nIf we try to assess the lasting influences of the Mongol rule in Asia we are confronted with the fact that from the second half of the thirteenth century on, or, to be more specific, from Kublai Khan (r. 1260-1294) on it is difficult to speak of a single Mongol empire. In theory Kublai Khan was, as Great Khan, the ruler of an empire stretching from China and Korea to Iran and Southern Russia, but the diversity of the subjugated countries made itself more and more felt. Kublai regarded himself more a Chinese emperor than a universal ruler. In China as elsewhere in the Mongol empire development followed a line where the local cultural substratum after some initial eclipses gradually re-emerged. In the Near Eastern and South Russian Mongol dominions this process was furthered by the Mongol rulers' conversion to Islam, and in Central Asia the Chagatay dominion followed soon afterwards. In the middle of the fourteenth century this development had already gone far. We should therefore regard the individual Mongol dominions as distinct cultural entities under Mongol rulers. There was no such thing as a Mongol civilization which reached all social strata in the individual dominions. On the contrary, the ruling Mongol and Turkish minority, was everywhere assimilated in varying degrees by the existing national civilizations. This process of assimilation was, as far as China is concerned, accelerated after 1368. The national dynasty of Ming which had, through a series of civil wars, gained supremacy over China and driven the Mongol ruler and his followers out of China and back into the steppes, introduced marriage legislation which forbade foreigners to intermarry within their group and instead encouraged or even prescribed intermarriage with the Chinese. This de-segregation imposed by the state resulted in the virtual extinction of the foreign national and linguistic groups on Chinese soil within a relatively short period.28 China and her traditional civilization had, by the end of the fourteenth century, scored a complete victory over the invaders and immigrants. In the other parts of\n\nPage 75\n\nPage 76", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1966.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/bz60k0811", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 206506, "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": 54, "title": "RAS-1972", "content_text": "48\n\nJ. L. CRANMER-BYNG\n\ntendent of Trade for the Northern Ports and Superintendent of Trade for the Southern Ports would find some material of use in this section of the six-point memorandum. For instance, it states that at Newchwang, the staple trade commodity is soya-bean cakes, but that this trade is not open to foreign ships. Details of the suggested method of collecting and reporting the customs revenues of this port are then given. At Tengchow, the memorialists state, an illicit foreign trade has been going on for a number of years, unbeknown to the Court. Now that it has officially become a treaty port, officials must be appointed to administer foreign trade there. As regards the five original treaty ports of Canton, Foochow, Amoy, Ningpo, and Shanghai, no changes in the regulations need be made. As regards the newly opened ports of Ch'iungchow, Swatow, Taiwan, and Tamsui, as well as Chenkiang, Kiukiang, and Hankow on the Yangtze, the governors-general and governors in whose jurisdiction these ports lie should jointly memorialize with the imperial commissioner at Shanghai concerning officials to be appointed to take charge of these places. Monthly reports on the volume of foreign trade at these ports are to be sent to the Tsungli Yamen and the Board of Revenue.\n\nSuggestions are also made for arrangements to be made for trade with Russia at the newly opened trading places of Urga, Kashgar, and Kalgan.\n\nAccording to the treaties, twenty percent of the duties on foreign trade are to be held for the payment of the indemnity. A counterfoil will be provided so that the total amount of revenue collected can be checked against the amount withheld.\n\nThe memorialists then return to the point they were making near the beginning of point 3 [as translated above].\n\nThus, the amount of foreign duty collected each year being clearly shown, the officials through whose hands it passes will be unable to enrich themselves through peculation. Not only will they be deprived of the means of living, they will secretly resort to other malpractices. It is further feared that wily clerks, when they see there is no money to be made, may provoke trouble, thus endangering the public interest. If we do not clearly lay down regulations providing them with expenses for transacting official business, we very much fear that unforeseen malpractices will arise. It is therefore proposed to request that an order be given to the superintendent", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1972.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gm80qf99h", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 216419, "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": 178, "title": "RAS-2003", "content_text": "128\n\nimmediately led to political intervention by Russia, France and Germany which forced Japan to give way and retrocede Liaodong to China. This high-handed action by Western powers left a permanent scar on the Japanese psyche.\n\nIn the last years of the 19th century, as a result of Russian forward policy in the Far East, Russian pressure had forced the Chinese to grant them railway and territorial concessions in the southern part of Manchuria. This, as well as Russian interference in Korea, led to ever increasing Japanese fears of further Russian expansion within the Pacific region. The Russian Government used the Boxer Rebellion in 1900 as a pretext for sending thousands of troops into Manchuria, ostensibly to protect the China Eastern Railway. Her encroachment in Manchuria, which she had promised to evacuate after having occupied it on the pretext of protecting it against the Boxers but which she firmly held, disturbed the Powers.\n\nThe causes of war were not insignificant. During the years immediately following the suppression of the Boxers Russia saw an increasingly formidable Japan rise up before her. Put bluntly, Russia and Japan went to war to determine who would control Manchuria and Korea, with one of the main Japanese grounds being fear generated by the threat posed by the land-bridge of Korea pointing threateningly straight at Japan, with the belligerent Russians poised on Korea's northern border. Another, and possibly a more credible threat, was the probability that a strong, victorious Russia would lead to the dismemberment of the Chinese Empire. This would have made a case for Japan's 'defensive war' - to occupy Port Arthur in order to place herself in a position to prevent any such dismemberment by laying the first stone in her long-term plan for predominance in Peking.\n\nThe war 1904-1905\n\nAfter several years of Russian-Japanese political sparring the latter grew impatient with diplomacy and war became inevitable. The Japanese took the initiative. Their plan envisaged a swift knock-out blow against the Russian Far Eastern Fleet with a night torpedo-boat attack, followed the next day by her fleet attacking the Russian fleet off Port Arthur and defeating it. Their next move was to get two armies into the field, the first to be landed on the west coast of Korea at", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390", "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": 216442, "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": 201, "title": "RAS-2003", "content_text": "151\n\nas accommodation, as local or major headquarters, staff or Other Rank accommodation and as storage space. Although it was the usual practice for both Russians and Japanese to use Chinese temples as field-dressing stations and even as hospitals, only two or three references to the practice have been found in contemporary books. There are at least two published photographs of wounded Japanese soldiers lying on stretchers in rows on the floors or in the temple courtyard, with one in particular showing a seriously wounded soldier lying at the feet of two large carved and stuccoed Chinese deities, two of four standard images of Guardians and Assistants to the major deity. The role of the fierce Guardians was to protect the temple from malignant forces and must have been either a comfort to the casualty or a frightening figure from the other world.\n\nThe difference between Russian and Japanese use of Chinese temples was that the former, when they departed, seldom left anything behind worth carrying away. The Japanese respected Chinese religious statuary, because they too were often Buddhists, but also because, although the deities on altars were different, they were sufficiently similar for Japanese to respect them.\n\nPost-war\n\nWe have described a few of the aspects of Chinese problems during the war and the effect the warring armies had on the Chinese officials and commonality on whose territory the war was being fought. The Chinese, who gradually tended to side with the Japanese in the hope of recovering Manchuria, adroitly avoided any involvement in the fighting.\n\nPost-war, Japan assumed the rights in Manchuria that Russia had previously held, with a garrison of some 10,000 men to protect its interests, primarily in southern Manchuria where it was known as the Guandong Army (Kuantung), though its controls extended in practice to the whole of the territory, with the Chinese ostensibly maintaining civil authority.\n\nThe change in Chinese official and student circles within the decade following the Sino-Japanese War, i.e. from 1884-1904, was from anti-Japanese and pro-Russian, to pro-Japanese and anti-Russian after the Russo-Japanese War. The Japanese victory clearly signalled to the Chinese in Peking that the Japanese were the model to study and possibly", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390", "rank": 0 } ]