[
    {
        "id": 208801,
        "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-1979",
        "page_number": 258,
        "title": "RAS-1979",
        "content_text": "BOOK REVIEWS\n\n231\n\nstrength (“gunboat diplomacy” and “showing the flag”) that westerners were indeed the equal of Chinese, and that the trade which was mutually beneficial ought to be allowed to flourish in peace and tranquillity.\n\nProfessor Graham shows quite clearly that, of course, the dominant theme of this whole period was the issues raised by the meeting of traditional sino-centrism and the dynamic of western expansion, a familiar theme from the work of countless China scholars including Fairbank and Waley. The author details much of the theme in episodes in Canton (“a war of nerves between British ‘barbarians’ and Canton ‘imbeciles’”), at Chusan, at Shanghai (in 1841 a “squalid” place “rising from the middle of ‘a low unhealthy marsh’”, but by 1858, a queen of a city “with handsome houses and gardens and busy quays”, pp. 217-218), and finally, close to the imperial seat, at Taku at the mouth of the Peiho.\n\nThe book pays the usual attention to some of the familiar and hoary myths: on the one hand, the Chinese official belief in “self sufficiency” and on the other the Western traders' belief in the limitless potential of China for international trade (The present interest in China of the international business community sounds all too familiar to the historian!); the “inscrutability” of the Chinese (the author seems to subscribe to this myth even toward present day Chinese!); their “traditional courtesy to the stranger” (For accuracy substitute “curiosity toward” for “courtesy to”!); and the curious belief that Chinese did not (do not?) react to heat and cold and pain and hunger like the rest of mankind (despite which, history shows quite clearly that the Chinese do indeed react to such stimuli as armed force and deprivation, like their fellows.)\n\nGraham on occasion overstates and exaggerates his analysis of the character and temperament of oriental races, seemingly succumbing to the now fashionable habit of admiration for anything “oriental” that lately, and again, permeates western attitudes and approaches to the Orient.\n\nOne also notes a contradiction or so: on page 356 we read,\n\n“Whether out of ignorance, natural courage, or despair, they (Chinese) were never cowed by the trappings of military might. The British Commissioner underestimated their determination and tenacity.”",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1979.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2801w5938",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 209290,
        "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-1981",
        "page_number": 193,
        "title": "RAS-1981",
        "content_text": "BRO TSUNG LAI SHUN IN MASSACHUSETTS\n\nIn Gratton and Ivy's History of Freemasonry in Shanghai and Northern China is an account of the formation of Union Lodge No 1951 EC of Tientsin. The first two paragraphs read:\n\nFreemasonry in Tientsin commenced its official life with the formation of this Lodge, and until the year 1902, it was the only Lodge working under the English Constitution. It is therefore the senior Lodge in Tientsin and its members have always taken a prominent and active part in the work of the Craft. In the early days it was no uncommon thing for the members residing in Taku, and Tongku to saddle their ponies and ride to Tientsin especially to attend the Lodge Meetings. In those days railways and Banks in this area were non-established, and the firm of Messrs. G. W. Collins and Co., were for years the Lodge bankers.\n\nThe first meeting of the Lodge was held on the 7th January 1881, in the hall of the English Methodist Mission in Taku Road. Bro. A. B. Menzies, P.M. Doric Lodge, No. 1433, E.C. being in the Chair, Bro. J. Innocent, Newall Lodge, No. 1434, E.C. Acting Senior Warden, Bro. J.M. Moore, Doric Lodge, No. 1433, E.C. Acting Junior Warden, Bro. C.A. Schultz, Tuscan Lodge, No. 1027, E.C. Acting Senior Deacon, Bro. James Stewart, Tuscan Lodge, No. 1027, E.C. Acting Junior Deacon, Bro. T.G. Downey, St. John's Lodge, No. 34, U.S.A. [probably of Baltimore, Maryland] Acting Inner Guard, and Bros. G. Von Mollendorff, Germania Lodge, G.C. G.W. Collins, St. John's Lodge, No. 175, S.C. J.J. Hatch, Ionic Lodge, No. 1781, E.C., J.D. Addicks Ancient Landmark, Mass. Const., W. Swain, Ancient Landmark, and Tsung Lai Shun of Hampden Lodge, Massachusetts Constitution,\n\nThis is the only reference in the book to Bro Tsung, and additional information has been sought. Bro Tsung is the first master mason of Chinese race known to have lived in China.\n\nReprinted with permission from Chater-Cosmo Transactions (1980 vol. 2). See also Carl Smith, \"Chan Lai-sun and his family: a 19th century China coast family\", JHKBRAS 14 (1974). - Hon. Ed.",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1981.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/ff36bt18m",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214336,
        "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-1998",
        "page_number": 194,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "158 days later, coincidentally, on 23 September 1861, a small postscript to the China coverage of The Illustrated London News established that there was indeed a link between Hong Kong and British actions in China.\n\nThe item took the form of an illustration of a Monument to the Royal Marines, erected in the Cemetery at \"Hong Kong, China\". In explanation of the illustration, it read: “The front inscription is as follows; 'In memory of the officers, non-commissioned officers, buglers, and privates of the Brigade of Royal Marines (Light Infantry); and the non-commissioned officers, buglers, and gunners of the battery of Royal Marine Artillery, who fell in the execution of their duty in China during the years 1857, 1858, 1859, and 1860. Erected by their comrades.' The slab on the right-hand side gives the names of three officers and 48 men killed in action; whilst that on the left shows the total loss from all causes to have been 257; and the numbers wounded were 27 officers, 16 sergeants, 20 corporals, four buglers, and 155 gunners and privates. The rear slab records the services of the brigade, from the taking of Canton in Dec. 1857, with the various expeditions in the neighbourhood, the Taku Forts in 1859, the defence of Shanghai, and the brilliant campaign in the north, which ended in the Treaty of Peking on Oct. 24, 1860.\"\n\nHong Kong, SAR, China\n\nAt midnight, 30 June 1997, Hong Kong was returned by Britain to China.\n\nThe Monument to the Marines \"who fell in the execution of their duty in China during the Years 1857, 1858, 1859, and 1860\" still stands, known only to the few Hong Kong residents today who take an interest in things of the past. And to most of these few, the past events which the Monument records are too distant in ethos as well as in time even to be uncomfortable; but are felt rather as irremediably alien.\n\nThis brief survey and commentary on the contemporary China coverage in one British periodical during the period 5 January to 23 September 1861 may perhaps offer reassurance that, like us today, the contemporary British public before, during and after Lord Elgin's China Campaign was also more comfortable when the soldiers could come",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    }
]