[ { "id": 206451, "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-1971", "page_number": 268, "title": "RAS-1971", "content_text": "242\n\nTOOGOOD, C. W. -\n\nTORRENS, Dr. Paul R..\n\nTORRENS, Mrs. Paul R.\n\nTORRIBLE, G. R.*\n\nTOWNER, J. A.\n\nTRISTRAM, M. P. W.\n\nTSEUNG, Dr. F. I.\n\nTUCK, Miss Jean\n\nTURNER, Sir Michael*\n\nUHALLEY, Dr. S., Jr.\n\nVALE, Miss M. VARNEY, Dr. C. B.\n\nVETCH, H.\n\nVETCH, Mrs. H.\n\nVIÒ, Dr. E. G.\n\nVISICK, Mrs. M.\n\nVOSS, Dr. A.\n\nc/o Oxford University Press, 5th floor, News Building, 633 King's Road, H.K.\n\n59A Nga Tsin Wai Road, A2, Kowloon,\n\nAs above.\n\nc/o The Hong Kong Club, H.K.\n\nUnknown.\n\nRating & Valuation Dept., Murray House, Garden Road, H.K.\n\nChina Building, 4th floor, H.K.\n\nUnknown.\n\n'Whispers', Riversdale, Bourne End, Bucks, England.\n\nc/o Dept. of History, Duke University, Durham, N. Carolina, U.S.A,\n\n49 Talbot Road, London, W.2. England. c/o Dept. of Geography, United College, C.U.H.K., 9A, Bonham Road, H.K. Belmont Court 10A, 10 Kotewall Road, H.K.\n\nAs above.\n\n315, H.K. & Shanghai Bank Building, H.K. Dept. of English, University of Hong Kong, H.K.\n\n27, Babington Path, H.K.\n\nWAINWRIGHT, Mrs. J. A. 5, Goldsmith Road, Jardines Lookout, H.K.\n\nWALDEN, J. C. C.\n\nWARD, Miss J. E. A.*\n\nWATERS, D. D.\n\nWATSON, James L.\n\nWATSON, K. A.\n\nWATT, James C. Y.\n\nWEBSTER, J. L. H.\n\nWEI, Dr. Tat\n\nWEINREBE, H. M.\n\nWELCH, Holmes, H.*\n\nc/o The Colonial Secretariat, H.K.\n\nc/o National Provincial Bank Ltd., Bideford, North Devon, England.\n\nMorrison Hill Technical Institute, 6 Oi Kwan Road, Morrison Hill, Wan Chai, H.K.\n\nDept. of Anthropology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77004, U.S.A. c/o Lammert Bros., Pedder Building, H.K. c/o The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T.\n\nc/o The British Council, P.K. 15, Sisli, Istanbul, Turkey,\n\n3, Fontana Gardens, 5th Floor, Causeway Hill, H.K.\n\nc/o Weinrebe & Pennell Ltd., Room 805 The Bank of Canton Building, H.K.\n\n4 Holden Lane, Concord, Mass., U.S.A.\n\n*Life Member\n\nPlease notify the Hon. Secretary of any inaccuracy", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1971.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/z029vt43g", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207353, "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": 121, "title": "RAS-1975", "content_text": "THE EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN MILITARY TALENT: \n\nCHINESE TRADITION AND LATE CH'ING PRACTICE \n\nRICHARD J. SMITH* \n\nDespite China's persistent and often pronounced Sinocentrism, and her general distrust of aliens in the interior, the theoretically self-sufficient Middle Kingdom in practice had to make almost continual use of foreign military talents. This was true not only of conquest dynasties and periods when martial values were disesteemed.2 The expansive Chinese dynasties of Han and T'ang also employed barbarians in a great number of civil and military capacities. It has been estimated, for example, that at times more than half of the T'ang military posts were held by men of foreign origin.3 So pronounced was Tang Wu-tsung's appreciation for foreign administrative and military talents that he commissioned his minister, Li Te-yü, to compile the biographies of thirty foreigners from Ch'in to T'ang times who had rendered \"meritorious and loyal\" service to China. This two chuan work, no longer extant, bore the title I-yü kuei-chung chuan (Biographies of Foreigners Who Returned to Loyalty), emphasizing the idea that it was natural for outsiders to come to the fold of Chinese culture and offer their submission and service to the Middle Kingdom.4 \n\nWe do not know who the thirty individuals who \"left [their] distant lands and returned to China\" were, but there are several likely candidates. By looking briefly at a few representative foreigners in the Chinese military service, and examining the foreword to the I-yü kuei-chung chüan (preserved in Li Te-yu's collected works) and other evidence, we may gain some idea of the theory behind employing barbarian officers, as well as the circumstances under which they were engaged, the standards by which their loyalty was judged, and the means by which they were controlled. Such a survey provides the necessary backdrop for a discussion of Chinese policy toward foreign employees in the late Ch'ing period, when China faced unprecedented challenges both within and without.5 \n\nAlthough by 1860 at least a few Chinese had come to see that China was entering a new stage in her foreign relations, Chinese \n\n* Dr. Smith is Assistant Professor of History, Rice University, Houston, Texas.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1975.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/j0995146d", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207639, "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-1976", "page_number": 27, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "REFLECTIONS ON THE COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MODERNIZATION IN CHINA AND JAPAN: MILITARY ASPECTS\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH*\n\nPaul Cohen has recently warned against measuring nineteenth century China’s modernization by the yardstick of Meiji Japan. From the vantage point of Japan’s ‘success,’” he writes, “the late Ch’ing epitomizes ‘failure,’ and next to the dynamism of the Meiji era, China, during the latter half of the nineteenth century, appears as the very embodiment of stasis. The trouble with this perspective is that it glosses over a very important fact, namely that China and Japan, in their respective encounters with the West in the last century, did not start out at the same point.” Cohen suggests that a “much more valid way of measuring change in nineteenth century China is by internal points of reference.” “Modernization is not, after all, a horserace,” he maintains,2\n\nThis approach has much to commend it, if only as a reminder that China did not simply stand still in the nineteenth century. Thomas Kennedy correctly indicates, for example, that for all its weaknesses, the “self-strengthening” movement from 1860 to 1894-1895 brought “far more comprehensive and far-sighted [changes] than earlier studies infer.” Cohen notes that when we measure the modernizing experiences of China and Japan against those of the rest of the world, rather than against each other, “we find that both China and Japan come off relatively well.”+\n\nYet the knowledge that historians would eventually vindicate China’s modernizing efforts would have been small consolation to Li Hung-chang at Shimonoseki. One doubts that he muttered at the signing table in 1895, “How far China has come in the last thirty years!” The fact is that Chinese modernizers continually viewed their progress in terms of Japan’s accomplishments. Li Hung-chang wrote as early as 1872: “Japan is just a small nation. Recently she has begun to trade with Europe; she has instituted\n\n* Dr. Smith is Assistant Professor of History, Rice University, Houston, Texas. His article “The Employment of Foreign Military Talent: Chinese Tradition and Late Ch’ing Practice” appeared in Vol. 15 of this Journal, pp. 113-138.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207652, "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-1976", "page_number": 40, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "The Teochiu: Ethnicity in Urban Hong Kong\n\nDOUGLAS W. SPARKS*\n\nThe Teochiu1 are a highly visible ethnic group2 in Hong Kong. They are aggressive, belligerent, likely to be involved in triads or narcotics, highly organized and shrewd businessmen. This is the stereotype of Teochiu that is widely held by non-Teochiu in Hong Kong. Emotional reactions to Teochiu at times seem to approach the vehemence of racist beliefs, although the diacritics signalling identity are not phenotypic but linguistic, cultural (food, emphasis placed on certain rituals rather than others) and most importantly for this article an individual's self-identification as Teochiu and concomitant involvement in largely Teochiu social networks and possibly in Teochiu organizations. It is difficult, however, to explicate the meaning of this identity in that there is tremendous diversity in the Teochiu population of Hong Kong. Some estimates of this population suggest that it is as high as one-fifth of the total population (see below). There is no clear-cut relationship between ethnicity and occupation in urban Hong Kong, much less between ethnicity and class. Teochiu are found in all sectors of the economy and at all socio-economic levels.\n\n* The author is a postgraduate research student from The Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin, who recently carried out 18 months field work in Hong Kong. This research was supported by a National Science Foundation Dissertation Research Grant, for which he expresses his indebtedness and appreciation.\n\n1 The most widely recognized romanization for this ethnic group in Hong Kong is \"Chiu Chow\" which is the Cantonese pronunciation of the characters 潮州. Newspapers, government publications and even Teochiu associations in Hong Kong use this romanization. “Teochiu\" and other variants (Taechew, Tiochew) represent the romanization corresponding to the pronunciation of the characters in the Teochiu language and are widely used by Western scholars in South East Asia.\n\n2 The Teochiu as well as other Chinese ethnic groups in South East Asia and Hong Kong have until recently been labelled \"dialect groups\" and their languages considered to be dialects of \"the\" Chinese language. This terminology is inappropriate in that these so-called dialects are quite clearly languages, being for the most part mutually unintelligible. The use of the term \"dialect group\" not only reflects the lack of interest and possibly the unawareness of the importance of ethnicity as a variable in studies of overseas Chinese, but has also served to obscure and minimize that importance.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 207684, "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-1976", "page_number": 72, "title": "RAS-1976", "content_text": "INTERETHNIC INTERACTION – A MATTER OF DEFINITION: ETHNICITY IN A HOUSING ESTATE IN HONG KONG\n\nDOUGLAS W. SPARKS*\n\nThis article examines interethnic interaction and ethnic boundary maintenance in a public housing estate whose residents include many former refugees from mainland China. Attention is focused on relationships between two ethnic groups who are similar in language and culture and between whom there is some intergroup passing but which are, paradoxically, separated by rigid cognitive boundaries. The historical origins and relationships between these two ethnic groups in China are related to interaction and communication patterns in the housing estate. Variation and confusion in categorization of people from villages in the border area between the two ethnic groups in China is shown to be a function of participation in social networks which include people from the border villages.\n\nThe fieldwork for this research was undertaken in a resettlement estate in Tsuen Wan, an industrial new town in the New Territories of Hong Kong, and was primarily concerned with the Teochiu ethnic group which is generally described in the companion article in this issue of the Journal.\n\nThe housing estate in which I worked is located in North Kwai Chung, in the eastern part of the new town, an area of heavy industrial concentration and the location of several large housing estates. This particular housing estate was chosen as the primary fieldwork site largely because I had very good contacts with Teochiu leaders in local religious associations. My major concerns in the research were with the analysis of group dynamics and leadership within these associations and within the dense Teochiu networks within the housing estate.\n\n* The author is a postgraduate research student from The Department of Anthropology, University of Texas at Austin, who recently carried out 18 months field work in Hong Kong. This research was supported by a National Science Foundation Dissertation Research Grant, for which he expresses his indebtedness and appreciation.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1976.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/hq382988q", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 208307, "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-1978", "page_number": 31, "title": "RAS-1978", "content_text": "THE REFORM OF MILITARY EDUCATION IN LATE CH'ING CHINA, 1842-1895\n\nRICHARD J. SMITH*\n\nThroughout much of the nineteenth century, Chinese and Westerners alike perceived the need for meaningful reform in Chinese military education. The problem could hardly be ignored, especially after the disastrous Opium War of 1839-1842. But change in this key area of late Ch'ing administration came slowly. Not only did it involve sensitive political issues, such as internal security, civil-military relations, and central versus local government responsibility; it also raised basic questions of educational policy, including the relationship between elite and popular instruction, between Confucian moral cultivation and technical specialization, and ultimately between Chinese and Western forms of civil and military knowledge. Complicating matters were the usual practical problems facing Chinese modernizers in the nineteenth century: widespread and entrenched vested interests, bureaucratic inertia, scarcity of revenue, and foreign pressure.\n\nThe Ch'ing dynasty's basic approach to military education can be seen clearly in the Ch'ing-ch'ao t'ung-chih, officially compiled during the Ch'ien-lung period: \"Our Emperor, succeeding and exalting the sages, treats the selection of talents as most important. In the literary arts, elegance and refinement is the aim. In military examination, familiarity with riding and shooting is [most] important.\" During the Tao-kuang reign, this emphasis on technical military skills received special stress. In 1833, for example, the emperor issued an edict stating that the education of Bannermen should be in horsemanship and archery, so that they would be kept \"simple and straight and not exposed to weakening [literary] influences.\" Similar statements abound in the dynastic record,\n\n* Professor Smith writes: S. A. M. Adshead has recently remarked that while \"China's failure to industrialize is well known, her failure to professionalize is less often commented upon.\" (See his review of John Fairbank et al \"The I.G. in Peking\" in the Journal of Asian Studies, 36.4 (August, 1977). This paper may be viewed as a brief comment on China's early effort to professionalize in military affairs.\n\nThe author is Associate Professor of History at Rice University, Houston, Texas.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1978.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/8g84t8593", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 210991, "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-1987", "page_number": 53, "title": "RAS-1987", "content_text": "28\n\nNOTES\n\nVirgile Pinot, La Chine et la formation de l'esprit philosophique en France, 1640-1740 (Paris, 1932).\n\n1 From Diderot's Encyclopédie. English translation from A. Reichwein, China and Europe, Intellectual and Artistic Contacts in the Eighteenth Century (Kegan Paul, Trench, Turbner & Co., London, 1925), p.92. Reichwein offers the best comprehensive treatment of China at the Age of Enlightenment, together with L. Maverick (see note 10).\n\n3 Pierre Poivre, Voyages d'un Philosophe (English translation by Reichwein, loc. cit.).\n\nFrançois Quesnay, Le Despotisme de la Chine (Paris, 1767). His friends had dubbed him 'the Confucius of Europe'.\n\n$ Lo Hui-min, The Tradition and Prototype of the China-watcher, 1976 G.E. Morrison lecture (Australian National University, Canberra, 1978), p. 9.\n\n7 Louis Lecomte, Nouveaux mémoires sur l'état présent de la Chine (Paris, 1969). Du Halde, Description géographique, historique, chronologique, politique et physique de l'Empire de la Chine et de la Tartarie Chinoise (Paris, 1735).\n\n$ Hugh Honour, Chinoiseries, the Vision of Cathay (John Murray, London, 1961).\n\nIn 1951, at the Lycée de Chartres where I was teaching history, the bicentenary of Diderot's Encyclopedia was celebrated at the initiative of left-wing teachers who were keen to stress the connection between the Encyclopedia and French Revolutionary traditions. I gave a public lecture: 'China and the Encyclopedists', of which the present Morrison Lecture might be considered the direct descendant.\n\n10 Lewis A. Maverick, China, a Model for Europe (Paul Anderson Company, San Antonio, Texas, 1946).\n\n|| From Les Fleurs du Mal (my translation).\n\n12 Evariste Regis Huc, L'Empire chinois (Paris, 1854). For a more severe evaluation of Huc, see Simon Leys, The Burning Forest (New York, 1986), pp. 47-94 (\"Peregrinations and perplexities of Pere Huc').\n\n13 Eugene Simon, La Cité chinoise (Paris, 1885).\n\n14 Paul Claudel, Connaissance de l'Est (Mercure de France, Paris, 1908).\n\n15 The novel by Jules Verne, Les Tribulations d'un Chinois en Chine (1879), is quite unique in its concern for the politics of nineteenth-century China. The hero, Kin Fo, is torn between his fascination with modern technology and his loyalty to his teacher Wong, who is an ex-Taiping leader. It is to my knowledge the only appearance of the Taiping rebellion in French literature.\n\n16 V. Hugo, Lettre au Capitaine Butler, Hauteville House, 25 November 1861 (my translation).\n\n17 Charles Bettelheim, Cultural Revolution and Industrial Organisation in China: Changes in Management and the Division of Labor, trans. by Alfred Ehrenfeld (Monthly Review Press, New York, 1974). See also China Since Mao, by Neil G. Burton and Charles Bettelheim (Monthly Review Press, New York, 1978).\n\n18 Claude Roy, Clés pour la Chine (Paris, 1954); Etiemble, Le Nouveau singe-pèlerin (Paris, 1957); Philippe Sollers, Tel quel (a literary magazine edited by...", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1987.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/rx919b522", "rank": 0 }, { "id": 214967, "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-2000", "page_number": 63, "title": "RAS-2000", "content_text": "18\n\n'purge' as a requisite for good health.\n\n29 Chong Su-see: The Foreign Trade in China. 1919.\n\n21 Elliot lasted until replaced by Pottinger in August 1841; he was then sent as Consul to the new Republic of Texas, \"a British diplomatic posting equivalent at the time to Turkestan.\" (M. Booth)\n\n22 M. Booth: Opium: A History, London 1996, p.136.\n\n23 Anthony Ashley Cooper (1801-1885), great reformer and philanthropist.", "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2000.txt", "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/nk328168n", "rank": 0 } ]