[
    {
        "id": 210535,
        "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-1985",
        "page_number": 142,
        "title": "RAS-1985",
        "content_text": "123\n\nof the Chinese and Roman religious systems.\n\n18\n\nAt the outset, it should be remarked that there are important differences between the two systems, and that these differences should not be minimized. There is, for example, no set of canonical books in Roman religion akin to those associated with the name of Confucius, nor did the masses of the Roman Empire superimpose the structure of their government upon the celestial pantheon as their Chinese counterparts have done. Nevertheless, there are many important structural similarities. Both have an official religion, consisting in each case of a select circle of functional deities for whom minutely regulated sacrifices are conducted by an equally small circle of officiants, and from whose activities the population at large is excluded. Alongside, there exists in both societies a publicly sanctioned domestic religion, whose centerpiece is the maintenance of the dead, but which contains additional elements such as the guardians of the hearth and household. Finally, there is the large and amorphous category of popular religion, which at times encroaches upon the spheres of the official and domestic cults. It is here that one encounters demonology, witchcraft, and shamanism; it is here that some of the exclusivist official cults find rivals with mass appeal, such as the corn-goddess Ceres in her plebeian guise, and the Taoist worship of the tutelary gods of walls and moats. It is here as well that one comes into contact with the intrusive foreign sects, such as Christianity and Buddhism, who assured themselves of large followings by holding out the promise of salvation, but whose threat to the existing social order ended in persecution.20 Given these similarities, an exchange of views and concerns between ancient historians and sinologues would appear highly desirable, for it has the potential to break new ground in both fields. Indeed, from the point of view of the classical historian, China offers the inestimable advantage of a religious system with an unbroken history stretching back more than two millennia that remains vital to this day, so that it may be approached from an anthropological as well as historical perspective. It is unfortunate in this respect that virtually all of the field work carried out in the last 35 years has been restricted to Taiwan and the New Territories of Hong Kong, which are well-removed from the centres of Chinese culture. This limits our",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1985.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/gt54s866x",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 216429,
        "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": 188,
        "title": "RAS-2003",
        "content_text": "138\n\npreyed on the Chinese who had settled in Siberia, north of the Amur River, and every now and then, upon those who lived in Manchuria just south of the river. The Russian bandits gradually disappeared from this region, and their place was more and more taken by Chinese, and so the term Hung Hutse came to be applied to Chinese bandits as well, even though the latter with rare exception have no beards.'\n\nAnother version provided by an American reporter with a vivid imagination explained that the bandits painted their faces red and wore false beards to engender fear in the hearts of all and sundry.\n\nBrindle related the story of two Hong Huzi chiefs who held high positions in the Imperial Army of China, and periodically visited Peking. They had organised large bands of Hong Huzi during the summer and autumn of 1904, the result being a determined and continual harassment of outlying Russian camps. The Hong Huzi, he wrote, 'were splendid horsemen, well armed and mounted on Manchurian ponies, and made admirable irregulars.'\n\nTwo early French travellers, Ular and Mury, described a community in northern Manchuria as 'Zheltuga, the republic of the Chinese bandits, the Hong Huzi'. Zheltuga was the community of illegal Chinese gold miners which existed on the banks of the Heilongjiang [Amur], the border between Manchuria and Russia, between 1883 and 1886. It consisted of Russians and Chinese who flocked into the area from Siberia and Manchuria when gold was found in the area of the present Chinese town of Mohe as far north as one can get in Manchuria. Zheltuga lasted three years and was destroyed by the Qing in 1886. There would appear to be no corroboration of the French claim, and the miners so described consisted of unauthorised speculators who doubtless were referred to as bandits by the Qing authorities and by extension as Hong Huzi. They may, perhaps, have been a community dominated by Hong Huzi but it is doubtful whether they were an organised community of Red Beards.\n\nGeneral Ma, one of China's generals stationed in northern Manchuria near its border with Mongolia, attracted significant attention of the Russians as he was one of a small but powerful party who urged the Chinese Government to cast her lot with the Japanese, making common cause against the encroaching northern Power. Many of his",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-2003.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/2v242g390",
        "rank": 0
    }
]