Wang Q.E. Inventing China Through History: The May Fourth Approach to Historiography
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
65. Ernst Breisach has noticed this lack of interest in epistemology as
shown in American Progressive historiography of the early twentieth
century. See his article “The American Quest for a New History: Observa-
tions on Developments and Trends,” Western and Russian Historiography:
Recent Views, ed. Henry Kozicki (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993),
25–44, especially 30.
66. Robinson, The New History, 25.
67. Fu, “Lishi yuyan yanjiusuo gongzuo zhi zhiqu” (An introduction
to the work of the Institute of History and Philology), Fu Sinian quanji,
vol. 4, 253.
68. Ibid., 254–256.
69. Ibid., 266–267.
70. Fu’s student and historian Lao Gan wrote that Fu was then eager
to make history analogous to geology and biology. Fu believed that they
all belonged to the “empirical sciences.” “Fu Mengzhen xiansheng yu jin
ershinian lai zhongguo lishixue de fazhan” (Fu Sinian and the development
of Chinese historiography in the past twenty years), Fu guxiaozhang
aiwanlu (In memory of former president Fu Sinian) (Taipei: National
Taiwan University Press, 1951), 70.
71. This was actually from Fu’s reading of Langlois and Seignobos’
Introduction to the Study of History, in which Langlois puts forth the slogan
“no documents, no history.” 17.
72. Fu pronounced in a report that the reason for the founding of the
Institute of History and Philology was to put history and philology on a par
with astronomy, geology, physics, and chemistry. See Dong Zuobin, “Lishi
yuyan yanjiusuo zai xueshu shangde gongxian” (The Institute of History
and Philology and its contribution to scholarship), Fu guxiaozhang aiwanlu,
64. Fu’s report is not found in Fu Sinian quanji.
73. Fu, Fu Sinian quanji, IV, 256–260.
74. Ibid. Fu’s remark here was coined in G. M. Trevelian’s phrase:
“Collect the facts of the French Revolution! You must go down to Hell and
up to Heaven to fetch them.” Clio A Muse (London, 1913), quoted in Xu
Guansan, Xin shixue jiushinian, vol. 1, 221, footnote 47.
75. In this article, Fu expressed his full confidence in the effective-
ness of archaeological study in solving problems in ancient history.
Archaeological study, he declared, is not only a new approach, but also will
become the foundation of the study of ancient history. See “Fu Sinian
dangan” (Fu Sinian’s archive), I-807.
76. Ibid.
77. The Bulletin of the University Yuan (Daxue yuan gongbao), namely
the Department of Education in the GMD government headed by Cai
248 NOTES
Yuanpei, provides information on how Fu Sinian managed to turn the Insti-
tute into a new branch of the Academia Sinica. When the Academia Sinica
was first founded in July 1927, there was no plan for establishing the Insti-
tute of History and Philology, only an Institute of Social Sciences. Fu Sinian
was listed as a member of the committee for founding the Institute of
Psychology. But in January 1928 the Institute of History and Philology
appeared in the organizational chart of the University Yuan. On April 10,
1928 when the Academia Sinica officially announced its establishment, the
Institute of History and Philology became one of its eleven research insti-
tutes. See Daxue yuan gongbao (Taipei: Wenhai chubanshe, n.d.), Year 1,
No. 1, 63, 155–166; No. 3, 56; No. 5, 29–30. Also, Pan Guangzhe, “Cai Yuan-
pei yu shiyusuo” (Cai Yuanpei and the Institute of History and Philology),
Xinxueshu zhilu: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo qishi zhoun-
ian jinian wenji (Along new pathways of research: Essays in honor of the
seventieth anniversary of the Institute of History and Philology), eds. Du
Zhengsheng and Wang Fansen (Taipei: Institute of History and Philology,
Academia Sinica, 1998), 1, 189–216.
78. See Li Ji, “Fu Mengzhen xiansheng lingdao de lishi yuyan yanjiusuo”
(Fu Sinian and the Institute of History and Philology), Fu suozhang jinian
tekan (Special publication for Director Fu Sinian) (Taipei: the Institute of
History and Philology, Academia Sinica, 1951), 12–13.
79. Fu, “Lishi yuyan yanjiusuo gongzuo zhi zhiqu” (An introduction to
the Institute of History and Philology), Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 4, 254.
80. In Fu’s letter to Cai Yuanpei, the head of the Academia Sinica, for
funding he argued that the success of the project would enhance China’s
scholarly reputation. Ibid. vol. 7, 94–96.
81. Fu, “Ming Qing shiliao fakan liyan” (Foreword to Ming Qing
Archives), ibid., vol. 4, 357–359.
82. “Ming Qing Shiliao fukanzhi” (Foreword to the resumed Ming Qing
Archives), ibid., 360–361.
83. See Li Ji “Fu Mengzhen xiansheng lingdao de lishi yuyan yanjiusuo”
(Fu Sinian and the Institute of History and Philology), Fu suozhang jinian
tekan, 16.
84. On May 25, 1948, Fu Sinian wrote Zhu Jiahua from the United
States, describing the “happy conversation” (kuaitan) between B. Karlgren
and him in Karlgren’s visit to New Haven, regarding Karlgren as a
sinological authority in Europe and having great influence on Chinese
scholars. Karlgren also wrote to Fu from New York on May 31, which read
I “offer you our hearty thanks for your great kindness during the happy
days we passed in New Haven.” See “Fu Sinian dangan” (Fu Sinian’s
archive), IV-188, I-1189.
85. Li Ji recalled that once he and Fu had lunch together and chatted
about the archive project, Fu said to Li that there was no important dis-
NOTES 249
covery from these archives. Li kidded about Fu’s preference for excavated
sources. See “Fu Mengzhen xiansheng lingdao de lishi yuyan yanjiusuo”
(Fu Sinian and the Institute of History and Philology), Fu suozhang jinian
tekan (Special publication for Director Fu Sinian), 16.
86. Paul Pelliot, “The Royal Tombs of An-yang,” Independence, Conver-
gence, and Borrowing in Institutions, Thought, and Art (New York: 1964),
272.
87. Li Ji, Anyang: A Chronicle of the Discovery, Excavation, and Recon-
struction of the Ancient Capital of the Shang Dynasty (Seattle: 1977). Also
Fu Sinian “Bensuo fajue anyang yinxu zhi jingguo” (A report of the exca-
vation of Shang ruins in Anyang, the Institute of History and Philology).
Fu also discussed the new methods used in archeology: “Kaoguxue de xin-
fangfa” (New methods in archaeology). See Fu Sinian quanji, IV, 267–288,
289–299.
88. Hu Shi for example told Gu Jiegang that “now my thinking has
changed. I do not doubt antiquity any longer. I believe the authenticity of
ancient Chinese history.” Quoted in Liu Qiyu, 262. In 1933, the Institute
started another archaeological project in Chengziya of Shandong Province.
Fu announced that the new project was to probe the scope of the Shang
Dynasty and to test the hypothesis as to whether Chinese civilization had
been influenced by the sea. See “Chengziya xu” (Preface to Chengziya), Fu
Sinian quanji, III, 206–211.
89. For Fu’s view of ancient China, see Wang Fansen, Fu Ssu-nien,
143–196.
90. About the impression of Fu’s leadership of the Institute on others,
see Dong Zuobin, “Lishi yuyan yanjiusuo zai xueshu shangde gongxian”
(The Institute of History and Philology and its contribution to scholarship),
Fu guxiaozhang aiwanlu, 64–69.
91. Wang Fansen describes the rivalry between Fu and Gu. Fu Ssu-nien,
96–97, footnote 209.
92. All these publications are in Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 4. About the
influence of Fu’s theory, see Wang Fansen, Fu Ssu-nien, 143–196.
93. Fu’s lecture notes for that course originally contained seven parts,
including a part in which Fu compared similarities and differences between
European and Chinese scholars in understanding history. However, all
these notes later were lost, except their headings and the one on historical
sources (Shiliao lunlue). Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 2, 3–4.
94. Ibid., 5–40.
95. Ibid., 41–60.
96. See Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, I, 1.
250 NOTES
97. Luo, “Wusi yundong de jingshen” (The spirit of the May Fourth
movement). Meizhou pinglun (Weekly critique), 23 (May 1919). Also
Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, I, 2–3. Cf. Wu Xiangxiang, Minguo bairen-
zhuan (A hundred biographies in the Republic of China) (Taipei, 1976),
199–200.
98. See Chen Chunsheng, Xinwenhua de qishou—Luo Jialun zhuan
(The forerunner of the new culture—biography of Luo Jialun) (Taipei:
Jindai Zhongguo Chubanshe, 1985), 6–13, and Wu Xiangxiang, 198.
99. Luo Jialun ziliaoji (Sources of Luo Jialun), found at Yale University
(n.p. and n.d.), 3.
100. See Fu, Fu Sinian quanji, IV, 152–153. Chen Chunsheng, Xinwen-
hua de qishou 19–27, and Wu, 198.
101. Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, I, 2–3. The translation was
given in Schwarcz, The Chinese Enlightenment, 22.
102. See Luo Jialun’s “Pingdiao Jiang Tingfu xiansheng” (In memory of
Jiang Tingfu), Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, X, 191–194. Because of John
Dewey, particularly because of his series of lectures in China during 1919
and 1921, Columbia University became a symbol of American education. In
1909, there were 24 Chinese students at Columbia. By 1920 when Luo
arrived in the United States, the number reached 123. See Keenan, The
Dewey Experiment in China, 18–19.
103. There was an interesting episode about Luo’s assignment. Luo
wrote to Hu Shi in 1920 telling him that he lost the notebook of Dewey’s
four lectures about the philosophy of education. Luo asked whether Dewey
or Hu still had the original lecture notes, because Hu was Dewey’s inter-
preter. In Hu Shi laiwang shuxin xuan, I, 95–97.
104. In Hu Shi laiwang shuxin xuan, I, 226–227. Luo’s presentation is
entitled “The Present Outlook for Chinese Historical Studies,” in which he
reviews works written by Hu Shi, Liang Qichao, and other Chinese schol-
ars at the turn of the century. He reports to American historians that the
achievement of Chinese historical study in China lay in the fact that besides
some conceptual changes, the discovery of many new sources, particularly
sources unearthed in the archaeological remains such as inscriptions on tor-
toise shells and animal bones, greatly enriched the historians’ knowledge
of ancient Chinese history. He also notices that some of these discoveries
were assisted by Western scholars and that some Chinese historians used
Western books in their study of Yuan history. In AHA Annual Report, 1922,
293.
105. In 1917, Zhang Xiangwen (1867–1933), a geography professor at
Beida, founded the Office of National History (Guoshi bianzhuan chu) on
Beida campus, which involved Cai Yuanpei and a few Beida students. But
NOTES 251
the Office only lasted two years and was abolished in August 1919. We are
not sure if Luo Jialun had been involved in some of projects organized by
the Office. Judging by its interest in source collection, however, it might
have a bearing on Luo Jialun. See Zhang Zhishan, “Zhang Xiangwen he
Beijing Daxue fushe Guoshi bianzhuanchu” (Zhang Xiangwen and the
Office of National History at Peking University), Shixueshi yanjiu (Journal
of Historiography), 3 (September 1991), 44–47.
106. Jiang Tingfu later recalled appreciatively that it was Luo who first
called his attention to the importance of modern Chinese history. See Luo
Jialun, Shizhe rusi ji, 201. About Luo’s friendship with Jiang, see Luo’s
“Pingdiao Jiang Tingfu Xiansheng” (In memory of Jiang Tingfu), ibid. Like
Luo Jialun, Jiang was later also involved in politics; he was the head of the
Executive Yuan of the GMD government in the 1940s. John K. Fairbank
described Jiang Tingfu’s scholarly and political career in his Chinabound:
A Fifty-year Memoir (New York: Harper & Row, 1982), 86–91.
107. See Luo, Shizhe rusi ji, 158.
108. The translation took him a long time because he found what he had
translated earlier was far from satisfactory. He had almost to translate it
again in order to make it publishable. This book was finally published in
1927 by the Commercial Press in Shanghai.
109. Luo spent the rest of his time in Germany traveling and attending
concerts, lived better than ordinary German people, as he recalled to his
daughter. In Luo Zhixi xiansheng zhuanji ji zhusu ziliao (Biography of Luo
Jialun and his writings), 30. Luo’s experience in Germany was not unique
for Chinese students at the time. The inflation of 1924 Germany gave many
Chinese students an advantage in supporting their lives; consequently,
many came to Germany from other European countries. The number of
Chinese students in Berlin in this particular year reached one thousand.
For general information about the Chinese students in Berlin, see Hsi-
Huey Liang, 23–38; for their economic condition, see Y. C. Wang, Chinese
Intellectuals and the West 165.
110. Zhang Youyi recalled Luo’s frequent visits to her apartment
in Berlin during the period, when she went through an emotional dis-
tress after Xu’s abandonment. Zhang appreciated Luo’s kindness but
declined his suggestion for considering a new marriage. See Pang-mei
Natasha Chang, Bound Feet and Western Dress (New York: Doubleday,
1996), 155–156. Xu Zhimo’s and Zhang Youyi’s divorce was the first modern
kind at that time.
111. These letters were discovered by Luo Jiufang, Luo Jialun’s
daughter, and published in Dangdai (Contemporary), 127 (March 1, 1998),
104–119, in which Fu described, humorously, his and their poor student
lives. A couple of letters were sent to Luo in Paris.
112. See Chen, Xinwenhua de qishou, 66–67.
252 NOTES
113. In his article written in 1931, Luo also mentioned the Rolls Series
in England and Collection des Documents inedits sur l’histoire de France.
Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, II, 60.
114. Ibid., 399–400.
115. Luo, Zhongshan daxue zhoukan, 2:14 (January 1928), 400–401. Li
was an important general of the Taiping rebellion. When he was defeated
and captured by Zeng, he wrote his confession.
116. Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, 400.
117. Chen Jiageng was not only the founder of the University, he was
also a well-known patriotic merchant at the time. It was legitimate for Luo
to hope to obtain Chen’s support. Ibid.
118. “Yanjiu zhongguo jindaishi de jihua” (A proposal for the study of
modern Chinese history), Luo’s letter to Gu Jiegang was dated September
8, 1926, but it was published in the Zhongshan daxue zhoukan (Weekly
Journal of Sun Yat-sen University), ed. the Institute of History and
Philology at Sun Yat-sen University, 2:14 (January 1928), 399–401. It was
not coincidental that the institute was founded by Luo’s friend Fu Sinian
and the journal was run by Gu Jiegang.
119. See Guo Tingyi xiansheng fangwen jilu (The reminisences of Mr.
Guo Tingyi), eds. Zhang Pengyuan et al. (Taipei: Institute of Modern
History, Academia Sinica, 1987), 121, and 149. Zhang Pengyuan’s new book,
Guo Tingyi, Fei Zhengqing, Wei Muting: Taiwan yu meiguo xueshu jiaoliu
gean chutan (Triangular Partnership: Kuo Ting-yee [Guo Tingyi], John
Fairbank, and C. Martin Wilbur and Their Contribution to Taiwan-U.S.
Academic Exchange) (Taipei: Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica,
1997) details the collaboration between the Institute of Modern History and
American universities and foundations.
120. About Luo’s joining the GMD and his role in composing the source
book, see ibid., 163–166, 243. The source book only had two volumes, yet
Luo’s ideas of the whole project were written into its preface.
121. See Luo’s “Zhi Qinghua daxue dongshihui baogao zhengli xiaowu
zhi jingguo ji jihua” (Report to the Qinghua Trustee Committee about the
plan and procedure of the administrative reform), Luo Jialun xiansheng
wencun, I, 450–484.
122. See Wen-hsin Yeh, The Alienated Academy, chapter 5, 167–182.
123. An example was that Luo required all the students to join
morning exercise before class, which was later abandoned because of
resistance. See Feng Youlan, Sansongtang zixu, 308–320. Feng was Luo’s
Beida mate whom Luo invited to Qinghua to teach Chinese philosophy.
Feng gives a firsthand account of Luo’s administration at Qinghua. He also
shares his assessments of Luo’s four emphases at Qinghua. For general
information on Luo’s administration at Qinghua, see Su Yunfeng, “Luo
NOTES 253
Jialun yu Qinghua daxue” (Luo Jialun and Qinghua University), Zhong-
yang yanjiuyuan jindaishi yanjiusuo jikan (Bulletin of the Institute of
Modern History, Academia Sinica, Taiwan), 16 (June 1987), 367–382. See
also, Chen Chunsheng, 88–99, and Luo Zhixi xiansheng zhuanji ji zhusu
ziliao, 47–53.
124. Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, II, 37–38.
125. For a representative work from the PRC historians, see Fan
Wenlan’s Zhongguo jindaishi (modern Chinese history), which was long
regarded as an authoritative text in teaching modern Chinese history in
the PRC. Li Yunhan, a modern historian in Taiwan, also adopted Luo’s
periodization in writing his same-titled textbook.
126. See Charles Beard, “Written History as an Act of Faith,” American
Historical Review 39 (1934), 219–231, also “That Noble Dream,” ibid., 41
(1935), 74–87.
127. Luo’s letter to Hu Shi, in Hu Shi laiwang shuxin xuan, I, 226–227.
128. Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, X, 193. In his article about the
educational reform in 1932, Luo praised the reading habit of F. J. E.
Woodbridge that he learned from his class. Ibid., I, 496.
129. See C. E. Delaney, Mind and Nature: A Study of the Naturalistic
Philosophers of Cohen, Woodbridge and Sellars (Notre Dame: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1969), 6.
130. F. J. E. Woodbridge, The Purpose of History (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1916), 17.
131. F. J. E. Woodbridge, Nature and Mind, Selected Essays of F. J. E.
Woodbridge (New York: Russell and Rusell, 1965), 448, 178. Emphasis is
mine.
132. Wilfred Trotter (1872–1939) was an English surgeon and sociolo-
gist. He was known for his study of “herd instinct” on which he built his
theory of social development. Jean-Gabriel Tarde (1843–1904) was a French
sociologist who was famous for his theory of imitation, which stipulates that
progress in history was made through imitation.
133. Luo, “Lishi zhexue de paibei he wode yijian” (Various schools of
the philosophy of history and my opinion), Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun,
II, 81–85.
134. Luo’s other articles on the philosophy of history are “Lishi zhexue
zhi niaokan” (A survey of the philosophy of history), ibid, V, 279–287;
“Shiguan” (Historical interpretations), VI, 24–35.
135. Luo, “Shiguan” (Historical interpretations), 24–25.
136. Ibid., 24–26.
137. Luo, “Lishi zhexue niaokan,” V, 279.
254 NOTES
138. Ibid., V, 286.
139. Woodbridge, “Confessions,” Nature and Mind, 5.
140. Cf. Delaney, Mind and Nature, 144.
141. Luo “Yanjiu zhongguo jindaishi de yiyi he fangfa” (Why we should
study modern Chinese history and its method), Luo Jialun xiansheng
wencun, II, 51–76.
142. Ibid., II, 51. Besides the citation, words with quotation marks are
Luo’s own hereafter.
143. Ibid., II, 54–55.
144. The “heuristik” (heuristic) refers to the art of discovering docu-
ments, which Langlois regarded as the primary step of modern historical
scholarship. See Introduction to the Study of History, chapter 1, 17–41. Luo
used Langlois’s analysis to argue for the establishment of a source collec-
tion for the study of modern Chinese history.
145. Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, II, 55–76.
146. Luo recalled that no sooner had he settled down at Wuhan Uni-
versity and started to teach history then he was called up by Chiang
Kai-shek for the appointment. He wanted to decline the offer but he failed
to do so, even with the help of the president of Wuhan university. See
Luo’s “Zhengda de dansheng yu chengzhang” (The founding and develop-
ment of the Central Political Institute), ibid. I, 696.
147. Wu, Minguo bairenzhuan III, 214.
148. See Luo, “Guoshiguan sishiliu niandu shizheng gangyao” (High-
lights of the programs in the Institute of National History, 1957), Luo
Jialun xiansheng wencun, I, 345–347. For a complete bibliography of the
historical source works published under Luo’s patronage in the 1960s, see
Jiang Yongjing, “Luo Jialun xiansheng de shengping Jiqi dui zhongguo
jindaishi yanjiu de gongxian” (Luo Jialun’s life and his contribution to the
study of modern Chinese history), in Luo, Luo Zhixi xiansheng zhuanji ji
zhusu ziliao, 81–82, notes 101 and 106.
149. Luo, “Yige jihu beishiluo de lishi zhengjian” (An almost lost his-
torical document), Luo, Luo Jialun xiansheng wencun, I, 481–489.
150. Dai Yi, “Wuxu bianfa zhong Yuan Shikai gaomi zhenxiang” (A new
discovery of Yuan Shikai’s betrayal in the 1898 Reform), Beijing ribao
(Beijing daily), June 23, 1999.
Chapter Five
1. Vera Schwarcz, Li Zehou, and Gu Xin, have discussed extensively in
their works the antithetic relation between the Chinese enlightenment and
NOTES 255
the task of national salvation, see Li Zehou, “qimeng yu jiuwang de shuang-
chong bianzou” (A dual, intertwined tone of enlightenment and national sal-
vation), Zhongguo xiandai sixiangshi lun (On modern Chinese intellectual
history) (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 1987), 7–49. See also Schwarcz The
Chinese Enlightenment; and Gu Xin, Zhongguo qimeng de lishi tujing (A
history of the Chinese enlightenment) (Hong Kong: Oxford University
Press, 1992), and Li Zehou’s other book, Zhongguo jindai sixiang shilun
(Essays on modern Chinese intellectual history) (Beijing: Renmin chuban-
she, 1979), 472–488.
2. For student radicalism during the wartime, see John Israel, Student
Nationalism in China, 1927–1937 (Stanford: Stanford University Press,
1966). Israel’s new book, Lianda, has offered detailed research on how the
academics reacted to the war, including Feng Youlan’s new works on Con-
fucian philosophy. Qian Mu in 1941 published Guoshi dagang (An outline
of national history), an instantly best-seller, in which he praised the
vitality of Chinese culture shown in its long history. Jerry Dennerline’s
Qian Mu and the World of the Seven Mansions (New Haven: Yale Univer-
sity Press, 1988) has discussions on Qian and his career.
3. Yu Ying-shih used the term radicalization to describe the intellectual
change in turn-of-the-century China and regarded the May Fourth as a
prime example. See his “The Radicalization of China in the Twentieth
Century,” Daedalus, 122:2 (Spring 1993), 125–150. I borrow his term here
to emphasize that this “radicalization” was more developed from the late
1930s onward.
4. He wrote about the losses of the Commercial Press. See his “Shangwu
yinshuguan beihui jilue” (A record of the devastation of the Commercial
Press), He Bingsong jinian wenji, 19–29.
5. He wrote a report about the destruction and expressed his angry at
the Japanese. “Shangwu yinshuguan beihui jilue” (The destruction of the
Commercial Press), ibid., 19–38.
6. He also wrote an article about Chinese social customs in the year:
“Zhongguo de fengsu” (On Chinese social customs), He Bingsong lunwenji,
259–269.
7. He wrote two textbooks with the same title Waiguoshi (History of
foreign countries) for high and middle schools in the 1930s, both were
published by the Commercial Press.
8. He,“Zhongguo shixue zhi fazhan,” He Bingsong lunwenji, 202–204.
9. Chen Lifu’s official title was the head of the Control Yuan of the GMD
government. But his real power lay in his leadership of the CC clique, an
intelligence agency of the GMD party. For the English translation of the
Declaration, see W. T. DeBary, ed., Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York,
1960), II, 192–193. About social and political background of the movement,
see Zhang Jun, “Sanshi niandai zhongguo benwei wenhua jianshe yundong
256 NOTES
fasheng de yuanyin beijing” (Origins and background of the construction of
a China-centered culture movement in the 1930s), Shiyuan (History of
history), 16 (November 1987), 191–216.
10. Liu Baimin, He’s friend and colleague in the 1930s, recalled that it
was He who drafted the Declaration. However, He’s name was actually
listed as the second on the Declaration. See Liu’s “Ku He Bocheng xian-
sheng” (Cry for Mr. He Bingsong), He Bingsong jinian wenji, 241.
11. Although it was not known whether Luo supported the ten pro-
fessors, it was quite possible that he and many GMD officials did. For the
debate, see Zhongguo wenhua jianshe taolunji (Anthology of the discussions
on the cultural construction in China) (Shanghai, 1935).
12. He, “Zhongguo benwei de wenhua jianshe,” He Bingsong lunwenji,
270–273.
13. Liu Baimin described He’s emotions. See He Bingsong jinian wenji,
240–242. Tao Xisheng mentioned his motive to sign the Declaration to Hu
Shi in Hu Shizhi xiansheng nianpu changbian, ed. Hu Songping (Taipei:
Lianjing chuban shiye gongsi), IV, 1381.
14. Cf. Arif Dirlik, “The Ideological Foundations of the New Life Move-
ment: A Study in Counterrevolution,” Journal of Asian Studies (August
1975); and Jonathan Spence, The Search for Modern China (New York: W.
W. Norton, 1989), 414–415.
15. See He, “He Bingsong nianpu” (Chronological biography of He Bing-
song), He Bingsong lunwenji, 226.
16. Hu Shi’s article appeared in Dagongbao (Dagong Daily) in 1935 and
was reprinted in Duli pinglun and Wenhua jianshe (Cultural construction)
in 1936. See He Bingsong xiaozhang wenji, 224–228.
17. Ibid.
18. See He, He Bingsong lunwenji, 282–285.
19. ”Lun zhongguo benwei wenhua jianshe da Hu Shi xiansheng” (On
China-based cultural construction—a response to Mr. Hu Shi), ibid.,
274–281.
20. Pocock wrote: “One is that the creation of new language may take
place in the attempt to maintain the old language no less than in the
attempt to change it; cases can be found in which a deliberate and conscious
stress on change, process and modernity is among the strategies of those
defending a traditional order, and it is in the logic of the concept of tradi-
tion that this should be so.” “The concept of a language and the metier
d’historien: some considerations on practice,” The Languages of Political
Theory in Early-Modern Europe, ed. Anthony Pagden (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1987), 32. Also see Pocock’s Virtue, Commerce, and
History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth
NOTES 257