In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

-86- "Legalists" and "Confucianists" During the Opium War: Interview with Chang Chi-ch'ien, Peking University, November 19. 1974 Dilip K. Basu During November, 1974, 1 traveled in China for three weeks with a group of University of California, Santa Cruz, students and faculty. The trip was preceded by intense negotiation through correspondence with the Luxingshe authorities in Peking as to the group's travel plans and interests, most of which were accommodated . I expressed a personal interest in meeting with historians, especially those working on the early nineteenth century Ch'ing history. I specifically mentioned Fu I-ling, Hu Sheng, P 'eng Tse-i and Ch'i Ssu-ho, the latter because he was the general editor of the six-volume documentary series published in 1954 fro» Shanghai on the Opium War, after duly explaining my own work on the pre-1842 Canton period and briefly describing the Ch'ing materials pertaining the SinoBritish relations and the Opium War that I came across at the Public Record Office in London. I was, of course, blissfully unaware as to whether any of these scholars were officially "in" in the wake of the Criticizing Lin Piao and Confucius campaign and would be around to see me. Since our itinerary didn't include Amoy, Fu I-ling was obviously out. Upon our arrival in Canton on November 1, I was told by our guides, who had come down from Peking to receive us, that Ch'i Ssu-ho was too old to even "sit up," that Hu Sheng was "out of town" and that the "economist" P'eng Tse-i was "unavailable." T was, however, assured that I should be able to meet a historian when our group arrived in Peking. On November 19 at 9:00 A.M. , a clear Peking morning, as the rest of our group listened to the Vice Chairman of the Revolutionary Committee at Pei -ta recount how the emphasis on practical experience and criticizing the revisionist -87line of book-learning had transformed its 2,600 student body, I was ushered into an adjoining room. There I met Chang Chi-Ch'ien ( Zfr f~ Í& ), a member of the History Faculty. We talked for over an hour as one of our guides listened silently. She spoke in Chinese, occasionally breaking into English when she thought I had misunderstood her or while making a reference to Western works and scholars. I took notes copiously and rewrote them upon my return to the hotel. The following is an edited and somewhat abridged version of our conversation. Chang: I gather that you're interested in the Opium War. That's good because the War also involved Indians. Bourgeois historians have distorted the Opium War history. New works sympathetic to the Chinese side are in order. Basu: I've done a good bit of work among Indian, British and American archives... Chang: American archives are important. Many Americans built up their fortunes based on the opium trade. They were the chief collaborators of the British. Basu: Yes, I agree. Ch'i Ssu-ho in his introduction to the Ya-p'ien chan-cheng volumes made this point strongly. Is there any new research being done at Pei-ta on the Opium War period? Chang: Yes. We're compiling materials on the peasant resistance against the imperialist aggression and on the Second Opium War to complete the series that Ch'i Ssu-ho had started. Basu: Are you the chief editor of this second series? Chang: No. We have done away with chief editorship. There are ten members of our faculty who specialize in modern history and then of course there are students who study it. We are doing the compilation job jointly with the students and there is no chief editor. We hope to publish the volumes soon. Basu: Are you only compiling documents... Chang: The Anti-Lin and Anti-Confucius Campaign has led us to sharpen our criticism of bourgeois historians, both Chinese and foreign. -88Basu : Who are these historians specifically? Chang: Our students are reading Chiang T'ing Fu' s 1931 article in Ch ' ing-hua hsüeh-pao on Ch'i-shan and the Opium War where Chiang clearly betrays...

pdf

Share