1. Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian, yanjiushi (ed.), Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Liu Shaoqi, Zhu De ji xianren dang he guojia zhuyao lingdaoren zhuanlüe (Biographical Sketches of Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Liu Shaoqi, Zhu De and Present Important Party and State Leaders) (Beijing: Wenxian he yanjiu congshu, 1984), p. 19Google Scholar.

2. Peter R., Moody Jr, Chinese Politics after Mao: Development and Liberalization 1976 to 1983 (New York: Praeger, 1983), p. 68Google Scholar.

3. Frederick C., Teiwes, Leadership, Legitimacy, and Conflict in China (Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, 1984), p. 86Google Scholar.

4. Tang, Tsou, “Back from the brink of revolutionary–‘feudal’ totalitarianism,” in Victor, Nee and David, Mozingo (eds.), State and Society in Contemporary China (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), pp. 60–61Google Scholar.

5. Stuart R., Schram, Ideology and Policy in China Since the Third Plenum, 1978–1984 (London: Contemporary China Institute, 1984), p. 5Google Scholar.

6. Benbao teyue, pinglunyuan, “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun,” Guangming ribao, 11 05 1978Google Scholar.

7. Tian, Guoliang and Sun, Daxun (eds.), Hu Yaobang zhuan (Biography of Hu Yaobang) (Beijing: Zhonggong dangshi ziliao chubanshe, 1989), p. 96Google Scholar. Yang, Zhongmei mistakenly identifies Hu's appointment as having taken place “at the beginning of October” 1977Google Scholar. See Hu Yaobang: A Chinese Biography (Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, 1988), p. 128Google Scholar.

8. Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao nianjian, bianweihui (ed.), Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao nianjian 1984 (CCP Central Party School Yearbook 1984) (Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao chubanshe, 1985), p. 4Google Scholar.

9. “Ye Jianying fu zhuxi zai zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao kaixue dianli shang de jianghua” (“Vice-chairman Ye Jianying's talk at the CCP Central Party School's inauguration ceremony”), Hongqi, No. 11, 1977, p. 14Google Scholar.

10. [Mao Zedong] “4.28 Jianghua” (“Speech on 28 April [1969]”). Handwritten copy of minutes from First Plenum of Ninth CCP Central Committee in the library of the Fairbank Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University.

11. “Renzhen xuexi liangtiao luxian douzheng de lishi” (“Conscientiously study the history of the struggle between two lines”), Renmin ribao, 25 November 1968.

12. “Zemyang lijie yiban buti ‘luxian cuowu,’ ‘luxian douzheng’” (“How is one to interpret the general absence of references to ‘line errors’ and ‘line struggle’”), Xueshu yanjiu dongtai (Academic Research Trends), Vol. 109 (1982), p. 16Google Scholar.

13. Jin, Chunming, Huang, Yuchong and Chang, Huimin (eds.), “Wenge” shiqi guaishi guaiyu (Strange Things and Strange Words from the “Cultural Revolution”) (Beijing: Qiushi chubanshe, 1989), p. 376Google Scholar.

14. Conversation with Li, Desheng et al. on 12 09 1971, in “Mao zhuxi 71 nian 8 yue zhi 9 yue shicha nanfang shi de jici jianghua (zhailu)”Google Scholar (“Chairman Mao's talks during his inspection tour of southern China in August–September 1971 (excerpts)”). Handwritten copy of transcript in the library of the Fairbank Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University.

15. Conversation with Liu Feng et al. on 16 August 1971, in ibid.

16. Conversation with Liu Xingyuan et al. on 30 August 1971, in ibid.

17. In CCP Central Committee Circular No. 57 (1971), quoted in Jin, Chunming, Huang, Yuchong and Chang, Huimin (eds.), “Wenge” shiqi guaishi guaiyu, p. 377Google Scholar.

18. Ibid. p. 375.

19. Tao, Kai, Zhang, Yide and Dai, Qing, “Zhenli biaozhun taolun shimo: ‘liangge fanshi’ de tichu” (“The beginning and end of the truth criterion debate: the formulation of the ‘two whatevers’”), Meizhou huaqiao ribao (China Daily News), 28 01 1989Google Scholar.

20. “Xuehao wenjian, zhuazhu gang” (“Learn the documents and grasp the key link firmly”), Hongqi, No. 3, 1977, p. 18Google Scholar.

21. Ibid.

22. Conversation with Liu, Xingyuan et al. on 30 08 1971, in “Mao zhuxi 71 nian 8 yue zhi 9 yue shicha nanfang shi de jici jianghua (zhailu).”Google Scholar

23. Handwritten copy of excerpts from CCP Central Committee Circular No. 4 (1976) in the library of the Fairbank Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University.

24. “1976 nian yuanyue 13 ri Mao zhuxi dui Wang, Zhang, Jiang, Hua Guofeng, Wu De, Wang Hairong deng ren de tanhua” (“Chairman Mao's talk on 13 January 1976 to Wang [Hongwen], Zhang [Chunqiao], Jiang [Qing], Hua Guofeng, Wu De, Wang Hairong et al.”). Handwritten copy of transcript in the library of the Fairbank Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University.

25. “Deng Xiaoping tongzhi de ‘Wode zishu’ (zhailu)” (“Comrade Deng Xiaoping's ‘My personal account’ (extracts)”), Canyue cailiao (Reference Reading Matter), Vol. 10, p. 19Google Scholar.

26. “Deng Xiaoping tongzhi de xin” (“Comrade Deng Xiaoping's letter”) (3 August 1972), ibid. p. 7.

27. Mao's written comment on Deng Xiaoping's letter of 3 August 1972, quoted in Wang, Nianyi, Da dongluan de niandai (Years of Great Turmoil) (Zhengzhou: Henan renmin chubanshe, 1988), p. 441Google Scholar.

28. Handwritten copy of excerpts from CCP Central Committee Circular No. 4 (1976).

29. “Deng Xiaoping jiejian Deng Liqun shi de jianghua” (“Deng Xiaoping's speech at a meeting with Deng Liqun”). Handwritten copy of CCP document dated 27 May 1977 in the library of the Fairbank Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University. Wang Ruoshui claims that apart from deleting the name of Weng Senhe, the Gang of Four had not “tampered with” Mao's words. See Wang, Ruoshui, Zhihui de tongku (The Pain of Knowledge) (Hong Kong: Sanlian shudian, 1989), p. 233Google Scholar.

30. Ma, Qibin et al. (eds.), Zhongguo Gongchandang zhizheng 40 nian 1949–1989 (Forty Years of the CCP in Power 1949–1989) (Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao chubanshe, 1989), p. 418Google Scholar.

31. Wang, Hongmo, “Shiyi jie san zhong quanhui zai dangshi shang de diwei he gongxian” (“The position and impact of the Third Plenum of the 11th Central Committee in the history of our Party”) in Quanguo dangxiao xitong zhonggong dangshi xueshu taolunhui zhuanti baogao he fayan huibian (Collected Speeches and Reports on Special Topics at the All-China Party School Academic Conference on the History of the CCP), Vol. 2 (Hefei: Zhonggong Anhui shengwei dangxiao tushu ziliaoshi, 1980), p. 82Google Scholar.

32. Guo, Luoji, “Liangge ‘fanshi’ he zhenli biaozhun” (“The two ‘whatevers’ and the truth criterion”), in Yu, Guangyuan et al. , Mengxing de shike (Brutal Awakening) (Beijing: Zhongwai wenhua chubanshe, 1989), p. 285Google Scholar.

33. [Wu, Jiang], “Guanyu shijian biaozhun wenti taolun de qingkuang” (“Facts surrounding the debate on the practice criterion”), in Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao lilun, yanjiushi (ed.), Zhenli biaozhun wenti taolun wenji (Collected Articles from the Debate on the Truth Criterion) (Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao chubanshe, 1982), p. 165Google Scholar.

34. Ibid.

35. Ruan, Ming, “Zhenli biaozhun zhi zhan” (“The battle over the truth criterion”) (unpublished manuscript), p. 76Google Scholar.

36. Quoted in [Wu, Jiang], “Guanyu shijian biaozhun wenti taolun de qingkuang,” pp. 165–66Google Scholar. Peter R. Moody is mistaken in suggesting that “the gist” of “the notion that practice is the sole criterion of truth” can be traced to an unpublished speech by Deng Xiaoping, in which Deng had been “outlining” it. See Chinese Politics after Mao: Development and Liberalization 1976 to 1983, p. 56 and note on p. 63.

37. [Wu, Jiang], “Guanyu shijian biaozhun wenti taolun de qingkuang,” p. 165Google Scholar.

38. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988.

39. Ibid.

40. Sun, Changjiang first elaborated briefly upon the importance of the criterion of “practice” in the essay “Zhongshi qunzhong de lishi zhudongxing” (“Pay attention to the historical initiative of the masses”), Renmin ribao, 23 01 1978Google Scholar. In Zhenli de qiusuo (Quest for Truth) (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe, 1989), p. 235Google Scholar, he gives February 1978 as the month in which he began work on “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.” Some readers may at this point wonder what has happened to Hu Fuming. New China News Agency journalist Zhang Xingduan's classic account (“Evergreen is the tree of practice,” Renmin ribao, 21 March 1979) of the Nanjing University professor who believed that only a return to the realism and anti-dogmatism of Mao Zedong in the Yan'an days could open a way out of China's post-Cultural Revolution impasse is actually not about the writing of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth,” but of a very different article, one that did not go much further in emphasizing the importance of “seeking truth from facts” than Deng Xiaoping and Nie Rongzhen had already done at the 11th CCP National Congress in August 1977, and one that if it were to have been published would not have become the spark that lit a fire of nationwide debate, but would have gone as unnoticed as did Zhang, Cheng's “There is only one criterion” (Renmin ribao, 26 03 1978)Google Scholar. It is a mistake to trace the truth criterion controversy back to Hu Fuming, not only because this implies that in post-Mao China the source of new ideological formulations had become more pluralistic and could be found at a much lower level of the Party hierarchy than in the past – which was not the case – but also because it turns everything that happened at the Central Party School before and after April 1978 into a mere side-show, and that it certainly was not. Hu was to play a minor role in the writing of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth” entirely by accident. For this he was awarded 700 yuan plus the directorship of the Jiangsu Provincial Propaganda Department. It is to his credit that, in Zhang Xingduan's account, Hu insists (in a direct quote) that he is not the “author” of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth,” but merely part of a larger “collective” involved in its production. Tsou Tang has called the reliability of Zhang Xingduan's version of events into question, and suggested that “the possibility or even likelihood that Hu's article was the prompting by leaders at a higher level or of an unannounced meeting of a group of like-minded Party leaders and cadres at different levels cannot be excluded.” (See “Back from the brink of revolutionary–‘feudal’ totalitarianism,” p. 269, n. 19.) Tsou is actually not far from the truth, since this is a far more accurate description of the genesis of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth” than the one that begins with Hu Fuming in his study in Nanjing pondering upon a recent Renmin ribao editorial and the problem of how to get Deng Xiaoping back into a leading position.

41. Ruan Ming, private communication, 11 January 1989.

42. See Sun Changjiang, “Gei Guangming ribao, Du Daozheng tongzhi nan” (“Letter to the Guangming Daily and comrade Du Daozheng”), in Sun, Changjiang, Zhenli de qiusuo, p. 258Google Scholar.

43. Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao nianjian, bianweihui, (ed.), Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao nianjian 1984, p. 590Google Scholar.

44. For Yang's personal observations on the truth criterion controversy, see Yang, Xiguang, “Guanyu ‘Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun’ yi wen xiezuo de sixiang beijing” (“Ideological background to the writing of the article ‘Practice is the sole criterion of truth’”), in Wenxian heyanjiu 1985 nian huibianben (Selections from Documents and Research 1985) (Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 1986), pp. 341–43Google Scholar.

45. , Guanyu“Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo hefabiao de jingguo (How the Article “Practice is the Sole Criterion of Truth” was Written and Published) (Beijing: Guangming ribaoshe, 1985), p. 2Google Scholar.

46. Ibid.

47. I want to thank Dr Robin Munro for lending me a tape-recording of Hu Fuming's 1979 account, given to a class of foreign students at Nanjing University, of his own role in the writing of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.”

48. Zha, Ruqiang, “Guanyu quandang gongzuo zhongxin de zhuanbian he shijian biaozhun” (“The change in the focus of the work of the entire Party and the practice criterion”), Xueshu yanjiu dongtai, Vol. 7 (1979), p. 9Google Scholar.

49. Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun “yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, p. 2.

50. Ibid.

51. Ibid.

52. Yuan, Weishi, “Weixinzhuyi hengxing de you yi biaoben” (“Yet another sample of rampant idealism”), Guangming ribao, 11 04 1978, p. 4Google Scholar. A photograph of the original paste-up of this page, with Hu Fuming's article on it, is in Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, appendix 7.

53. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988.

54. Ibid., and Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, pp. 2–3.

55. “Wang Qianghua tongzhi suo ji 1978.4.13 Yang Xiguang tongzhi de tanhua jilu” (“Record of Comrade Yang Xiguang's talk on 13 April 1978 as recorded by Comrade Wang Qianghua”), in Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, appendix 8.

56. Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun “yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, p. 3.

57. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988.

58. Some scholars have assumed that Hu Yaobang personally “edited” and “discussed” the manuscript with Hu Fuming. See Brantly, Womack, “Politics and epistemology in China since Mao,” The China Quarterly, No. 80 (1979), p. 774Google Scholar; and Tang, Tsou, “The historic change in direction and continuity with the past,” The China Quarterly, No. 98 (1984), p. 330Google Scholar. In fact, Hu and Hu probably never even met.

59. Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, p. 3.

60. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988.

61. Compare the texts of Hu Fuming's and Sun Changjiang's manuscripts reproduced in Guanyu “Shijian shi jianyan zhenli de weiyi biaozhun” yi wen xiezuo he fabiao de jingguo, appendixes 9, 10, 11 and 12. In the course of writing the present article, I have gone over a dozen different handwritten and typeset drafts of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.” A version of the final draft in which plain, italic and underlined text are used to indicate the authorship of individual passages is included in Sun, Changjiang, Zhenli de qiusuo, pp. 249–257Google Scholar.

62. Ruan Ming claims that “as a matter of fact, Deng Xiaoping did not know [about the publication] in advance.” See “Hu Yaobang and me” (unpublished manuscript), p. 14. Xu Chengzong is wrong in maintaining “on the basis of Hong Kong hearsay” that the publication took place only after Hu Yaobang and Yang Xiguang had “obtained Deng Xiaoping's consent.” See Xu, Chengzong, Hu Yaobang pingzhuan (Critical Biography of Hu Yaobang) (Taipei, 1987), p. 54Google Scholar.

63. Compare Bao, Yujun, “Lizu shishi, zhengyi zhiyan” (“Basing oneself on facts and speaking from a sense of justice”), in Renmin ribao huiyilu (Recollections of the People's Daily) (Beijing: Renmin ribao chubanshe, 1988), p. 256Google Scholar.

64. Guangming ribao, 1 May 1978.

65. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988.

66. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988. Yang Zhongmei and Kenzo Shida mistakenly identify Hu Yaobang as the person who “when approving the final draft” changed the title to “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.” See Hu Yaobang: A Chinese Biography, p. 130; and Ko Yoohoo (Hu Yaobang) (Tokyo: Nitchuu Shuppan, 1983), p. 105Google Scholar.

67. Vol. 60 of Theory Trends contains no other article apart from “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.” Yang Zhongmei mistakenly gives its date of publication as 9 May 1978. See Hu Yaobang: A Chinese Biography, p. 130.

68. Jürgen Domes has suggested that the article was “most probably” written by Hu Qiaomu. See The Government and Politics of the PRC: A Time of Transition (Boulder: Westview Press, 1985), p. 156Google Scholar. In fact, Hu was at no stage involved in the writing of “Practice is the sole criterion of truth.”

69. For some reason, western scholars have without exception translated benbao teyue pinglunyuan as “Our paper's special commentator.” In fact, it is the plural form that is correct. Sun, Changjiang has stressed that the author's attribution in the Guangming Daily “had not just referred to one person” (interview in Beijing, 26 07 1988)Google Scholar. Compare also Tian, Guoliang and Sun, Daxun (eds.), Hu Yaobang Zhuan, p. 103Google Scholar, where Hu Yaobang is said to have remarked that “They publish editorials and write commentaries … We can be the specially appointed commentators.”

70. Ruan, Ming, “Hu Yaobang and me,” pp. 12–13Google Scholar.

71. Cf. Zheng, Derong et al. (eds.), Xin Zhongguo jishi 1949–1984 (Record of events in New China 1949–1984) (Changchun: Dongbei shifan daxue chubanshe, 1986), pp. 628–630Google Scholar.

72. Nanjing junqu bubing xuexiao zhengzhibu dangshi zhenggong, jiaoyanshi (ed.), “Jianguo yilai dashiji (1949.10–1981.6)” (“Important events since the founding of the nation (October 1949–June 1981”), Xueshu yanjiu dongtai, Vol. 88–89 (1981)Google Scholar.

73. Text as in Ruan, Ming, “Zhenli biaozhun zhi zhan,” pp. 78–80Google Scholar. This transcript of Wu Lengxi's telephone call is also reproduced in Tao, Kai, Zhang, Yide and Dai, Qing, “Zouchu xiandai mixin: Zhenli biaozhun taolun shimo” (“Leaving modern superstition behind: the beginning and end of the truth criterion debate”), Zhongshan (Zhong Mountain) No. 3 (1988), pp. 18–19Google Scholar. The sentence “According to this kind of argument, the 1lth line as formulated by the Party is not yet the truth” is missing in the latter source. This is probably a typesetter's error, rather than a censor's intervention, since without it the (retained) reference to “another 23 years” that follows makes little sense.

74. Ruan, Ming, “Zhenli biaozhun zhi zhan,” p. 80Google Scholar.

75. Ibid.

76. Ibid. pp. 80–81.

77. Sun Changjiang, interview in Beijing, 26 July 1988. I have not actually seen the bulletins alluded to by Sun.

78. Quoted in [Wu, Jiang], “Guanyu shijian biaozhun wenti taolun de qingkuang,” pp. 160–61Google Scholar.

79. Ibid. pp. 167–68.

80. As noted by Stuart R. Schram, the formulation was merely “endorsed by implication.” See “‘Economics in command’? Ideology and policy since the Third Plenum, 1978–1984,” The China Quarterly, No. 99 (1984), p. 419Google Scholar.

81. Ibid. p. 168.

82. Zha, Ruqiang, “Guanyu quandang gongzuo zhongxin de zhuanbian he shijian biaozhun,” pp. 9–10Google Scholar.

83. Renmin ribao, 3 June 1978.

84. Ruan, Ming, “Zhenli biaozhun zhi zhan,” p. 84Google Scholar.

85. Ibid. p. 85.

86. Wu, Jiang and Sun, Changjiang, “Hu Yaobang yu zhenli biaozhun taolun” (“Hu Yaobang and the debate about the criterion of truth”), Guangming ribao, 24 04 1989Google Scholar.

87. Zheng, Derong et al. , Xin Zhongguo jishi 1949–1984, p. 629Google Scholar.

88. Mu, Qing, “Jianchi zhenli, lianxi shiji” (“Stick to the truth, stay in touch with reality”), in Xinwen luncong (Journalism Debate), Vol. 4 (1984), p. 12Google Scholar.

89. “Zhongguo Gongchandang di shiyi jie zhongyang weiyuanhui di san ci quanti huiyi gongbao” (“Communique of the Third Plenum of the 11th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party”), in Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian, yanjiushi (ed.), Sanzhong quanhui yilai zhongyao wenxian xuanbian (Selected Important Documents Since the Third Plenum of the 11th Central Committee) (Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 1982), pp. 1–2Google Scholar.

90. See “Hu Qiaomu tongzhi guanyu xuexi Deng Xiaoping wenxuan de jianghua” (“Comrade Hu Qiaomu's talk on studying the Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping”), Xueshu yanjiu dongtai, Vol. 150 (1983), p. 5Google Scholar.

91. Chen, Yun, “Zai zhongyang jilü jiancha weiyuanhui di yi ci quanti huiyi kaimuhui shang de jianghua” (”Speech at the opening of the First Plenum of the CCP Central Disciplinary Inspection Commission”), in Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian, yanjiushi (ed.), Sanzhong quanhui yilai Zhongyao wenxian xuanbian, p. 44Google Scholar.

92. Quoted in Huang, Jianqiu et al. (ed.), Xin shiqi zhuanti jishi (A Topical Factual Record of the New Era) (Beijing: Zhonggong dangshi ziliao chubanshe, 1988), p. 38Google Scholar.

93. Wang, Hongmo, “Shiyi jie san zhong quanhui zai dangshi shang de diwei he gongxian,” p. 84Google Scholar.

94. Deng, Xiaoping, “Sixiang luxian zhengzhi luxian de shixian yao kao zuzhi luxian lai baozheng” (“The realization of ideological and political lines can only be guaranteed by an organizational line”), in Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian, yanjiushi (ed.), Sanzhong quanhui yilai zhongyao wenxian xuanbian, p. 163Google Scholar.

95. “Ba quandang de sixiang zhenzheng jizhong dao sihua shang lai” (“Really concentrate the thinking of the entire Party on the four modernizations”), in Xuanchuan dongtai xuanbian 1979 (Selections from Propaganda Trends 1979) (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1981), pp. 152–53Google Scholar.

96. Stuart R., Schram, Ideology and Policy in China Since the Third Plenum, 1978–1984, p. 42Google Scholar. Schram originally used this phrase to refer to events in China in 1984.

97. See the retrospective “Jianchi shijian biaozhun, jin yi bu jiefang sixiang” (“Adhere to the practice criterion, further liberate your thinking”), Lilun dongtai, Vol. 786, 20 06 1988Google Scholar.

98. Guangming ribao teyue, pinglunyuan, “Fenqing liangtiao sixiang luxian, jianchi si xiang jiben yuanze” (“Distinguish between two ideological lines, adhere to the four cardinal principles”), Renmin ribao, 11 05 1979Google Scholar. For an overview of the nationwide movement in the second half of 1979 to “make up for lost lessons” in understanding the criterion of truth, see Frank, Ching, “The current political scene in China,” The China Quarterly, No. 80 (1979), pp. 701–706Google Scholar.