* An earlier draft of this article was presented on 17 April 1975 to the Modern China Seminar, Columbia University, New York. Grateful acknowledgement is made to Mark Elvin, Edward Friedman, Maurice Meisner, Stuart Schram and John Starr, all of whom made critical comments on the original version. The author alone is responsible for the final text. The larger study of which this article is a part will be published in 1980 by Stanford University Press under the title: The Emergence of Maoism: Mao Tse-tung, Ch'en Po-ta and the Search for Chinese Theory, 1935–1945.

1. For some specific comments on Mao's theory of the “Sinification of Marxism,” see Schram, Stuart R. (ed.), The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1969, Revised edit.), pp. 112–17Google Scholar. Also see Ch. 15, “Marxism,” in Wakeman, Frederic Jr, History and Will: Philosophical Per spectives of Mao Tse-tung's Thought (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973)Google Scholar. For a detailed account of the historical background to “Mao Tse-tung's thought” (including the “Sinification of Marxism”), see the author's dissertation, “Mao Tse-tung, Ch'en Po-ta, and the conscious creation of ‘Mao Tsetung's thought’ in the Chinese Communist Party, 1935–1945,” Ph.D., University of London, 1976Google Scholar.

2. For a detailed critique of the concept of the “Sinification of Marxism” by a self-styled Chinese adherent of “scientific communism,” see Ch'ing, Yeh (Jen Cho-hsüan), Mao Tse-tung p'i-p'an (A Critique of Mao Tse-tung) (Taipei: P'a-mi-erh shu-tien, 1961, 5th edit.), pp. 91–120Google Scholar. This book was originally published. in the spring of 1941, as part of Yeh Ch'ing's polemics with the CCP. A more recent debate in western scholarship is to be found in the various articles by Pfeffer, Richard M., Schram, Stuart R., Wakeman, Frederic, and, Walder, Andrew G. in Modern China, Vol. II, No. 4 (10 1976), pp. 421–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Vol. Ill, No. 1 (January 1977), pp. 101–118, and Vol. Ill, No. 2 (April 1977), pp. 125–84.

3. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Ssu-hsiang te fan-hsing” (“Reflection in thought”), Chieh-fang jih-pao (Liberation Daily), 28 08 1942, p. 4Google Scholar.

4. Chang Tung-sun was an “idealist” philosopher of international reputation. His career was more academic than political, but he did engage in polemical debate from time to time. Yeh Ch'ing, on the other hand, was a prolific and controversial writer who had left the CCP to devote his energies to the cause of making Marxism a “pure science.” For further information on these two figures, see the relevant entries in Boorman, Howard L. and Howard, Richard C. (eds.), Biographical Dictionary of Republican China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967)Google Scholar; and Klein, Donald W. and Clark, Anne B. (eds.), Biographic Dictionary of Chinese Communism, 1921–1965 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971)Google Scholar.

5. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Lun hsin ch'i-meng yu;n-tung” (“On the New Enlightenment Movement”), Hsin shih-chi (New Century), Vol. I, No. 2, 1 10 1936Google Scholar. The text used here is in Cheng-nung, Hsia, “Hsien chieh-tuan te chung-kuo ssuhsiang yün-tung” (Contemporary Intellectual Movements in China) (Shanghai: Yi-pan shu-tien, 1937), pp. 67–75Google Scholar. The passage cited is on p. 68.

6. Loc. cit.

7. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Hsin che-hsüeh-che te tzu-chi p'i-p'an ho kuan-yü hsin ch'imeng yün-tung te chien-yi” (“A new philosopher's self-criticism and proposal for a New Enlightenment Movement”), Tu-shu sheng-huo (Reading Life) (Shanghai: Tu-shu sheng-huo she), Vol. IV, No. 9 (10 09 1936), p. 453Google Scholar.

8. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Wen-hua shang te ta lien-he yü hsin ch'i-meng yün-tung te li-shih t'e-tien” (“The great unity in culture and the historical characteristics of the New Enlightenment Movement) (Summer 1937)Google Scholar, in Cheng-nung, Hsia, Hsien chieh-tuan, pp. 128–37Google Scholar. The reference is on p. 128. Also see Po-ta, Ch'en, “Hsüeh-hsi p'i-p'ing” (Study and Criticism) (Spring 1937?)Google Scholar, in Po-ta, Ch'en, Tsai wen-hua chen-hsien shang (On the Cultural Front) (Hong Kong: Sheng-huo shu-tien, 1939), pp. 28–33Google Scholar.

9. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Lun Chung-kuo ch'i-meng ssu-hsiang-chia T'an Ssu-t'ung” (“On the Chinese enlightened thinker T'an Ssu-t'ung”) (15 12 1933)Google Scholar, in Ch'en, , Tsai wen-hua chen-hsien shang, pp. 181 and 209Google Scholar.

10. Ch'en, , “Hsin che-hsüeh-che te tzu-chi p'i-p'an,” p. 453Google Scholar.

11. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Tsai lun hsin ch'i-meng yün-tung: ssu-hsiang te tzu-yu yü tzu-yu te ssu-hsiang.” (“Again on the New Enlightenment Movement: freedom of thought and free thought”), in Jen-shih yüeh-k'an (Knowledge Monthly), Vol. I, No. 1 (16 05 1937?)Google Scholar. The text used here is in Cheng-nung, Hsia, Hsien chiehtuan, pp. 84–99Google Scholar. The reference is on p. 90.

12. Ch'en, , “Wen-hua shang te ta lien-ho,” pp. 128–30Google Scholar.

13. Ibid. p. 136.

14. Ibid. p. 130.

15. Li Li-san was an urban-oriented leader who dominated Party policy for much of 1929–30, during which time he strenuously opposed Mao Tse-tung's rural strategy. Wang Ming (Ch'en Shao-yü) was the acknowledged leader of the so-called Returned Students, a young Moscow-educated leadership group who dominated the Party's policies during 1931–34, and who severely undermined Mao's position during those years. For more information on these individuals and their policies, see the relevant entries in Boorman and Howard, Biographical Dictionary of Republican China, and Klein and Clark, Biographic Dictionary of Chinese Communism, 1921–1965.

16. On this point, see Schram, (ed.), The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung, pp. 84–88Google Scholar. Schram discusses at some length the difficult question of the authenticity of Mao's early lectures on Marxist philosophy, and accepts them as genuine. He rejects in particular John E. Rue's suggestion that they were forged by Mao's enemies in the Party with a view to discrediting him as a theorist. On this point see Rue, John E., “Is Mao Tse-tung's ‘dialectical materialism’ a forgery?,” Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXVI, No. 3 (05 1967), pp. 464–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17. Tse-tung, Mao, Mao Tse-tung hsüan-chi (Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung) (HC), 4 Vols. (Peking: Jen-min ch'u-pan-she, 1967), Vol. I, pp. 259 and 274Google Scholar. For the argument that these two essays were revised very substantially prior to publication, see Cohen, Arthur A., The Communism of Mao Tse-tung (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), pp. 22–28Google Scholar.

18. Wittfogel, K. A. and Chao, C. R., “Some remarks on Mao's handling of concepts and problems of dialectics,” Studies in Soviet Thought, Vol. III, No. 4 (12 1963), pp. 251–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Mao's critical self-appraisal of his original lectures, see Mao Tse-tung chi {Collected Works of Mao Tse-tung) (Chi), 10 Vols., edited under the direction of Minoru, Takeuchi (Tokyo: Hokubo sha, 1970–1974). The specific reference is Chi VI, p. 303Google Scholar.

19. Whiting, Allen S. and Shih-ts'ai, Sheng, Sinkiang: Pawn or Pivot? (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1958), pp. 229–31Google Scholar. This information is based on the personal recollections of General Sheng Shih-ts'ai, who apparently discussed some of Mao's early philosophical writings with Teng and Chou in late 1939 or early 1940.

20. Ju-hsin, Chang, “Hsüeh-hsi ho chang-wo Mao Tse-tung te li-lun ho ts'elüeh” (“Study and grasp Mao Tse-tung's theory and strategy”), Chieh-fang ühpao (18–19 02 1942), p. 3 both issuesGoogle Scholar.

21. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 269Google Scholar.

22. Mao, , HC I, pp. 293–95Google Scholar.

23. Mao does not employ this term, but his line of argument leads directly to this conclusion, and was eventually to lead to the use of the term “Sinification” in official Party publications in the late 1930s and early 1940s.

24. Mao, , Chi VI, pp. 269–70Google Scholar.

25. Mao, , HC I, pp. 294–95Google Scholar.

26. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Fu-pai che-hsüeh te mo-luo” (“The decline of a decadent philosophy”), Tu-shu sheng-huo, Vol. IV, No. 1 (10 05 1936), pp. 48–57Google Scholar; and Vol. IV, No. 2 (25 May 1936), pp. 39–41. See especially pt. 1, pp. 54–55.

27. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 300Google Scholar.

28. For an indirect reference by Mao to the New Enlightenment Movement, see Mao, , Chi VI, p. 275Google Scholar.

29. Boorman, and Howard, , Biographical Dictionary of Republican China, VoL I, p. 221Google Scholar.

30. Po-ta, Ch'en (ed.), Mao Tse-tung lun (On Mao Tse-tung) (Sian: Hsi-an ch'u-pan-she, 1939)Google Scholar. This book is not widely available, but it is on deposit at the Hoover Institute of War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

31. Tse-tung, Mao, Mao Tse-tung lun-wen chi (Collected Essays of Mao Tse-tung) (Shanghai: Ta-chung ch'u-pan-she, 1937)Google Scholar.

32. Ch'en's influence is more likely to have been felt in the revision of part of Mao's lectures for publication in 1950 and 1952, but this is a separate question beyond our present concerns.

33. Brief sketches of Ch'en Po-ta's early career are to be found in Boorman and Howard, Biographical Dictionary of Republican China, and Klein and Clark, Biographic Dictionary of Chinese Communism, 1921–1965. For an extensive listing of biographical material on Ch'en, and a discussion of his career up to 1935, see the author's dissertation, pp. 21–32.

34. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 275Google Scholar.

35. By his own admission, it was only in the spring of 1925 that Mao first began to appreciate the revolutionary potential of the peasantry as opposed to that of the urban proletariat. See his comments in Snow, Edgar, Red Star Over China (London: Victor Gollancz, 1937), p. 157Google Scholar. It was not until 1927, when he was 34 years old, that Mao, began to translate his new awareness of the peasants' revolutionary potential into important political writings such as his famous “Report on an investigation of the peasant movement in Hunan” (03 1927)Google Scholar. Key passages from this important report have been translated in their original form in Schram, , The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung, pp. 250–59Google Scholar.

36. For a brief but useful discussion of the various schools of thought in the “Controversy on China's social history,” see Schwartz, Benjamin I., “A Marxist controversy on China,” Far Eastern Quarterly, Vol. 13 (1954), pp. 143–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A more recent study is Dirlik, Arif, “Mirror to revolution: early Marxist images of Chinese history,” Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. XXXIII, No. 2 (02 1974), pp. 193–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 102Google Scholar.

38. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Wo-men chi-hsu li-shih te shih-yeh ch'ien-chin” (“We will continue to advance towards our historical goal”), Chieh-fang (Liberation), Nos. 43–44 (joint issue of 1 07 1938), pp. 72–78Google Scholar. For an extensive discussion of Ch'en's role in rewriting CCP history in 1944–45, see the author's dissertation, pp. 102–106 and 308–373.

39. Ch'en, , “Wo-men chi-hsü li-shih te shih-yeh ch'ien-chin,” p. 72Google Scholar.

40. Ibid. p. 73.

41. Loc. cit.

42. Fu, Lo (Wen-t'ien, Chang), “Chung-kuo kung-ch'an tang shih-ch'i chou-nien chi-nien” (“In commemoration of the 17th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party”), Chieh-fang, Nos. 43–44 (joint issue of 1 07 1938), p. 68Google Scholar.

43. Loc. cit.

44. Interestingly, by this time some of the Returned Students were beginning to adopt a more positive attitude towards China's traditional culture. In an article in the summer of 1938, for example, Po Ku declared in passing that the Chinese Communists “understand the necessity for respecting and accepting all the good traditions and theories of our nation.” See Ch'in Po-ku (Ch'in Pang-hsien), “On the development, the difficulties and the future of the national anti-Japanese united front,” in Shao-yü, Ch'en, Old Intrigues in New Clothing (Chungking: New China Information Committee, Bulletin No. 7, 1939), pp. 22–23Google Scholar.

45. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Lun wen-hua yün-tung chung te min-tsu ch'uan-t'ung” (“On national traditions in the cultural movement”), Chieh-fang, No. 46 (23 07 1938), p. 26Google Scholar.

46. Ibid. p. 28.

47. Ibid. p. 27.

48. Ibid. pp. 26–27.

49. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Women kuan-yü mu-ch'ien wen-hua yün-tung te yi-chien” (“Our opinions concerning the present cultural movement”) (4 05 1938?)Google Scholar, in Ch'en, , Tsai wen-hua chen-hsien shang, pp. 93–95Google Scholar.

50. Ch'en was a student at Shanghai (Labour) University for an undetermined period in 1924–25, and was already active in left-wing student activities. For further information on this university, see the biographies of Ch'iu-pai, Ch'ü and Pang-hsien, Ch'in in Klein, and Clark, , Biographic Dictionary of Chinese Communism, 1921–1965, pp. 241 and 195Google Scholar.

51. For an outline of Ch'ü Ch'iu-pai's literary ideas in the early 1930s, see his “Ta-chung wen-yi te wen-t'i” (“Problems in literature and art for the masses”) (5 March 1932), in Ch'ü Ch'iu-pai wen-chi (Collected Works of Ch'ü Ch'iu-pai) (Peking: Jen-min wen-hsüeh ch'u-pan-she, 1953), Vol. II, pp. 884–93Google Scholar. A full discussion of Ch'ü's literary ideas is to be found in Pickowicz, Paul G., “Ch'ü Ch'iu-pai and the Chinese Marxist conception of revolutionary popular literature and art,” The China Quarterly, No. 70 (06 1977), pp. 296–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52. Ch'en, , “Lun wen-hua yün-tung chung te min-tsu ch'uan-t'ung, p. 28Google Scholar. Ch'en further defines “national essence” as “min-tsu te ching-hua,” a term no more precise in meaning than the more common “kuo-ts'ui.”

53. Ch'ü, , “Ta-chung wen-yi,” pp. 887–89Google Scholar.

54. Ch'en, , “Wo-raen kuan-yü mu-ch'ien wen-hua yün-tung te yi-chien,” p. 93Google Scholar.

55. For a tentative discussion of this issue, see the author's dissertation, pp. 170–73.

56. Mao, , Chi VI, pp. 216–17Google Scholar.

57. Mao, , Chi VI, pp. 259–60Google Scholar.

58. Loc. cit.

59. Loc. cit. For rather obvious reasons Mao did not apply Ch'en's concept of localization to Marxism-Leninism. This idea had its place in the field of art and literature, for example, but it would have proved rather awkward if applied to political theory. This would have been especially true in 1938, when Mao was doing his best to unify CCP ideology under himself as an emerging national leader.

60. Pien-che, (Editors), “Chieh-fang erh chou-nien chi-nien” (“In commemoration of the second anniversary of Liberation ”), Chieh-fang, No. 70 (1 05 1939), pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

61. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 260Google Scholar.

62. Loc.cit.

63. Mao, , Chi V, pp. 96–97Google Scholar.

64. On this point, see the Liberation editorial cited in note 60.

65. Schram, (ed.), The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung, pp. 112–13Google Scholar.

66. Mao, , Chi VI, p. 261Google Scholar.

67. Chieh-fang, No. 57 (25 11 1938), p. 41Google Scholar. See also Ch'ün-chung (The Masses), Vol. II, No. 12 (25 12 1938), p. 593Google Scholar.

68. Schram, (ed.), The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung, p. 173Google Scholar. Stuart Schram, who first brought this discrepancy to light, was told by Edgar Snow that it might well have been Po Ku who was responsible for altering the English text of Mao's report. However, it is impossible to confirm the validity of Snow's hypothesis.

69. Goldman, Merle, Literary Dissent in Communist China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), pp. 15–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70. For a detailed discussion of the cheng-feng campaign, and Ch'en Po-ta's role in it, see the author's dissertation, pp. 236–54.

71. Chieh-fang, No. 53 (30 09 1938), p. 22Google Scholar.

72. For a discussion of this subject, see the author's dissertation, pp. 277–91. Also see Wylie, Ray, “The emergence of ‘Mao Tse-tung's thought’ in 1943: the domestic and international context,” International Studies Notes, Vol. II. No. 2 (Summer 1975), pp. 1–11Google Scholar.

73. Po-ta, Ch'en, “Ssu-hsiang wu-tsui (wo-men wei ‘pao-wei chung-kuo tsuihao te wen-hua ch'uan-t'ung’ yi chi ‘cheng-ch'u hsien-tai wen-hua te chungkuo’ erh fen-tou)” [“Thought is no crime (We are struggling to ‘defend China's finest cultural traditions’ and to ‘achieve a China with a contemporary culture ‘)”] (05 1937)Google Scholar, in Ch'en, , Tsai wen-hua chen-hsien shang, p. 26Google Scholar.