论文部分内容阅读
先后读了1996年《传记文学》第11期刘小清、刘晓滇撰写的《王芸生和香港大公报起义》和1997年《新文化史料》第3期刘小清撰写的《香港大公报起义史录》两文,也想谈谈自己对这段历史的看法。两文作者抓住《大公报》这样一张有悠久历史的大报在新中国成立前夕,如何选择自己的前途和命运,披露这段鲜为人知的史实。然重要史实错误甚多,是其大弊。尤其是第一篇文章,大的错误就有十几处之多,虽然作者在第二篇文章中对第一篇文章明显错误之处有所改正,但又产生了新的错误。本文不拟对此有所讨论,而愿跟作
The two articles entitled “Uprising of Wang Yunsheng and Hong Kong Ta Kung Pao” by Liu Xiaoqing and Liu Xiaodian and “The Historical Records of the Uprising of Hong Kong Ta Kung Pao” written by Liu Xiaoqing in the 3rd issue of “New Cultural History” in 1996 were also read Talk about your own view of this period of history. The author of the two seizes the big newspaper with a long history such as Ta Kung Pao. On the eve of the founding of New China, how to choose its own future and destiny to disclose this little-known historical fact. However, a lot of important historical facts are wrong and have their own disadvantages. In particular, the first essay contains as many as a dozen major mistakes. Although the author corrects the obvious mistakes of the first essay in the second essay, it creates a new mistake. This article does not intend to be discussed, but willing to follow