文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：对出席中共“一大”代表的几个判断

英文题名：Three Judgments About the Attendants of the First National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party

作者：张利[1]

第一作者：张利

机构：[1]北京联合大学社科部

第一机构：北京联合大学马克思主义学院

年份：2001

卷号：15

期号：2

起止页码：10-13

中文期刊名：北京联合大学学报

外文期刊名：Journal of Beijing Union University

语种：中文

中文关键词：中共党史研究;中共"一大"出席代表;包惠僧;何叔衡

外文关键词：study on the history of the Chinese Communist Party;textual research on the First National Congress of Communist Party of China;BAO Hui seng; HE Shu heng

摘要：因囿于缺乏原始资料以及当事人回忆的多样 ,长期以来 ,关于出席中共“一大”代表的人数和实际出席者是谁 ,曾是中共党史学界争论的一个问题。 80年代初出版并发行的《中共党史大事年表》似乎作了权威性的结论。但其结论却与基本的史料不相符合。这里对《大事年表》关于出席中共“一大”代表人数为 1 3人的结论提出质疑 ,援引多种材料 ,论证出席中共“一大”代表应为 1 2人 ,由此进一步论证包惠僧和何叔衡二人 ,包是出席“一大”会议的正式代表而非陈独秀个人指派的代表 ,何则是唯一一个未能出席会议的“一大”代表。
Because of short of original informations and different memories from the attendants,in a long time,how many members and who actually attended the First National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party,is a problem in the circle of study about the Chinese Communist Party.It's seems that “the chronicle of events of the Chinese Communist Party”had given an authoritive conclusion,but this conclusion is inconsistent with historial materials.Being an opposite to thirteen attendants in the First National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party,insisting on the opinion of twelve attendants.Meanwhile,proving BAO Hui seng was an attendant as an official delegate,but HE Shu heng was an only absentee as an official delegate.