1. “Was there a Sneevlietian Strategy?“, CQ, no. 54 (01–03, 1973), pp. 159 –68Google Scholar. Mrs Munjewerf must know that the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam has repeatedly turned down my requests for access to their “Sneevliet Archives.” In my requests, I offered to comply with any restriction the Institute might impose. Fortunately, all major documents on Sneevliet's mission to China are available outside the “Sneevliet Archives.” It would have been correct for Mrs Muntjewerf to have pointed this out.

2. For instance, Mrs Muntjewerf gives a neatly tabulated summary of source materials used by me, but it is misleading. Sneevliet wrote over 60 articles on China and her observation that “only a few exist from this particular period” is quite unfounded. She also failed to mention my use of the Sneevliet flies in the Archives of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the former Dutch Ministry of Colonial Affairs and the Dutch Ministry of Justice.

3. Issues and Studies (Taipeh, November 1972), pp. 48–55. The original Chinese version of the article on which he was commenting appeared in Wen-ti yü yen-chiu in May of the same year. Professor Chen wrote: “…I have great esteem for Dov Bing's work which contributed considerably to the study of the OCP's history…”.

4. Muntjewerf, , CQ 53, pp. 163–4Google Scholar.

5. Ibid. pp. 161–3.

6. Ibid. p. 160, n. 3.

7. Ibid. pp. 165–7.

8. Komintern i Vostok; bor'ba za Leninskuiu Strategiiu i Taktiku v Natsionalno Osvoboditelnom Dvizhenii (Comintern and the East. Struggle for Lenin's strategy and tactics in the national liberation movement) (Moscow, Glav.Red.Vost.Lit, 1969)Google Scholar. Contributions by V. I. Glunin, A. J. Kartinova, M. A. Cheshkov, A. B. Reznikov and M. A. Persitz.

9. CQ 53, p. 163.

10. Snow, Edgar, Red Star over China (New York: Random House, 1944), pp. 154–8Google Scholar. Shen Te-ch'un and Tien Hai-yen in an interview with Pi-wu, Tung, Jen-min jih-pao (People's Daily) (Peking, 30 06 1961)Google Scholar. See also Chung-kuo ch'ing-nien (Chinese Youth) (Peking, 1961), Nos. 13–14, pp. 10–12Google Scholar. Pi-wu, Tung, in an interview with Nym Wales, Red Dust (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1952), pp. 39–40Google Scholar.

11. lao-jen, Ch'i-wu (Pao Hui-sheng), “ Chung-kuo kung-ch'an-tang ch'eng-li ch'ien-hou ti chien-wu “ (Recollections of the events surrounding the founding of the CCP), Hsin kuan-ch'a (The New Observer) (Peking, 1 07 1957)Google Scholar. Internal evidence and cross reference with four articles and a book written in China in 1957 by “Old Man Ch'i-wu” show beyond doubt that that writer was none other than Pao Hui-sheng, the third Wuhan delegate at the First National Congress. Pao left the Party at an early stage, but remained in the People's Republic after 1949. Professor Tse-tsung Chow of the University of Wisconsin has verified this identification. There does not seem to be any reason why we should not accept Pao Hui-sheng's account of the Congress. For a more detailed analysis, see my paper “A Dutch Revolutionary in China: Henk Sneevliet and The First National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party,” delivered at the 24th International Congress on Chinese Studies, Sinological Institute, Leiden University, Holland, 3–9 09 1972Google Scholar.

12. Ch'en Kung-po Chou Fo-hai hui-i lu hu-pien (Memories of Ch'en Kung-po and Chou Fo-hai) (Hong Kong, 1967), pp. 19 and 142Google Scholar. Ch'en Kung-po (Collected Writings) (n.p., Ti-fang hsing-cheng she, 1944), pp. 206–7. Chou Fo-hai mentions that Sneevliet overruled the decision of non-co-operation with the Southern Government.

13. Kuo-t'ao, Chang, “Wo ti hui-i,” Ming-pao yueh-k'an (Ming-pao Monthly) (Hong Kong), Vol. I, No. 6, p. 73Google Scholar.

14. Kung-po, Ch'en, The Communist Movement in China (New York: Octagon Books, 1966), pp. 102, 105Google Scholar.

15. Glunin, V. I., “Komintern i stanovlenie kommunisticheskogo dvizhenia v Kitae” (The Comintern and the establishment of the Communist Movement in China) (1920–1922), in Komintern i Vostok…, p. 246Google Scholar. Another interesting account on the Chinese Section of the Far Eastern Department in Irkutsk can be found in Shumiatsky, B. Z., “ Iz istorii Komsomola i Kompartii Kitaia tov. Chang T'ai-lei” (On the Communist Youth and the Communist Party of China. In memory of one of the organizers of the Communist Youth and Communist Party of China, comrade Chang Tai-lei), Revoliutsionnyi Vostok (Revolutionary East) (Moscow, 1928), No. 4–5, p. 216Google Scholar.

16. The other Comintern delegate, Nikolsky, does not appear to have made much of an impression upon the foundation members of the CCP. Only Pao Huisheng remembers him speaking at the Congress about the work of the Profintern. It seems unlikely that he, or any of the inexperienced Chinese delegates, took the initiative in fonnally joining the Comintern. Nikolsky acted very much as Sneevliet's assistant.

17. Isaacs, Harold, “Notes on a conversation with H. Sneevliet. The Chinese Question, 1920–23” (Amsterdam, 19 08 1935)Google Scholar, published in CQ 45 (01–03 1971), p. 104Google Scholar. Names spelt as in the original text. Various other passages in this document suggest that Sneevliet's dating was not merely a slip of the tongue.

18. Muntjewerf, , CQ 53, p. 161Google Scholar.

19. Maring, M., “Bericht des Genossen H. Maring für die Executive” (Report of H. Maring for the Executive) (Moscow, 11 07 1922), p. 12Google Scholar.

20. lao-jen, Ch'i-wu, “Chung-kuo kung-ch'an-tang…”, Hsin kuan-ch'a, 1 07 1957Google Scholar.

21 Glunin, V. I., “Komintern i stanovlenie kommunisticheskogo dvizhenia v Kitae” (The Comintern and the establishment of the Communist Movement in China), (1920–22), in Komintern i Vostok, p. 252Google Scholar.

22. The name of this meeting between Sneevliet and the Central Committee does not appear to be crucial, as long as we know that it took place in the Spring and not in the Summer of 1922. In fact, the term “Hangchow Plenum” is inappropriate, although it has become universally accepted for the meeting of August. Sneevliet called it, in 1935, “a conference at West Lake, Hangchow” and, in 1922, “several discussions.” Ch-en Tu-hsiu does not refer specifically to Hangchow in his letter of 6 April 1922. In his letter of 10 December 1929, he merely mentioned “a meeting at West Lake.” An article on the Hangchow Plenum is due to appear shortly in Issues and Studies.

23. Muntjewerf, , CQ 53, pp. 160–1, n. 3Google Scholar.

24. Letter from H. S. (H. Sneevliet) to Mrs E. J. Sneevliet-Brouwer, teacher, Traverdoeli, Semarang, Java. Dated China, 2 September 1922. Letter F6, 4523. No. 698 Geh. AJP. (Archive of the Dutch Ministry of Colonial Affairs.)

25. Aus der Internationale: Sitzung der Exekutive der Komintern vom 17 July” (From the International: Session of the Executive of the Comintern of 17 July), Internationale Presse Korrespondenz (International Press Correspondence), No. 145 (Berlin, 25 07 1922), pp. 929–30Google Scholar.

26. Komintern i Vostok, pp. 252, 302.

27. “Aus der Internationale: Sitzung der Exekutive”, Internationale Presse Korrespondenz, No. 145, p. 930Google Scholar.

28. Voor Vrijheid en Socialisme (For Freedom and Socialism) (Rotterdam, Sneevliet Commemoration Committee, 1953. Privately published), p. 60Google Scholar.

29. Kuo-t'ao, Chang, “Wo ti hui-i,” Ming-pao yueh-kan, Vol. I, No. 8, p. 86Google Scholar.

30. See my article “Sneevliet and the early years of the CCP,” CQ 48 (10–12 1971), p. 694, n. 86Google Scholar.

31. Ibid.

32. Dutch Foreign Ministry Archives: Peking report 46/23, No. 997/2343 A.P. Subject, H. Sneevliet. In a letter written by A. Langkemper, Rotterdam to Mrs Sneevliet, Semarang, dated 9 May 1923 it is observed that Sneevliet wrote a letter from Shanghai, to a Dutch comrade dated 29 March 1923.

33. Kuo-t'ao, Chang “Wo ti hui-i,” Ming-pao yueh-k'an. Vol. I, No. 9, p. 92Google Scholar.

34 Ibid.

35. Kuo-t'ao, Chang, “Wo ti hui-i,” Ming-pao yueh-k'an, Vol. I, No. 10, p. 78Google Scholar. This report is indirectly confirmed by Sneevliet himself, who mentions that Mao made it clear at the Third Congress that he did not believe in a mass organization of workers. Sneevliet's letter to the ECCI, Canton, , 20 06 1923 in Komintern i Vostok…, p. 303Google Scholar.

36. The ECCI relied almost solely upon Sneevliet for the formulation of its China policy. Apart from the agrarian programme, the May directive is merely a restatement of Sneevliet's July 1922 proposals. It is of course possible that the shock of the February Seventh Incident induced Sneevliet or the ECCI to formulate their peasant policies. However, there is no indication in Sneevliet's writings, or for that matter in the available documents on the Third Congress, that this might be so. Chang Kuo-t'ao's personal report to the ECCI on the failure of the February Seventh strike received hardly any attention from the Comintern leadership. It was on this basis that I suggested that Mao Tse-tung may have played some part in the formulation of the agrarian programme.

37. Sneevliet and Mao appear to have been rather close in 1923. Mao Tse-tung conversed with Sneevliet during the summer of 1923. He supported Sneevliet's proposals at the Third Congress and, consequently, the young Hunanese was elected a member of the CC. Another Sneevliet protege, Ch'ü Ch'iu-pai, was also elected to the CC. Ch'ü was one of the Sneevliet's two personal assistants and, together with Chang Tai-lei, lobbied intensively for the implementation of Sneevliet's proposals. As an indication of Sneevliet's influence at the time, it must be noted that Chang Kuo-t'ao, who had been elected to the CC at the Second Congress, was unceremoniously sacked from that Committee. Chang had opposed Sneevliet at the Third Congress. Mrs Muntjewerf's observation that I “completely failed to refer to documents or literature to prove this point” is not correct My footnote was, in fact, indirectly based on the same document quoted by Mrs Muntjewerf, namely, a conversation with “Comrade Mau Tsze Tong,” as recorded in the “Sneevliet Archives.” In an interview in Het Vrije Volk (The Free People), Mr Riethof (a colleague of Mrs Muntjewerf who had access to the documents in question) told about the Sneevliet meeting with Mao in 1923. See Schaap, Dick, “Henk Sneevliet, een leven voor de rode revolutie” (Henk Sneevliet, a life for the Red Revolution), Het Vrije Volk, 18 04 1970Google Scholar. Interview with H. Riethof.