|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 泸定桥上的桥板 |
 |
| 所跟贴 |
泸定桥上的桥板 -- Anonymous - (4248 Byte) 2007-3-20 周二, 上午6:41 (788 reads) |
胖鹭鸶
[个人文集]
警告次数: 1
加入时间: 2005/06/17
文章: 1695
经验值: 13053
|
|
|
作者：胖鹭鸶 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
张书2005年就出版了，参加讨论者最好是通读过全文。再者，讨论时对原文如有疑问，应以英文为准，因为原文是英文。
贵文提到：“张氏有关泸定桥有无战事的判断基于两个证据，一是93岁老太太的证词，二是邓小平接见Zbigniew Brzezinski时的谈话。”
这结论有点随便，张戎书中正文，脚注，后注，辅注所涉及的论据远不止贵文所归纳的两点。
其实，凡是看过张戎原文的读者都知道，张女士判断桥面无战事的最大依据是：突击队员在桥面上没有任何伤亡。原文是：
The strongest evidence debunking the myth of 'heroic' fighting is that there were no battle casualties. The Red Army crossed the bridge without incurring a single death. The vanguard consisted of twenty two men, who, according to the myth, stormed the bridge in a suicide attack. But at a celebration immediately afterwards, on 2 June, all twenty two were not only alive and well, they each received a Lenin suit, a fountain pen, a bowl and a pair of chopsticks. Not one was even wounded.
张的此处资料来源出自中共方面。杨成武回忆录证实了这一点。杨将军真不该疏忽大意，不但忘记了其余十八位勇士的姓名，而且还能将几位从奈何桥上死而复生。于是被人钻了空子。
张书有关泸定桥的正文如下：（本人扫描，如有遗漏，敬请补充）
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mao's group had now reached west-central Sichuan, near Tibet, marching straight north towards Chang Kuo-tao. This next stretch provided the backdrop for the primal myth about the Long March the crossing of the bridge over the Dadu River. This river constituted a formidable natural barrier. In late May, swollen with the Himalayan snows, it was a raging torrent, trapped between towering cliffs. Its rockstrewn bed concealed treacherous whirlpools that made wading or swimming across impossible.
There was no way round, and only one bridge, which had been built in the early eighteenth century as part of the imperial road connecting Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan, to Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. It was a magnificent suspension bridge, 101 metres long and over 3 metres wide, carried by 13 thick iron chains, 9 on the bottom, with gaps a foot wide between each chain. Wooden planks paved the surface, and covered the gaps.
This bridge is the centre of the Long March myth created by Mao,who fed it to the journalist Edgar Snow in 1936. Crossing the bridge, Snow wrote, 'was the most critical single incident of the Long March'. As he describes it:
half this wooden flooring had been removed [by the Nationalists], and before them [the marchers] only the bare iron chains swung to a point midway in the stream. At the northern bridgehead an enemy machine-gun nest faced them, and behind it were positions held by a regiment of White troops. . . [W]ho would have thought the Reds would insanely try to cross on the chains alone? But that was what they did.
He described men being shot and falling into the river.
Paraffin was thrown on the [remaining] planking, and it began to burn. By then about twenty Reds were moving forward on their hands and knees, tossing grenade after grenade into the enemy machine-gun nest.
This is complete invention. There was no battle at the Dadu Bridge. Most probably the legend was constructed because of the site itself: the chain bridge over the roiling river looked a good place for heroic deeds. There were no Nationalist troops at the bridge when the Reds arrived on 29 May. The Communists claim that the bridge was defended by a Nationalist regiment under one Li Quan-shan, but cables to and from this regiment locate it a long way away, at a place called Hualinping. There had been a different Nationalist unit headquartered in Luding, the town at one end of the bridge, but this unit had been moved out of town just before the Reds arrived. The numerous Nationalist communications make no mention of any fighting on the bridge or in the town, while they do mention skirmishes en route to the bridge, and after the Communists crossed over it. Chiang had left the passage open for the Reds.
When the Red advance unit reached the area, it set up HQ in a Catholic church near the bridge, and shelled and fired across the river at Luding on the opposite side. A local woman, who was a sprightly 93-year-old when we met her in 1997, described to us what happened. In 1935 her family - all Catholics, like most locals in those days - was running a beancurd shop right by the bridge on the side held by the Reds, and Red soldiers were billeted in her house. She remembered the Communists firing as 'Only Yin a shell, and Yang a shot' - a Chinese expression for sporadic. She did not remember her side of the river being fired on at all.
Some planks of the bridge may have been removed or damaged. The 93-year-old remembered that the Reds borrowed her doors and those of her neighbours to put on the bridge, and after the troops had crossed over, the locals went to collect their doors. A few had even handed over precious coffin lids (people prepared their coffins long before their death). But the bridge was not reduced to its bare chains: the only time this happened was when Mao's regime made a propaganda film.
Central to the myth is the claim that part of the bridge was set on fire and soldiers had to crawl across on incandescent chains. This claim was explicitly denied by the curator of the museum at the bridge in 1983. The bridge did not burn, although there was a fire in the town itself, caused, most likely, by Red Army shelling.
After them, no one else died under fire. Chou En-lai's bodyguard described how Chou, having been upset when he heard that a horse had fallen into the river, went to check on human losses. 'No men lost?' Chou asked the commander of the unit that had taken the bridge, Yang Cheng-wu, to which Yang replied: 'None.' Even the most hopeless defence would have inflicted at least one death.
---------------------------------------------------------
作者：胖鹭鸶 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
