资料来源和方法 Sources and Methodology

 资料来源和方法 Sources and Methodology

本书综合了自上而下和自下而上的观点，并纳入了机构历史和人物故事。

这里介绍的许多政府记录是在一个短暂的机会窗口中获得的。

在2006年6月至2008年11月期间，中国外交部档案馆解密了1949年至1965年间制作的数千份文件。

然而，这批文件，包括本书中使用的几乎所有中国外交文件，在2013年被重新分类。

与 "930"运动有关的最重要的文件，即1965年8月5日的艾迪特-毛泽东讨论，来自一个名为《毛主席与各共产党领导人会谈纪要》（Mao Zhuxi yu geguo gongchandang lingdaoren tanhua）的文集，该文集在一群有特别权限进入中共中央档案馆的高级中国学者中内部流传。

除了这些目前在北京无法接触到的官方档案，我还参考了雅加达的印度尼西亚共和国国家档案馆（Arsip Nasional Republik Indonesia或ANRI）；台北的國史館（Guoshi guan）和中国国民党档案馆（Guomindang dangshi guan）；以及中国广东、福建和海南的省市档案馆。

This book synthesizes top-down and bottom-up perspectives and incorporates both institutional history and human stories.

 Many of the governmental records presented here were obtained during a brief window of opportunity.

 Between June 2006 and November 2008, the Chinese Foreign Ministry Archives declassified thousands of documents produced between 1949 and 1965.

 However, this collection, including almost all the Chinese diplomatic documents used in this book, was reclassified in 2013.

 The most important document related to the September Thirtieth Movement, the Aidit-Mao discussion on August 5, 1965, is drawn from a collection entitled “Minutes of Meetings between Chairman Mao and Leaders of Various Communist Parties” (Mao Zhuxi yu geguo gongchandang lingdaoren tanhua), which was internally circulated among a group of senior Chinese scholars with special access to the CCP Central Archives.

 In addition to this body of currently inaccessible official records in Beijing, I have drawn on the National Archives of the Republic of Indonesia (Arsip Nasional Republik Indonesia or ANRI) in Jakarta雅加达; Academia Historica (Guoshi guan) and the archives of the Chinese Nationalist Party (Guomindang dangshi guan) in Taipei; and provincial and municipal archives in Guangdong, Fujian, and Hainan in China.

在中国和印度尼西亚，政府的资料都有其局限性。

在中国，记录的保存是全面和严格的，但高度集中和严格的控制。

印尼的官方档案没有那么严格，但也远没有那么系统。

1965年的政权更迭不仅导致在混乱的权力交接过程中意外或故意销毁记录，也导致几十年来对公众讨论历史的压制。

此外，在这两个国家的国家记录中，移民是作为政策的主体或监视的目标出现的。

他们从自己的角度讲述的生活故事很少被记录下来。

In both China and Indonesia, government sources have their limitations.

 In China, record keeping is comprehensive and rigorous but highly centralized and tightly controlled.

 The Indonesian official archives are less rigid but also much less systematic.

 The 1965 regime change led not only to the accidental or deliberate destruction of records during the chaotic transition of power but also to decades of repression of public discussion of history.

 Moreover, in state records from both countries, migrants appear as subjects of policies or targets of surveillance.

 Their life stories as told from their own perspectives are rarely documented.

为了补充国家档案，我查阅了各个图书馆和研究中心的资料，如厦门大学东南亚研究中心（厦门大学东亚研究所）和香港浸会大学的报纸收藏，以及阿姆斯特丹国际社会历史研究所的印尼共产党流亡者资料。

我还收集了个人的私人文件。

例如，在上海，巴人（王任叔）的家庭。

(意思是 "普通人"）的家人，允许我查阅他未发表的手稿和个人信件。

巴人（王任叔）是当时著名的作家，在1940年代末，在他成为中国驻印度尼西亚的第一位大使之前，他在苏门答腊岛生活了五年半的时间。

 在华南沿海的农村地区，我参观了五个华侨农场，从国外移民到中国的中国人在那里得到了重建生活的处女地。

在这些农场里，被遣返的华侨与我分享材料，包括出生证和结婚证、身份证、学校成绩单、家庭照片以及他们从印度尼西亚到中国的船票。

To complement state archives, I consulted materials at various libraries and research centers, such as the newspaper collections at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies of Xiamen University (Xiamen daxue Dongnanya yanjiu zhongxin) and the Baptist University of Hong Kong as well as the materials on Indonesian Communist exiles at the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam.

 I have also collected private documents from individuals.

 For instance, in Shanghai, the family of Ba Ren巴人（王任叔） (which means “Common Man” in Chinese), granted me access to his unpublished manuscripts and personal letters.

 Ba Ren巴人（王任叔）, a well-known writer in his time, lived in Sumatra for five and a half years in the late 1940s before he became the PRC’s first ambassador to Indonesia.

47 In the rural regions of coastal South China, I visited five Overseas Chinese Farms (huaqiao nongchang华侨农场), where the ethnic Chinese who migrated to the PRC from abroad were given virgin land on which to rebuild their lives.

 On these farms, repatriated overseas Chinese shared material with me, including birth and marriage certificates, identification cards, school transcripts, family photos, and ferry tickets for their journeys from Indonesia to China.

此外，我还采访了退休的中国外交官、印尼共产党流亡者，以及20世纪50年代和60年代在印尼的中国社区成员。

例如，梁英明是一位受过训练的历史学家，也是一位对自己的过去进行自我反省的叙述者。

但那些在1950年代末和1960年代被驱逐出印尼的经济移民在陈述他们的经历时，往往对当时的大环境和他们自己在其中的地位认识不足。

至于那些仍然生活在印尼的华裔，他们的记忆往往被对苏哈托政权的不满所蒙蔽，甚至是残留的创伤。

前外交官们通常都很克制和谨慎。

相比之下，PKI的流亡者往往是雄辩家，他们以验证其政治信仰的方式来框定自己的过去。

可以理解的是，所有这些记忆都被叙述者目前所处的大环境所框定、修改和限制：在审查制度仍然盛行的中国，或者在言论自由逐渐改善的印尼。

但承认口述历史的困难并不意味着否认其价值。

本书将公共记录和个人回忆交织在一起，同时旨在解释这两种来源，并对它们的陷阱和承诺保持敏感。

In addition, I interviewed retired PRC diplomats, Indonesian Communist exiles, and members of the Chinese community in Indonesia in the 1950s and 1960s.

 Liang Yingming, for example, is a historian by training and a self-reflective narrator of his own past.

 But the economic migrants who were expelled from Indonesia in the late 1950s and 1960s tend to present their experiences with less awareness of the broader context at the time and their own position in it.

 As for the ethnic Chinese who remain living in Indonesia, their memories were oftentimes clouded by grievances against the Suharto regime or even residual trauma.

 Former diplomats are usually restrained and cautious.

 The PKI exiles, in contrast, tend to be eloquent speakers who frame their past in ways that validate their political beliefs.

 Understandably, all these memories are socially framed, revised, and restricted by the broader environment the narrator is currently situated in: the PRC, where censorship is still prevalent, or Indonesia, where the freedom of speech is gradually improving.

 But acknowledging the difficulties of oral history does not mean denying its value.

 This book weaves together public records and personal recollections, while aiming to interpret both sources with sensitivity to their pitfalls and promises.

48