在20世纪六七十年代，数以亿计的干部群众投入“文革”，在“反修防修”、整“走资本主义道路的当权派”及建立新的革命秩序、维护“文革”的理论和实践成果方面进行激烈的角力。本文考察的正是促成这一变化的主要生力军——造反派。在全国一般情形的基础上，本文以湖北/武汉的造反派为对象，同时兼顾该省一个地区（宜昌）一个县（枝江）的造反派历史，试图全景式地展现造反派在“文革”中及其后的历史，时间跨度为1966-1987年。1966年5月到1966年底，“文革”从矛头向下转为矛头向上，造反派逐渐兴起；到1967年初造反派开始“夺权”，此后军方介入“支左”，造反派开始受压，经过1967年“7·20”事件命运出现反转；再经过“大联合”前的混乱，到1968年春湖北省、地大体建立革命委员会，“文革”的目标基本实现。此后，革命秩序趋于“复旧”。1968年夏秋开始的“清理阶级队伍”、1969年秋开始的清查“北、决、扬”和1970年全面铺开的清查“五·一六”运动使得数十万的湖北造反派受到批斗、关押及诸多牵连，群众造反力量自此走下政治舞台。1974年春的“批林批孔”和1975年末开始的“批邓、反击右倾翻案风”是造反派骨干在权力场中的最后挣扎。1976年9月毛泽东逝世后，造反派在“揭批查”运动中纷纷落网，再经1982年底开始的清理“三种人”，造反派残余力量亦不复存焉。关于造反派历史的叙述，有两种说法值得关注。一种是从常见的彻底否定“文革”而来的彻底否定造反派在“文革”中的作为，强调造反派整“走资派”的一面；另一种是近年来逐渐兴起的解释，从肯定“文革”的角度出发肯定造反派整“走资派”的正当性。这两种叙述的共同之处是将论述的焦点集中在“文革”整“走资派”是否正当。本文考察的核心，是造反派失势后被整的历史。通过深入梳理，本文认为：“文革”中，除了造反派整“走资派”，造反派被整的历史是更长时间也更酷烈的面相，反倒是在“文革”后造反派获得了解脱。凸显出这一点，有助于澄清造反派乃至“文革”政治史的本来面目，给“文革”以客观的理解和评价。

During the 1960s and 1970s in China, hundreds of millions of cadres and masses devoted to the Cultural Revolution, resulting in fierce struggles not only in aspects of “combat and prevent revisionism” and striking against “capitalist roaders in power”, but also establishing a new revolutionary order and maintaining the theoretical and practical results of the Cultural Revolution. This dissertation takes the main force that participated in and contributed to this event, that is, the Rebels, as the research object.On the basis of the general situation of the whole country, this dissertation selects the Hubei/Wuhan rebels as the object, and at the same time takes the rebellious history of a county (Zhijiang) and a city(Yichang) of Hubei province into account, trying to show the history of the rebels in and after the Cultural Revolution panoramically. The time span is from 1966 to 1987. From May 1966 to the end of the same year, the spearhead of the Cultural Revolution turned from aiming at masses to leaders, therefore the rebels gradually emerged. By the beginning of 1967, the rebels began to “take power”. Then the military intervened to “support the left”, and the rebels were suppressed. The “July 20” incident in 1967 meant that the fate of the rebels reversed. Going through the chaos before the “Great Alliance”, finally, the revolutionary committees were widespreadly established in Hubei in spring of 1968, which implied the goal of the Cultural Revolution was generally realized. Then the revolutionary order tended to return to the old one. The “Clean up Class Ranks” which started between the summer and the autumn in 1968, the combing out and uncovering of “Bei, Jue, and Yang” which began in the autumn of 1969 and the “May 16th” movement which was fully rolled out in 1970, caused hundreds of thousands of Hubei rebels to be criticized, detained and implicated. Subsequently, the mass rebellious force stepped down from the political arena. In the movement of “Criticize Lin Biao and Confucius” in the spring of 1974 and the movement of “Criticize Deng, and Resist the Trend of Reversing Verdicts” beginning at the end of 1975, the rebel leaders staged their final performances in the power stage. Following the death of Mao Zedong in September 1976, the rebel factions were arrested in the “Reveal, Criticiz, Survey” campaign. From the end of 1982, cleaning up “Three Kinds of People” began, and finally the remnants of the rebel factions vanished.Among various narrations about the history of the rebels, there are two that deserve special attention. One, is to completely negate the rebels in the Cultural Revolution, which is derived from the common complete negation of the Cultural Revolution, emphasizing the rebels’ strike against the “capitalist roaders in power”; the other has been rising steadily in recent years, by means of affirming the Cultural Revolution to affirm the legitimacy of the rebels’ strike against the “capitalist roaders in power”. What these two narratives have in common is that both arguments focus on the legitimacy of the strike against the “capitalist roaders in power”. The core of this dissertation is the history of the purge to the rebels after their failure. Through an in-depth pectination, this dissertation believes that in the Cultural Revolution, compared to the rebels’ strike against the “capitalist roaders in power”, the strike against the rebels lasted longer and was more brutal. Quite paradoxically, the rebels got disengagement after the Cultural Revolution. Highlighting this point helps to reveal the true face of the political history of the rebels and even that of the Cultural Revolution itself, and this may contribute to an objective understanding and evaluation of the Cultural Revolution.