Aboriginal Boundary：Research on the Formation and Change of Diversified Boundary （1722~1902）

• Main Authors: Tung,Shu-Yin, 董書吟
• Other Authors: Li,Chung-Hsin
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/36zt3j

碩士 === 國立彰化師範大學 === 歷史學研究所 === 106 === This paper attempts to explore the significance and influence of the aboriginal boundary to the central government, local government, and neighboring people, and to analyze the formation and transformation of the aboriginal boundary in Taiwan. Under the distortion of spatial cognition, each ethnic group and country establish the field and circle with self-awareness. In the past, in the process of establishing a life circle, The Han people and aboriginals in Taiwan had overlapped after continuous expansions. After the dispute between the Han people and aboriginals, two ethnic buffer zones were formed at the overlap. This was probably the initial form of the aboriginal boundary. Later, with the Netherlands, Spain, Zheng's regime, the Qing Empire, and Japan ruling Taiwan, their policies had continued to isolate the aboriginals’ boundary in order to avoid conflicts and administrative costs. Therefore, the aboriginal boundary gradually shifted from the natural space division to the specific man-made boundary. The origin of the aboriginal boundary was generally considered to be the aftermath of the Zhu Yigui Incident in 1722, when the Qing government established fifty-four standing stones or building stone tablets in the western Taiwan. It was considered an ethnic boundary between the Han people and indigenous peoples. Although the Han people were forbidden from entering the aboriginal boundary, they often ignore the ban. The Han people crossed the border in order to expand their living space and develop the economy, thus triggering conflicts. In addition, the criminals hiding in the mountains also made the aboriginal boundary become a place of security breaches. Therefore, the government had rearranged the aboriginals’ boundary for several times. The aboriginal boundary is not of the same significance to the central government, local government, and neighboring peoples. Even modern scholars have different ideas. For example, Tien-hui Shin uses the aboriginal boundary of 1760 and 1790 to initiate a three-tier ethnic-spatial regime and to separate head-hunting mountain aborigines, plain aborigines and coastal-plain Chinese setters. Chen-hua Wen believes that the meaning of the aboriginal boundary includes ethnic boundaries and the borders of the Qing Dynasty. This paper also hopes to turn the traditional top-down perspective of exploring development between the Han people and the aborigines to the bottom-up one. The focus of this study includes：What is the awareness of the aboriginal boundary? What is the significance of the existence of the aboriginal boundary?