Starting from 1642, the colonial government of the Dutch East India Company in Taiwan required all Chinese merchants to apply for a permit before entering the aboriginal villages for trade. Two years later, a bidding system was introduced to determine the fee of the permit. This is the origin of the village franchise system in Taiwan. Under this system, a tax was levied on the trade between the franchisee and the aboriginal deer hunters, and the tax rate varied from year to year because the franchise fee was determined by bidding. The Cheng regime inherited the franchise system from the Dutch, while the Feng-shan eight villages changed the franchise system into a head tax system. When the Ching dynasty took over Taiwan, it adopted the system from the Cheng regime with a change. Instead of being determined by bidding, the franchise fees became fixed. This study traces the evolution of the village franchise system from the Dutch colonial government to the Ching rule, and discusses its effects on the aboriginal economy.
After the First Sino-Japanese War, with the signing of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, Taiwan was ceded by the Qing Dynasty to Japan. In June 1895, the colonial educational system was established in the School of Zhisanyen by the first Director of Educational Affairs, Izawa Shiuzi. Between 1896 and 1898, rules and regulations related to schools and national language education were enacted. Apart from language learning, singing lessons were also made compulsory for school students. Hence, with objectives of fostering assimilation and providing enlightenment, these singing lessons set the stage for modern music education in Taiwan. Besides music being taught at school, modern discourses on music were published in newspapers and magazines in colonial Taiwan. Though limited in quantity, these publications together with lectures, seminars, charity concerts, as well as activities organized by record companies and music associations, helped popularize modern music playing a dual role in knowledge dissemination and introduction of new ideas.
This article begins with a brief account of Izawa’s modern idea of music education, highlighting its importance as one of the origins of modern music thinking among Asian intellectuals. Then musical discourses bearing the significance of enlightening the social culture published before 1930 were explored. These publications by both Japanese and Taiwanese teachers as well as intellectuals included essays of Takahashi Hymiyo, Yamaguchi Tōken, and Wei Qingde published at the end of Meiji period in the Taiwan kyōikukai zashi; interviews with Zhang Fuxing published between the late Meiji and Taishō periods in the Taiwan nichinichi shinpō, lectures of Ichizyou Shinzaburou and Tanabe Hisao, a famous musicologist from Tokyo, published in the Taishō period in the Taiwan kyōikukai zashi, and the writings of Li Jingtu published in the same magazine in the beginning of Shōwa period. Exploring these publications of various styles and different themes can shed light on the enlightenment on modernization these discourses brought about and their hidden theme of cultural assimilation.
During the Japanese colonial era, the Taihoku Imperial University was established in Taiwan and the Kejyo Imperial University, in Chaoxian. These two colonial universities both offered history courses. The history courses taught at Japanese universities comprised three areas, namely the history of Japan, the East and the West. However, when such history courses were offered in colonial universities, there were some changes made. The Taihoku Imperial University in Taiwan changed the course History of the West into History of Nanyang; while the Keiyo Imperial University in Chaoxian replaced the course History of the West with History of Chaoxian. The lectures on History of Nanyang given at Taihoku Imperial University used to include Introduction to History of Nanyang, the learning of Dutch and Spanish languages, the Historical Relations between Japan and other countries of Nanyang, the Development of Europeans in Nanyang, the History of Taiwan and the Study of Books Specialized in Nanyang History. Over a period of 17 years (1928-1945), the faculty members included Iwao Seiiti, Yanai Kenji and Murakami Naojiro. There were 62 graduates, but only two, She-jie Ke and Liang-biao Zhang, were Taiwanese. Upon graduation, neither of them pursued further in related studies. On the other hand, at the Kejyo Imperial University, there were also lectures on History of Chaoxian such as Historiography of Chaoxian, Historical Geography of Chaoxian, History of Xinluo, History of Gaoli, History of Chaoxian in Li Period and the Study of Books Specialized in Chaoxian History. Over a period of 19 years (1926-1945), the faculty members included Imanisi Ryu, Oda Syogo, Hujita Ryosaku and Suematu Yasukazu. Among 121 graduates, one-third (around 40 graduates) were from Chaoxian. Many of them continued research in fields related to History of Chaoxian, and made remarkable achievements. In sum, the number of courses, the size of the faculty and the student population at the Taihoku Imperial University were all smaller than those of the Kejyo Imperial University. After World War II, the course on History of Nanyang was discontinued at the National Taiwan University while the course on the History of Taiwan under Dutch and Spanish rule was replaced by History of China, which has become the focus of research. Compared with Taiwan, Korea continued their research on history of Chaoxian with no interruption. Hence, Korea’s achievement in the research on History of Korea, History of Sino-Korean Relations, and History of China was noteworthy in terms of both high quality and large quantity.
Keywords：Taihoku Imperial University, Kejyo Imperial University, Taiwan History, History of Nanyang, History of Chaoxian
Historical Consciousnesses of Multilayered Indigenization: A Preliminary Comparative Analysis of the Literary History Discourses of Huang Te-shih and Shimada Kinji
The argument of this paper can be summarized as follows. Shimada Kinji’s discourse of literary history adopted the European theory of overseas or colonial literature as its framework. The so-called “overseas literature” is a complicated theory with duality. On the one hand, it regards overseas literature as extension of the literature of the metropole from the political stance of expansionist nationalism. On the other hand, it maintains that overseas literature should creates works with local characteristics, and this aesthetical position entails differences, distortions, oppositions, and even the possibility of secession. Starting from such theoretical position, Shimada went on to construct a subject of literary history that manifested a dialectic relationship between metropole and colony. While he argued that literature in Taiwan could not be anything but the extension of the history of Japanese literature in metropole and thus Taiwan could not become a subject of literary history by itself, he admitted and even maintained that within the larger context of a Japanese language expanded overseas the subject formation of colonial Taiwan was possible.
Secondly, based upon the linguistic criterion of Japanese-centrism, Shimada’s conception of literary history dealt only with those Japanese writers traveling or immigrating to Taiwan who had a good command of Japanese as a literary language. The level of written Japanese of the Taiwanese writers was still so primitive that they were excluded from his treatise for the time being. Thirdly, Shimada followed the chronological sequence in constructing his narrative structure, but two related logics were hidden in this time sequence. On the one hand, Shimada evaluated the artistic maturity of each author’s works of various stages according to criteria of realist aesthetics. On the other hand, however, the process of gradual maturation of the realist aesthetics among the authors under discussion tacitly corresponded to that of the indigenization of the Japanese settlers in Taiwan. Fourthly, the emergence of a colonial subject in Shimada’s literary history was a corollary of his aesthetic argument of realism. In other words, the emergence of colonial subject was an unintended political consequence of his unpolitical writing.
Huang Te-shih borrowed the theoretical framework of the nineteenth century French historian Hippolyte Taine’s masterpiece, Histoire de la Littérature Anglaise, to construct his own literary history and thus was a typical discourse of history of national literature. First of all, Huang presumed that “Taiwan” constituted a subject of literary history parallel to “England” and “Japan.” Secondly, he creatively extended the concept of race in Taine’s methodology and interpreted the Taiwanese nation formation as the outcome of two processes of social history, i.e., indigenization and amalgamation of races. By way of this interpretive strategy, he on the one hand overcame the discontinuity of Taiwan’s political history and made it possible for Taiwan to become a subject of literary history, and on the other hand constructed a pluralistic concept of “Taiwanese,” thereby preserving a theoretical space for discussing multi-racial and multi-linguistic works. Thirdly, in terms of narrative structure, Huang followed a time sequence of indigenization characteristic of a teleological order of “from settlers to natives.” He discussed period by period how the creative works of Chinese settlers or writers about Taiwan were transformed from the writings of exiles, bureaucrats and travelers to native writings. Fourthly, Huang’s history of Taiwanese literature was a distinctly political writing in that he intentionally appropriated the discourse of local culture of Japan’s Taise Yokusan Movement of early 1940s to represent the thesis of Taiwanese cultural nationalism that emerged out of the new literature movement of the 1930s.
Research on History of Buddhism in Taiwan and Its Contemporaneity: With book review on Buddhism in Taiwan: Religion and the State, 1660-1990 by Charles Jones and History of Buddhism in Taiwan by Tsan-teng Chiang