- 期刊
日治初期之前居臺漢人分佈特質成因再探－以宜蘭擺厘陳氏家族為例
Re-examination of the Characteristics of the Han Chinese Settlement in Taiwan Prior to the Japanese Colonization as Exemplified in the Chen Lineage of Bai-Li, Ilan
摘要
日治初期之前居臺漢人的分佈，向來有「泉海、漳中、客山」的特質，不僅如此，在泉人集中的地區即鮮少有漳客兩裔漢人，反之亦然，顯示了三籍漢人分布同時有相當集中的傾向。1980年之前，幾乎只見「先來後到」的傳統解釋，1980年代後期起，才陸續有學者提出「械鬥說」、「地理環境與生活方式說」、「班兵與移民說」等另外的解釋。但筆者認為，對於日治初期之前居臺漢人的分佈特質，若企圖僅以單一理論的解釋，並且忽略17世紀至19世紀之間臺灣移民社會有其階段性特色的本質，並沒有辦法真正洞悉並解釋居臺漢人分佈特質的成因。故筆者提出在移民前期，環境資源與生存空間充足豐裕時，應用社會文化人類學的文化概念來分析，所以「地理環境與生活方式說」能有效解釋；但到移民後期，處於資源與空間激烈競爭下，「械鬥說」則是有力的解釋。文末並以臺灣的現象重探Fredrik Barth的經典性人類學族群關係研究，指出了釐清移民社會階段性特質，在解釋族群關係時同樣具有重要性。
並列摘要
The distribution of Han Chinese immigrants settled in Taiwan prior to the period of Japanese colonization displayed two distinct characteristics. The first primary characteristic is that the Quan-Zhou (泉州) immigrants settled along the coast and the Hakka (客家) immigrants settled in the woodlands and near mountain areas, while the Zhang-Zhou (漳州) immigrants located themselves directly between these two. The second important characteristic is that people of the same ethnic background chose to settle and make their living together. Recent explanations for this phenomenon have tended toward a very simple rationale: that settlement located was influenced by the chronological sequence of the first, second and third arrival. In the late 1980s, scholars, however, introduced three further explanations: ”the free choice for eco niche and cultural habitus,” ”the influence of barracks and military institutions upon settlement distribution” and ”the ultimate consequence of ethnic conflict and armed clashes.”This article, however, builds upon both the author's field experience and research to argue that all four of the above-mentioned explanations is inaccurate, with two of these being in contradiction to the historical facts. The validity of the four primary explanations is therefore limited. In my opinion, the different immigrant phases must be seriously considered. In the beginning phase, the explanation of free choice for eco niche and cultural habitus may be valid, because there was little competition for space and resources necessary for survival. When approaching the final phase, however, the consequence of ethnic conflict and armed contestation is most valid. We must combine these two explanations with the concept of immigrant phases in order to achieve a more accurate understanding of the immigration settlement in Taiwan.