Indigenous Peoples' History and Naming Rights Movement

From the Dutch term "wild people," the Qing's "raw barbarians," the Japanese colonial "aborigines," to the post-war "mountain compatriots," and finally today's "Indigenous peoples" (yuanzhumin zu 原住民族) - this represents not merely lexical evolution, but a centuries-spanning battle for identity recognition and dignity.

The Trajectory of Labeling Under Colonial Rule

Dutch and Qing Eras: The "Savage" Stigma

When the Dutch East India Company began ruling Taiwan in 1624, they categorized the island's inhabitants into "civilized aborigines" (gehuafan 歸化蕃) and "wild aborigines" (yefan 野蕃). Those who submitted were incorporated into the colonial system, while the "wild" were regarded as uncivilized aliens. The Qing dynasty continued this classification, further distinguishing between "cooked aborigines" (shufan 熟番) and "raw aborigines" (shengfan 生番) based on whether they paid taxes, cut their hair, and adopted Chinese surnames.

This "fan 番" nomenclature system was essentially a colonial control mechanism. It wasn't neutral classification but discriminatory labeling embedded with civilizational hierarchy. The Qing's "Aboriginal Administration Policy" (lifan zhengce 理番政策) explicitly treated Indigenous peoples as subjects requiring "enlightenment," denying the value of their original cultures.

Japanese Colonial Period: Comprehensive Control Through "Pacification"

After Japan's takeover of Taiwan, Indigenous peoples were termed "aborigines" (banjin 蕃人), subjected to more systematic control policies. From 1895 to 1945, the Japanese government sought to completely incorporate Indigenous peoples into the colonial system through "Aboriginal Affairs" (riban jigyō 理蕃事業).

The most brutal episode was the 1930 Wushe Incident (Wushe shijian 霧社事件). Seediq chief Mona Rudao led his people in resistance against Japanese rule, ultimately facing poison gas suppression. This tragedy highlighted the violent destruction of Indigenous culture under colonial rule and planted the historical seeds for the later naming rights movement.

Martial Law Era: Assimilation Under "Mountain Compatriots"

After the ROC government took control of Taiwan in 1945, Indigenous peoples were renamed "mountain compatriots" (shanboa 山胞), seemingly more neutral but actually continuing assimilationist logic. The term "mountain compatriots" implied that Indigenous peoples were merely Han Chinese compatriots living in the mountains, deliberately ignoring their distinct ethnic identity.

The martial law period's policy core was "mountainland flatlanding" (shandi pingdihua 山地平地化). The government enforced Chinese education, prohibited native languages, required adoption of Chinese surnames, and even forced village relocations. While these policies operated under "modernization" banners, they essentially constituted systematic elimination of Indigenous cultures.

Many Indigenous peoples were forced to leave their villages for urban work, becoming bottom-rung laborers. Indigenous workers on construction sites, at sea as fishermen, and in mines bore the double burden of economic exploitation and cultural displacement.

Rise of the Naming Rights Movement

1980s: The Awakening Decade

With democratization's tide, Indigenous movements began emerging. In 1983, the Taiwan Indigenous Peoples Rights Promotion Association was established as the first national Indigenous organization. Activists began questioning the official "mountain compatriots" label, demanding renaming to "Indigenous peoples."

In 1984, Indigenous youth published "Our Voice" (Women de husheng 我們的呼聲) in Summer Tide magazine, explicitly demanding naming rights: "We are not mountain compatriots; we are Taiwan's Indigenous peoples." This article became a crucial manifesto for the naming movement.

Return Our Land Movement: From Naming to Rights

Naming wasn't merely about nomenclature but involved fundamental issues like land rights, autonomy, and cultural rights. In 1988, Indigenous peoples launched the "Return Our Land Movement," demanding government restoration of traditional territories and recognition of Indigenous collective rights.

The movement's climax was the 1993 "Naming Rights Movement Grand March." Thousands of Indigenous peoples took to Ketagalan Boulevard, chanting "We are Indigenous peoples, not mountain compatriots." Parade participants wore traditional costumes and sang ancient songs, demonstrating cultural subjectivity most directly.

Legislative Milestones

Constitutional Additional Articles: Historic Breakthrough

In 1997, Article 10 of the Additional Articles to the ROC Constitution officially used "Indigenous peoples" (yuanzhumin 原住民), replacing "mountain compatriots." This marked the first time in ROC constitutional history that Indigenous peoples' existence was recognized, holding epochal significance.

More importantly, the Constitution explicitly mandated state protection of Indigenous peoples' political participation, language and culture, economic lands, and social welfare. Though only establishing principles, it laid constitutional foundations for subsequent legislation.

Indigenous Peoples Basic Act: Concrete Rights

The 2005 Indigenous Peoples Basic Act further renamed "Indigenous peoples" to "Indigenous nations" (yuanzhumin zu 原住民族), emphasizing their collective nature. This law established a basic rights framework including Indigenous autonomy, land rights, and cultural rights.

The law explicitly requires government consultation of Indigenous will when formulating related policies, establishing co-management mechanisms. While actual implementation faces many problems, the legal foundation is now established.

From Naming to Revitalization: Contemporary Challenges

Urgent Language Revitalization

After naming success, rescuing endangered tribal languages became a new challenge. Taiwan's Indigenous peoples currently comprise 16 officially recognized tribes with 42 dialects, most facing transmission crises. Young people generally cannot speak tribal languages, with traditional cultures facing extinction risks.

While the government promotes tribal language education, effectiveness remains limited. True revitalization requires family and community cooperation, bringing tribal languages back to daily life. Some communities have initiated "tribal language family" programs, encouraging parents to speak tribal languages at home.

Unfinished Business of Land Justice

The "Regulations for Demarcating Indigenous Peoples' Land or Tribal Territory" was announced in 2017, but demarcation progress is slow with severely reduced scope. Many traditional territories are excluded, triggering strong Indigenous protests.

Land isn't merely economic resources but the foundation of cultural identity. How can Indigenous peoples who've lost their land maintain connections with nature? How can hunting culture be transmitted? These remain deep issues the naming movement hasn't resolved.

Taiwan's Vision of Multiculturalism

The Indigenous naming rights movement's significance far exceeds nomenclature itself. It represents Taiwanese society's recognition of multiculturalism, reflection on historical injustice, and protection of minority rights.

Today, when we say "Indigenous peoples," we acknowledge this land's cultural diversity and the possibility of different ethnic groups coexisting and prospering together. This naming journey from "savages" to "Indigenous peoples" essentially mirrors Taiwan's democratization - from single-culture hegemony to multicultural prosperity.

But naming is only the first step. True equality and respect require everyone's effort. When we hear Bunun polyphonic singing, when we learn Atayal weaving techniques, when we respect Paiwan land wisdom, we're practicing the naming movement's true spirit - making Taiwan a truly diverse and prosperous island.

Further Reading: