Inherit or Innovate？：Formosan Statecraft and Institutional Formulation from the Period of Ming to Ching Dynasty

This paper mainly discusses the development of taxation and ruling strategies in the island of Taiwan during the period of the Netherland occupation and pro-Ming dynasty founded by Koxinga. Traditionally, there are two different views in such a discussion. The mainstream view argues that the Netherlanders had a prominent characteristic of colonial exploitation. Yet, while Koxinga moved into Taiwan, he not only removed various colonial systems established by the Dutch East India Company (Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie– VOC), but also brought in the Chinese systems. On the contrary, the other view argues that the systems established by the Netherlanders were not eliminated while Koxinga entered Taiwan, but to a certain extent, they were used by the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty, and later on even became the source of a variety of focuses in Qing dynasty. Regarding the contradictory of the two views, this paper discusses three topics: first, were the systems of pro-Ming dynasty continuous to the ones of the Netherland occupation or a reformation of the latter one? Second, were the systems that Koxinga brought into Taiwan the same as the traditional Chinese political paradigm? Especially, Koxinga established his own military kingdom in southeast China in mid 17th century, which was essentially different from the traditional Chinese political paradigm. Third, did the Dutch East India Company, in accordance with the argument above, take the way of colonial exploitation while occupying Formosa?

As the paper reveals, the Dutch East India Company ruled Taiwan by adapting the approach of classification. The kantoor van Taiwan granted the indigenous villages that were unable to make any production the positions of feudal vassalage, making them complete the kantoor’s insufficiency of military force, and cooperate with the various economic policies of the kantoor. On the other hand, the Han people who were capable of making production were assigned the mission of business development and trade. They were the key figures of economic activities. On the whole, under the ruling structure, kantoor, the Han people and indigenous villages formed a complete interactive structure, and the Dutch East India Company was in the highest position among this triangular relation. It constantly stabilized and coordinated the interactive model with the others in order to achieve the purpose of profit making.

In comparison to the Dutch East India Company, the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty were founded when Ming dynasty collapsed. However, Koxinga was not affected by the problems of the civil and military and orthodoxy of Ming dynasty. With the authorization from the Emperor, he established a military administrative system, in which the scholars supporting the existence of the dynasty were excluded from this administrative system while his relatives, subordinates and family members took the important positions. In addition, the system did not serve the Junglieus Court far away in the Southwest, but Koxinga who had a position equal to a dictator.

In the year 1662, Koxinga turned to Taiwan after failing the Northern Expedition, he did not pay attention to the systems that the Netherlands had left. In 1664, Zheng Jing lost his base in China, and placed focus on Taiwan. From then on, the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty started to sort out the systems left by the Netherlands. As the paper has indicated, the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty eliminated certain aspects of the systems established by the Dutch East India Company, and meanwhile, adapted the doctrine of free evaluation and followed some aspects of the systems. While the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty were influenced by the prior systems, they did not understand the ruling strategies and system context of the Netherlanders. On the other hand, profit making was not the purpose for the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty. Thus, the interactive systems formed by the Dutch East India Company were destroyed by the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty, and the authorities also did not make Taiwan as “one world.” On the basis of the paper’s research, the taxation under the military rule in pro-Ming dynasty was heavier than the period of the Netherland occupation. Why such a difference arose was due to the situations of the authorities of pro-Ming dynasty and the Dutch East India Company varied. Most important of all, their ruling purposes were essentially different.