排除？還是放棄？－－平埔族與山胞身分認定

Exclusion or Renunciation? Identification of Plains Tribes and Mountain Compatriots

對於大多數平埔族人不具法定原住民身分的原因，有兩種截然不同的論述。排除論認為大多數平埔族人在1950年代的山胞身分認定中遭到排除；放棄論則認為大多數平埔族人在山胞身分認定中放棄登記。由於當代原住民身分完全採認1950年代山胞身分認定的結果，本文試圖釐清山胞身分認定的脈絡與過程。史料顯示「山地同胞」是高砂族的延續，原本就不包含平埔族群。反倒是，政府曾經開了一扇門，讓平埔族人獲得加入平地山胞的機會。然而，1956年9月時，還有兩萬多人在戶口普查中回答自己是平埔族，但卻在隨後展開的平地山胞登記中缺席了。可能原因是他們未獲得告知，或者不認為自己是高砂族。無論如何，平埔族人未登記為平地山胞，不表示他們失去原住民認同；欲解決平埔族群身分認定的爭議，有必要跳脫山胞身分認定的框架。

There exist two opposing camps offering explanations for why most plains tribes were not granted official recognition of their tribal status. On the one hand, the exclusion camp argues that most plains tribes were left out in the identification of aboriginal status in the 1950s. On the other hand, the renunciation camp advocates that most plains tribes gave up being registered as aboriginals themselves. Nevertheless, contemporary aboriginal status follows completely the official identity granted during the 1950s. In view of the above controversy, this article seeks to clarify the contexts and the process of the official identification of tribal status. Evidences from historical records indicate that shanbao were originally the Takasago aborigines and did not include the plains tribes. Nevertheless, the government had offered the plains tribes an opportunity to be registered as pingdi shanbao. During the census held in September 1956, more than 20,000 people responded that they were of the plains tribes but were subsequently absent from the registration of pingdi shanbao for reasons unknown. Perhaps, they were not informed of such registration or they did not identify themselves as Takasago aborigines. Nevertheless, failure to be registered as pingdi shanbao does not mean they lose their identity as aborigines. To resolve the controversy over their identity would require a broader framework than the current process for official recognition of aboriginal identity.