從「本島森林的主人翁」到「在自己的土地上流浪」：臺灣森林計畫事業區分調查的再思考（1925－1935）

From ＂Masters of Taiwan's Forests＂ to ＂Wanderers in Their Own Lands＂: The Zoning and Classification Survey of Taiwan's Forest Management Project (1925-1935) Reconsidered

臺灣歷史上的「蕃地」是如何轉變為國有林班地與原住民保留地？面對此臺灣史研究的經典議題，論者均同意，大正14年至昭和10年（1925－1935）之森林計畫事業中的區分調查，扮演了重要角色。即便如此，受到史料限制，對區分調查的起源、過程與結果，論者往往眾說紛紜，甚至對「要存置林野」、「準要存置林野」與「不要存置林野」等類別的定義，都還有值得商榷之處。所幸，區分調查的原始檔案目前仍保存在行政院農業委員會林務局，而中央研究院人社中心地理資訊科學研究專題中心已全數複製收藏。本文即運用這批已公開、然少為研究者重視的史料，一方面導讀這批史料，另方面也為前述臺灣史之經典議題提出新的歷史解釋。本文首先聚焦在矢內原忠雄與李文良就區分調查的見解，梳理兩造的異同點。其次，以此異同點為基礎，對照這批史料，試著為下列根本問題提出回答：為何區分調查會查定絕大面積的要存置林野？準要存置林野的起源與內涵為何？不要存置林野是否為預備要處分給資本家經營的土地？第三，簡述區分調查之原始檔案的內容與規模，並以最早完成的南庄調查區為例，結合目前典藏在國立臺灣大學圖書館的〈蕃人所要地調查書〉，說明這批史料有助於釐清1920年代臺灣的行政空間、林政空間與原住民的生活空間。最後，本文主張，區分調查的原始檔案不僅反映出殖民林業部門在將蕃地納入一套科學林業體制時的理論與實作，更為理解臺灣之資本主義化與國家化、日本帝國作為帝國民族國家之特殊性等議題的關鍵史料。同等重要的，有鑒於晚近臺灣原住民族轉型正義的呼聲，區分調查之原始史料更可為相關討論提供一個基礎，讓研究者得以與下列問題正面對決：為何臺灣原住民會從「本島森林的主人翁」到「在自己的土地上流浪」？

How did the past ＂banchi＂ or ＂savages' land＂ in Taiwan get transformed into today's national forests and lands reserved for indigenous peoples? In the face of this classical question, scholars of Taiwan history generally agree that the kubun chōsa (zoning and classification survey) of the shinrin keikaku jigyō (forest management project, 1925-1935) played an important role. However, there is little consensus regarding the origin, process, and results of the kubun chōsa. In particular, the definitions for zoning and classifying Taiwan's forestlands, such as the huyō sonchi rin'ya (literally meaning non-reserved forests and lands), the jun yō sonchi rin'ya (semi-reserved forests and lands, which would later become lands reserved for indigenous peoples), and the jun yō sonchi rin'ya (reserved forests and lands, which would later become national forests) remain ambiguous. The original survey reports and maps of the kubun chōsa preserved by the Forestry Bureau, Council of Agriculture has been reproduced by the Center for GIS, RCHSS, Academia Sinica for scholarly research. This essay offers a guidance on how to use these open and yet understudied primary sources, and develops an explanation to the role of the kubun chōsa in Taiwan's transition to capitalism and statemaking. First, this essay focuses on the respective views proposed by Tadao Yanaihara and Wen-liang Lee in regard to the kubun chōsa, and outlines their agreements and disagreements. Second, with the historiographical survey completed, this essay returns to the official reports and primary sources of the kubun chōsa, and offers answers to the reason why the kubun chōsa designated most of the forestlands under survey as the yō sonchi rin'ya, the actual meaning and origin of the yō sonchi rin'ya, and whether the colonial government planned to sell the huyō sonchi rin'ya to capitalists. Third, this essay outlines the contents and scopes of the primary sources of the kubun chōsa, and uses the Nanshō chōsaku as a case, integrating the primary sources known as the banjin shoyōchi chōsasho currently housed at the Library of the National Taiwan University and distinguishing three types of spaces, namely space for governmental administration, space for scientific forestry, and living space of indigenous peoples. In conclusion, this essay argues that the primary sources of the kubun chōsa not only reveal the theories and practices of the colonial forestry sector in incorporating the savages' land into a scientific forestry regime, but also offer a valuable window through which contemporary scholars could examine issues such as Taiwan's transition to capitalism and statemaking, and the uniqueness of the Japanese empire as an imperial nation-state. Moreover, in light of the rising call for historical and transitional justice of Taiwan's indigenous peoples, the results of the kubun chōsa could provide relevant discussions with an empirical basis, upon which scholars and activists could explore how and why Taiwan's indigenous peoples transformed from ＂masters of Taiwan's forests＂ to ＂wanderers in their own lands.