| 摘要: | 林爽文事件是清代臺灣最大抗官民變事件，也引發嚴重分類械鬥，對於為何會產生附從、反抗兩大對立勢力，學界長期以來缺乏相關研究。筆者欲從開發史角度探討林爽文事件起因，及涉案兩大陣營村庄內部祖籍結構、方言使用，族群對抗組合方式，及可能因為族群對立而造成族群遷移和整合問題。
經研究發現林案前臺灣已形成閩粵、漳泉間嚴重對立，官兵追捕天地會黨引發林爽文起事抗清，但因社會存在已久的仇恨，造成族群分類對立現象。本研究統計307個附和林爽文家族，其中以漳州籍最多佔82.41%；其次為泉州籍佔9.45%，其中同安籍佔7.49%；第三為廣東籍佔4.56%；第四為汀州籍佔3.58%。本研究亦對81個附林村庄進行歸類，發現漳州庄佔有絕對優勢，漳籍與他籍混居村庄亦有相當比率。泉州庄中多屬為同安籍。汀庄和粵庄所佔比率很多。從祖籍統計分析，附從林爽文者以漳州籍佔絕對多數，泉籍約佔一成，汀州和粵籍相當少數。
本研究亦統計119個反抗林爽文村庄家族，其中以泉州籍最多，佔68.07%，其中同安籍佔9.24%。其次為潮州籍佔23.53%，第三為嘉應州籍佔10.08%，第四為漳州籍佔7.56%，第五為永春州籍佔0.84%。本研究對35個反林村庄進行分類，發現泉州庄數量最多，粵庄居次，漳州庄、泉優附粵庄、泉優附漳庄、泉籍優勢庄約佔一成。泉籍優勢庄、泉優附漳庄、永春優勢庄所佔比率很低。從統計也發現泉州籍(含永春州)是林爽文主要反對勢力，粵籍是林爽文次要對手，至於與林爽文同為漳州籍者所佔比率不高。
本研究也從語群角度，統計附從和反抗林爽文村庄內部家族數量，探討當時族群對抗組合關係。經統計發現附和林爽文以漳州福佬最多佔61.56%；其次為漳州客家佔20.85%；第三為泉州同安福佬佔7.49%，第四為永定客家佔3.58%。其中漳州福佬和漳州客家共佔82.41%，為附和林爽文最大勢力。反抗林爽文勢力，以泉州福佬最多佔58.82%；其次為嘉應客家與潮州客家，各佔10.08%，第四為泉州同安福佬佔9.24%；第五為漳州福佬人佔7.56%。其它潮州福佬、永春州福佬只佔極少數。泉州同安福佬附從、反抗林爽文，約呈現二比一。潮州福佬依附泉粵籍比例大於依附漳籍。亦即林爽文事件臺灣中部分類械鬥，大致呈現漳州福佬、漳州客家和泉州同安福佬，結合對抗泉州福佬、粵籍客家和泉州同安福佬的分類組合型式。此外發縣汀籍附漳而不附粵客型態，不同於朱一貴事件下淡水地區汀籍附粵客對抗漳泉福老，及林案時桃竹苗地區汀附粵客結合方式，此除顯示出時間性不同外，也具有區域性特色。
林爽文事件造成族群重大位移，日後持續分類械鬥與對立，亦造成漢人不斷遷移，加上原鄉來臺入居村庄的選擇，加深區域內同籍聚集現象。因此，清末臺灣中部族群分布型態，是經過多次民變、械鬥、漢人遷徙，以及原鄉來臺同籍聚集後的整合結果。
In terms of scale and impact, the Lin Shuangwen Incident is regarded as the largest popular revolt in Taiwan under Qing rule which caused subsequent serious intra-ethnic battles as well. The thesis tried to discuss the possible causes that involved the conflicts, including genealogical structures of the villagers, the regional dialects used, the lines of friend/foe differentiation drawn in the mobilization and the migration and integration of different groups. The study analyzed 307 families that supported Lin Shuangwen's military actions and found that 82.41% of them were of Zhangzhou origin, 9.45% were of Quanzhou origin and among them 7.49% were from Tong’an county, 4.56% were of Guangdong origin and 3.58% were of Dingzhou origin. Therefore most of the 81 villages that supported Lin Shuangwen were those of Zhangzhou origin or mixed habitation of people of Zhangzhou origin and others. Among them, 10% of the villages are of Quanzhou origin and most of these Quanzhou origin villages are from Tong’an county.
The study also analyzed 119 families that were against Lin Shuangwen. Among them, 68.07% were of Tong’an origin, 23.53% were of Chaozhou origin, 10.08% were from Jiayingzhou, 7.56% were of Zhangzhou origin and 0.84% were from Yungtsunzhou. Among 35 villages that were against Lin, 18 villages (51.41%) were of Quangzhou origin and 8 villages (22.86%) were of Guangdong origin. Numbers of villages that were constituted with people of Zhangzhou origin, Quanzhou origin as majority and Guangdong origin as minority, Quanzhou origin as majority and Guangdong origin as minority, Quanzhou origin as majority and Zhangzhou origin as minority, Quanzhou origin as majority and Yungtsunzhou as majority, were 4 (11.43%) respectively. The percentages of the villages of Quanzhou origin as majority and Guangdong origin as minority, Quanzhou origin as majority, Quanzhou origin as majority and Zhangzhou origin as minority and Yungtsunzhou origin as majority were relatively low. The force against Lin were constituted with people of Quanzhou origin as the major rival and of Guangdong origin as the secondary one. People of Zhangzhou origin were few among those who were against Lin.
From the linguistic perspective, the study also analyzed the lines of friend/foe differentiation drawn in the mobilization. Among people supporting Lin, 61.56% spoke Zhangzhou Holo, 20.85% spoke Zhangzhou Hakka, 7.49% spoke Quanzhou Tong’an Holo and 3.58% spoke Yongding Hakka. The major force supporting Lin against Qing rule was constituted with people speaking Zhangzhou Holo and Hakka (82.41%). Among people against Lin, 58.82% spoke Quanzhou Holo, 10.08% spoke Jiaying Hakka, 10.08% spoke Chaozhou Hakka, 9.24% spoke Quangzhou Tong’an Holo and 7.56% spoke Zhangzhou Holo. Therefore, we can suggest that the inter-communal conflicts in central Taiwan could be described as people speaking Zhangzhou Holo, Zhangzhou Hakka and Quangzhou Tong’an Holo against those speaking Quanzhou Holo, Guangdong Hakka and Quangzhou Tong’an Holo. During the Lin rebellion, that people of Dingzhou origin joined the actions taken by people of Zhangzhou origin, rather than those taken by people of Guangdong Hakka origin, could be depicted as one of the local characteristics in central Taiwan.
One of the impacts that this incident caused was ethnic migration. The subsequent intra-ethnic battles and rivalry also kept the migration going. The gathering and integration of the people of the same origin within the area was intensified in the process. Therefore, the distribution of different ethnic groups in central Taiwan at the end of Qing rule was the resultant of repeated popular revolts, intra-ethnic battles, migration of Han Chinese, and gathering and integration of new immigrants of the same origin in the Mainland. |
