Recently, four tribal warrior skulls of the indigenous Paiwan people were finally returned, having been in exile thousands of miles away for 150 years. This is yet another case of repatriation: the return of cultural property or indigenous remains to their original country that had been looted or obtained in wars through illicit means.
The return of the Paiwan warrior skulls from the University of Edinburgh in Scotland is an important page in the history of the indigenous people of Taiwan.
In May, before the coronation of King Charles III, indigenous leaders representing 12 Commonwealth nations demanded that the new king should apologize for the violence and brutality perpetrated by the British crown. They also called for the return of stolen cultural property and ancestral bones.
Repatriating indigenous remains to the country of origin is not unprecedented. In 1989, indigenous Australians successfully claimed a significant amount of indigenous bones from the US. Demands had also been made on the UK to repatriate remains stolen during the colonial era, back to Australia.
These cases demonstrate that the repatriation of indigenous bones is one way to redress historical wrongdoing and to restore international justice.
From the early 19th to the mid-20th century, Western hegemonic empires had done a number of outrageous things. They imprisoned peoples of different races, including Native Americans, Africans and indigenous Australians, who were then exhibited in the so-called “human museum.” Their brutality toward different races was despicable and disgraceful.
Today, a great number of Westerners do not want to talk about their dark past. The above is not exactly the same as the case of indigenous remains in exile. Yet we should remember that on the pretext of research, it was not unusual for Western powers to obtain indigenous skulls through means of waging wars.
The return of the Paiwan warrior skulls reminds us of the Japanese invasion of Taiwan in the 19th century. In 1874, Japan’s punitive expedition led to the attack of indigenous Taiwanese in southern Taiwan. Known as the Mudan Incident, the attack happened only 20 years before the First Sino-Japanese War. After the Meiji Restoration, Japan looked to militarily expand, and Taiwan — with its natural resources and strategic location — became a prime target.
Japan’s 1874 invasion of Taiwan was the first undertaken by Japan after the Meiji Restoration. In 1895, Japan and the Qing signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki, in which Taiwan was ceded to Japan.
In the past few years, the Council of Indigenous Peoples has facilitated the establishment of an indigenous knowledge system, based on which the subjectivity of the indigenous peoples can be affirmed. History is integral to such work, and with this project, the indigenous resistance against Japanese invasion can be explored more deeply.
The display of cultural property and historical objects should highlight the subjectivity of the indigenous peoples. For instance, a flag of surrender given by the Japanese army to some villages is preserved at the National Museum of Taiwan History in Tainan. The surrender flag is a powerful contrast to the sacrifice of the indigenous tribes. It must be emphasized that it is not the surrender flag that we should commemorate, but the warriors who defended their people and sacrificed their lives, including the four Paiwan warriors whose skulls just arrived home. The past must be revisited without bias and explored with care. Only in doing so can the truth be uncovered.
Chang Lien is a retired professor of the department of history at National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Emma Liu
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS