本文透過歷史故事，分析十七世紀幾個發生在台灣有關主權紛爭的插曲。指出荷蘭東印度公司出來臺灣時並無積極主權宣示動作，1628年荷蘭日外交糾紛「濱田彌兵衛事件」後，方才留意宣示擁有臺灣主權之事實。而當時出現所謂「臺灣王」之名銜，僅是荷日交涉中的外交辭令，不是真有全島性的全住民之王，不過也不應忽略傳統原住民社會就存在有頭目、長老之組織。文中接著探討荷蘭時代鄭氏父子先後派人來臺所收支稅，是明中葉以來的東西洋餉。也因此，鄭成功能宣稱說臺灣屬於鄭家，或屬於鄭家所效忠的南明小帝國。作者最後指出，原住民在當時的國家主權紛爭中，絕非無聲配角或傀儡。原住民有其選擇同盟的主動性。而歷經荷蘭人三十餘年的統治，仍保有相當程度文化或政治上之自主。國姓爺鄭成功入侵臺灣時，西拉雅人選擇中立，但其他原住民卻壯烈反抗。

This paper first analyzes disputes over Taiwan's sovereign rights in the seventeenth century. It then points out that during its early reign, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) did not make any public claim of its sovereignty of Taiwan. It was not until the Hamada Yahyoue Incident, a trade dispute between the Dutch and Japanese, did VOC start to proclaim its governance of Taiwan. It is worthy to note that the indigenous Dika's title "coninck van Formosa" (King of Taiwan) prevalent at that time did not refer to a real aboriginal king of the whole island, it was just a linguistic term used in diplomatic negotiation. However, one should not neglect the fact that there existed the prime tribal chief or elder in traditional indigenous society of Taiwan. This paper also reveals that the tax collected in Taiwan by the Zheng family was in fact the East and West Ocean tax collected to finance the pay of the naval officers. (Check if this is what you mean.) Finally, this paper highlights that aborigines in Taiwan did not play a silent role in disputes over Taiwan's sovereign rights. During the Dutch reign, they had the choice of entering into alliance with the powers or to refuse cooperation, and maintained to some extent their cultural and political autonomy. When the Koxinga Zheng Cheng-gong invaded Taiwan, the Siraya people chose to remain neutral while other indigenous tribes opted for defiance and fought bravely against the invaders.

荷蘭東印度公司;濱田彌兵為事件;國姓爺;東西洋餉;西拉雅

Dutch East India Company (VOC); Hamada Yahyoue Incident; Koxinga; East and West Ocean tax; Siraya