Talk:History of Taiwan

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Taiwan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taiwan Top‑importance

	Taiwan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Limited recognition Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Wikipedia by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Change dating system to Common Era

I will be changing the dating system on this article away from the biased, Christian based AD/BC to the common era system. This will bring the article into alignment with secular usage such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India. If you object, please state why you are ok with the biased system here. Eupnevma (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Before you go changing AC BC please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style, specifically MOS:VAR. Also, instead of hundreds of discussions regarding the changes on hundreds of different talk pages, get a conversation going here: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since it seems @Eupnevma went ahead and did this against MOS consensus, I intend to restore the page to BC/AD. Riposte97 (talk) 02:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed uncited content

@Qiushufang: it looks like you remove content which was already tagged as uncited. Generally we only remove text when we don't believe that it is citable, is that the case here? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 05:07, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lock the page

this page needs to have edit protection, given the topic can be potentially controversial. Also another talk page can be setup for the discussion regarding the history of the island. 184.145.61.182 (talk) 15:39, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop disruptive changes to section names

184.145.61.182 please stop disruptive changes to section names. The article is already about Taiwan, adding Taiwan to section names does not add anything and none of the other polities are described as "Qing Taiwan" or "Zheng Taiwan" or "Dutch Taiwan". That would be redundant in an article about Taiwan. Qiushufang (talk) 04:10, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some things that would be nice to add

Taiwan is about the same land area as England (not Great Britain though). When people think "island" they think of something much smaller. Americans don't talk about rebelling from the "Island of England" for example. Consequently, the "powers" mentioned in the TOC were regional powers. Historically the only foreign power to control the whole of Taiwan, in more than a regional sense, was Japan. Their total control was only completed with the battle of Toroko Gourge in 1923.

Another thing that is largely missed in this article was what is probably the most powerful force in shaping Taiwan - tropical disease. Koxinga only lasted 3 months in Taiwan before being taken by malaria. Genetic studies show that the people of Taiwan are largely mixed with the Austronesian, and for good reason, they have more disease resistance. As another example, hospital records in Keelung show 1500 Japanese who were registered there during the invasion died of tropical disease. And they had quinine. Arguably this was the gating reason they could invade at all. A Chinese General was also quoted on this topic relative the reasons the Qing Army did not invade in full.

Taiwan was largely an island of bandits, pirates, those escaping the law, and the losers of Chinese Wars on the run. This does not come through well in the current article.

I would like to edit the article with these things in mind. I don't know if this is one of those wiki articles carefully watched by a highly engaged small group, so I am testing the water a bit here. Though I studied this topic in some detail, I'm not emotionally invested in the reading of the history, and it certainly isn't worth getting into an Internet "flame war" over it. 2407:4B00:2C00:72E4:0:0:0:2E94 (talk) 11:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what your point is regarding island size. According to List of islands by area, there are 38 larger islands in the world. Most people have no trouble thinking of those as islands.

As long as your material is based on reliable secondary sources, it should be fine. For example, to avoid synthesis you would need sources discussing the impact of disease on Taiwanese history, rather than just sources for particular events like Koxinga's death etc.

Taiwan was largely an island of bandits, pirates, those escaping the law, and the losers of Chinese Wars on the run. This does rather overlook the majority of the population at the time. Even considering only the Han population, the majority from the mid 17th century wouldn't fit that description. Kanguole 12:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would be basing the material on primary and secondary sources. I'm pretty sure all mentioned can be tied in.

"I'm not sure what your point is regarding island size." There are roughly 11,000 islands in the world - so being number 39 among 11,000 in size makes it quite large! Though where it ranks is not the point, the reason it is meaningful in this context is to avoid the conflation of a regional power on the island with controlling power of the island. For example, though the Spanish had a fort on the north coast, they only exercised regional authority on Taiwan. These guys were foremost a naval power. There was nothing interesting for them in Taiwan (try as they might to find something). Much the same can be said of the others.

"This does rather overlook the majority of the population at the time."

In the 17th century I suppose a lot would depend upon your categorization of the Nation on the Sea as traders or pirates. Actually they were both, and certainly were pirates. There are a lot of terms for pirates of various types, perhaps another would be more fitting. Taiwan was a useful base for their activities, and a refuge for those escaping the Qing for various reasons.

In the late 18th and 19th centuries .. I have a French map, for example, that shows a large region called the "the Area of Bandits". Pickering wrote at length about the pirates using the island and banditry on all the coasts.

Though not sure why the opposite of pirate, bandit, outlaw, tax scoff etc. would be "Han Chinese population" can you explain what you meant by that? I'm sure a lot of pirates etc. were Han. Settlement was also initially blocked by the Qing, and by the time they changed their minds about that the treaty of Shimonoseki was signed. China claimed Taiwan as a prefecture for 19 years total. The American diplomat Le Gendre wrote a book at the time explaining why the claims were not valid. Not that I have an opinion on this, but that is what is there in the literature.

Anyway, let me have a look, try to draft something to point out the size of Taiwan, the regional demographics, and about the tropical disease problem, well grounded, so as to bring out these aspect of the history.

2407:4B00:2C00:72E4:0:0:0:2E94 (talk) 13:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources would be key. Primary sources can be problematic. And the secondary sources would need to directly say what you want to add, rather that being supporting evidence for an argument.

It might be useful to start with a brief geographical overview as background.

The majority of the population I was referring to was the indigeneous Taiwanese. Just because some colonialists called them bandits doesn't make them so. Even for the Han population the majority from the mid 17th century would have been tenant farmers. Taiwan was a useful base for their activities, and a refuge for those escaping the Qing for various reasons. can be supported by sources; I suspect the more sweeping original claim cannot. Kanguole 14:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]