在清代臺灣文獻中，係以某某社來指稱各地的原住民，但社字作何解釋？一般視為原住民的自然聚落(village)，但若以此來解讀文獻中的社，卻有誤讀史料的可能。對「社」字的重新思索是本文撰寫的動機，並以臺北地區的南港社與北港社為例，探討這兩「社」在二十世紀被學者誤解的過程；除澄清此一誤解之外，並試圖探索這兩社的成因及其與清代臺灣番丁銀制的關係。
本文使用的史料，以十八、十九世紀的文獻為主，史料包含原住民與漢人間的土地典賣契約；官方資料則包含官員奏疏、官方檔案與官方樹立的碑記。
本文作者認為南港、北港(或南港社、北港社)是清朝政府在大臺北地區的賦稅單位，從賦稅性質論，出現於社餉期結束，與番丁銀期相始終，而廢止於一條鞭法施行後。從賦稅單位論，則是取代雞籠社與淡水社，存在於十八世紀中葉以後，直至十九世紀末廢止。
而南、北港社同時又具有類似行政單位的性質，如南港社與北港社各設有通事，在官僚體系上，介於番丁與巡檢之間，所以在北海岸發生海難時，北港社通事負有向上級通報與保護難民之責。而十八世紀末期，全臺實施番屯時，臺北地區亦是按南、北港社的區劃，編製屯丁清冊。
臺灣原住民史的研究相當倚賴中文文獻，但如何解讀？值得我們用心探討，以社為例，也許我們應針對中文文獻中的每個社或相關社群進行個案研究，重新思索不同時代、地域「社」字的意涵。

　　　　　In Chinese documents about Taiwan during the Ch'ing dynasty, the word she (tribe or village) is an important term referring to the organization of the plains aborigines (p'ing-p'u tsu). Research to-date, however, has not determined adequately what a she refers to: is it a village or a tribe of plains aborigines? Some twentieth century scholars have come to define she as a village and, as I will argue, misinterpreted the she's actual significance.
Through a case study of the Nankang and Peikang she, this paper attempts to clarify our understanding of the term. I argue that the establishment of these to she in the eighteenth century was due to the creation of a tax system for aborigines who submitted to the authority of the Ch'ing dynasty. Out of imperial concern for its aboriginal subjects, the government applied a new system of reduced taxation known as the fan-ting-yin in the mid eighteenth century. The Nankang and Peilang she established at this time were initially set up as units of taxation and a commissioner (t'ung-shih) played an important role in overseeing land transactions between the aborigines and Han Chinese settlers.
The tax reforms initiated by Liu Min-ch'uan in the nineteenth century brought about the end of the fan-ting-yin system and the abolition of the two she. The history of the origins, development, and end of the Nankang and Peikang she is therefore an excellent opportunity to discuss the nature of she in general.