When Japan joined the late nineteenth-century “scramble for colonies” by annexing Taiwan in 1895, the perceived urgency of “civilizing its natives” prompted questions about the nature of “civilization” itself. How could the Japanese, who had for centuries considered China to be civilization's very fountainhead, “civilize” an island largely populated by Chinese immigrants and their descendents? The writings of Inō Kanori (1867-1925) can be viewed as an attempt to resolve this dilemma. In his ethnology, Inō adopted the Middle Kingdom view of “civilization” as “conformity to Chinese customs and obedience to the Qing”. In his historical writing, however, Inō regarded the custodians of Chinese civilization, the Qing dynasts, as “backward” for failing to prosecute a “civilizing mission” among the island's non-Han indigenes. In both historical and ethnological modalities, Inō conceptualized Taiwan Aborigines as losers against the Han Chinese in a centuries-long “struggle for survival”, thereby accusing the Qing of neglect, while portraying the Japanese as guardians and enlighteners of the Aborigines. By invoking an EuroAmerican “civilizing mission” discourse, Inō argued that Japan's Aborigine policy, by contrast to the Qing's, confirmed its place among the civilized and modern colonizing powers.