「標準化」還是「正統化」？－從民間信仰與禮儀看中國文化的大一統

Standardization or Legitimization? Perception of the Unity of Chinese Culture from the Standpoint of Popular Beliefs

科大衛(David W. Faure) ； 劉志偉(Zhi-Wei Liu)

《歷史人類學學刊》 6卷1&2期 (2008/10) Pp. 1-21

摘要

本文圍繞着《近代中國》（Modern China）第33卷第1期「中國的儀式、文化標準化與正統行為：華琛理念的再思考」專號的幾篇論文的主題，討論了地方信仰和儀式所體現的地方傳統多元性和中國文化大一統之間的關係。文章認為，明清時期，地方傳統的延續，是一個不言而喻的事實，也是華琛探討大一統的文化如何在大眾文化層面傳播的出發點。但地方傳統的歧異性，可以同樣是人們文化正統性認同標籤的多樣性。在不同的時空，通過師傳關係、文字傳播和國家力量推行製造出來的正統化樣式在概念和行為上可以有相當大的差異，漫長的歷史過程製造了很多不同層面意識模型的疊合交錯，形成表現不一但同被接受的正統化的標籤。我們要研究的，就不只是中國文化的「大一統」的結構本身，而是形成其結構的複雜歷史過程，尤其需要對不同地域歷史演變作比較的研究。我們深信通過比較，才可以瞭解更全面的「中國」歷史。

關鍵字

民間信仰 ； 禮儀 ； 正統性 ； 地方社會

並列摘要

This article is a response to Modern China, vol. 33 no. 1 (2007), a special issue devoted to ＂Ritual, Cultural Standardization, and Orthopraxy in China: Reconsidering James L. Watson's Ideas.＂ It acknowledges the diversity of local cultures as seen in ritual, and relates it to the perceived unity of Chinese culture. We think it is obvious and beyond worthwhile argument that local traditions have continued, and we believe this was Watson's starting point in describing the standardization of rituals in the context of popular culture. We think it should be pointed out that whether or not local rituals were standardized, they could be legitimized through real or imagined master-disciple transmission, through the power of writing and the authority of the state. The long duration of the legitimizing process over very large and varied geographic regions produces much scope for the local adoption of overlapping but not identical bodies of legitimizing symbols. We argue that rather than reiterating the existence of variations between local practices and perceived unities, students of Chinese culture might understand better the complex history of the making of the perceived unity of Chinese culture by documenting the history of the adoption of legitimizing symbols and comparing these histories across local cultures.

並列關鍵字

popular beliefs ； ritual ； orthoprax ； local society