親屬、實踐與漢人宗族觀：以宜蘭秀才村為例的歷史人類學探討

Kinship, Practice, and the Concept of Chinese Lineage： A Historical Anthropology Case Study of Xiucai Village, Yilan.

朱家嶠(Chia-Chiao Chu)

指導教授 ： 謝繼昌

國立臺灣大學/文學院/人類學研究所/博士(2007年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2007.00507

摘要

不論從人類學之學科理論發展史、人類學核心概念與論題的轉化過程上，還是分析將之移植到漢人社會文化的運用演變情形，都不難發現在問題意識與檢視角度上，有著「結構功能」、「文化象徵」不同偏向的態度。本研究一開始即對這樣的人類學親屬研究之發展情況做出分析，隨之則力圖以漢人社會「宗族現象」的例子，使用「雙主軸」的架構來表達問題意識 —「歷史人類學」的概念，以及延續Malinowski對於人類學親屬研究的提示：若以「漢人宗族現象」做為對象，探討漢文化中的親子社會關係與生殖之間的對應，而這種對應關係又靠什麼樣的介質來實踐，以及這種對應關係如何成為漢人社會文化中獨特的秩序、象徵關係。本研究在方法的使用上，不但採用參與觀察式的傳統人類學田野，同樣重視文字資料的累積成果，如正史、地方志、古文書、族譜與野史等可資瞭解研究對象村落的宗族團體，在移民與發展歷程中的相關文獻，並運用了歷史人類學的觀點來檢視該宗族古往今來的整體脈絡。
在民族誌材料的分析上，則由秀才村宗族的發展歷程、生業經營表現與經濟模式、地方上的宗教信仰與對祖先崇拜的某些特色、社會關懷程度與社會教化的熱衷等各面向，做為切入點來分析秀才村的親屬組織與宗族表現，並且在人類學的「整體觀」（holistic）凝視下，處理臺灣漢人對於親屬、宗族的認識議題，指出了以往「結構功能」與「文化象徵」各有偏向的處理方式，皆有其限制與不足；並在過往研究的成果如「氣」、「父骨母肉」等概念的基礎上，加以考量power的因素如儒學在漢人的親屬、宗族觀中的滲透，而強調以實踐論之「agent」與「practice」、歷史人類學之「structure of the conjuncture」的觀點來看的話，「血脈」可以視為一種宗族結構的表象，「氣」則是宗族結構的文化內涵，與「血脈」實為一體兩面，而更為重要的是「自我實現與超越」的動態修煉過程，則不但是一種反饋的機制，也是實踐施為的關鍵 — 象徵「血脈」之文化內涵的「氣」，由「自我實現與超越」在上承下傳的實踐過程裡完成兩者的構連。
本研究所呈現的論證，在秀才村漢人宗族的發展繁衍過程部分，顯示了在實踐「自我實現與超越」的動態修煉較為完滿的房支，對於親屬與宗族的意識感較為強烈，參與度也較高；在宗族興盛、衰敗又試圖以「社區營造」來重建宗族意識的實踐方面，則表現出宗族意識的失落與復興、房支間的互動，同樣與「自我實現與超越」的動態修煉有關；在經濟與生業上、文治教化與社會參與度上，甚至是嵌合了與土著互動的自我族群識別、宗教信仰、政治的表現，「自我實現與超越」的動態修煉，都以實踐過程的方式構連了「血脈」與「氣」這種一體兩面的結構表現，如生業上的成功與堅持「自我實現與超越」有正相關，而生業上的失敗若非「自我實現與超越」的不良因素造成，則將之轉化為其它解釋，若屬「自我實現與超越」的失敗，則用之說明；而在宗族房支的繁衍上，同樣的「自我實現與超越」失敗因素造成人口偏少，則視為理所當然，反之則用非「自我實現與超越」解釋 — 如「體質」、「血脈」來置換。此即展現出做為漢人「文化秩序」的「親屬」概念與實踐，或以歷史人類學而言，這種可以置換與安排歷史的文化結構，是有一定的結合機制。當然，本研究最後指出，「集體記憶」（collective memory）在「血脈」與「氣」之於漢人親屬觀與宗族觀的結合與持續上，有其關鍵地位。

關鍵字

自我實現與超越 ； 儒學 ； 實踐 ； 文化置換 ； 歷史人類學 ； 集體記憶

並列摘要

No matter what the transformation of the key concept of anthropology and the history of anthropological theory have displayed, and no matter how they have been used to the anthropological analysis of Chinese society, it is not difficult to find out that in consciousness of problem and the perceiving angle, there are ”structure functional” approaches in contrast to “cultural symbolic” ones. This research from the very beginning makes an analysis of such paradigms shift in anthropological kinship studies , and then tries to take the expression of “Chinese lineage”(宗族現象) as an example to denote “the double axes” of this research - the consciousness of concept of historical anthropology, as well as the extension of B. Malinowski’s concept of kinship. Briefly speaking, Malinowski’s most important contributions in anthropological kinship studies are the detailed analysis of discrepancy between the corresponding parent-child social relations and biological relations. In the study of Chinese lineage, in examining the discrepancy, some fruitful discussions and results of social practice could be made in Chinese cultural symbol between the parent-child social relations and the corresponding of this kinning progress in reproduction. And some kinds of corresponding relations depend on in the progress of practice, as well as how this kinds of corresponding relations, may be considered an unique culture order, or the symbolic relations. But it is to be regretted that the state of anthropological kinship study mentioned above still within sight but beyond reach. The aim of this research is to suggest those who do kinship study in anthropology that it’s time to consider the synthetic paradigms and use the better research approach.
The method used in my research is not only participant observation - like traditional anthropological field studies, but also takes the plenty writing material, such as official histories, biographies, local gazetteers or the local chronicles, the paleography writings, the genealogies, the unofficial history…etc., which can offer the help for understanding the immigration and construction of a patrilineal surname village. In the ethnographical analysis of my research object - Xiucai village, Yilan, I used an anthropological holistic view in dealing with several main dimensions of life practices, such as the developments and segments of lineage, lineage’s business management and performance, the types of economic actions, the forms of belief, the ways of ancestor worship, as well as social education and social care. And I point out that although many past works of anthropological studies in Chinese kinship may contribute a lot, most of them still enmeshed in arguing the significance and difference of “structure functional” and ”cultural symbolic” respectively. From the view of consciousness of the problem, I try to explain that the “structure functional” and the “cultural symbolic” ways has deviated processing directions from the past till now, and they offer nothing good for anthropology but also have limitations and the insufficiencies in kinship studies.
On the concept foundations of passing research achievements like the “Qi”(氣) or “the father plants the bone and the mother adds the flesh”(父骨母肉), I take other factors into consideration such as “power” under the Confucianism’s affections. Through the view of practical theory and the structure of the conjuncture in the context of historical anthropology, the concept of “blood vessels”(血脈) may be regarded as the most important kind of performative structure in the representation of “the Qi”, which is the prescriptive structure and cultural significance in Chinese culture. And in this research I propose that “self-realization and surmounting” is not only the dynamic practice process which is some kind of feedback mechanism to reshape the structure, but also is the key cultural symbol that can articulate the practice actions, which is the “blood vessels” and the cultural significance, which is “Qi”.
The expounding presented here demonstrates that no matter what dimensions of social practices in Xiucai Village – economics, subsistence, belief and religion, etc., the more succeessful in dynamic practicing of “the self-realization and surmounting”, the more perfect manifestation of Chinese lineage consciousness is. Besides, when the concept of dynamic practicing of “the self-realization and surmounting” is stronger, the lineage segment has higher position in village and can have more lineage members. Of course, there must be one or more key factors to make the articulation continue. At end, this research points out that “collective memory” is a key factor which has vital status in replacing or rearrange the cultural order to make historical structure change

並列關鍵字

the self-realization and surmounting ； Confucianism ； practice ； structure of the conjuncture ； historical anthropology ； collective memory

參考文獻

1994 過去的結構：關於族群本質與變遷的探討。新史學 5（3）：119-140。

1967 龜山島：漢人漁村社會之研究。臺北：中央研究院民族學研究所。

1982 儀禮喪服篇所表現的親屬結構。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊 53：1-43。

1986 中國宗族之發展與其儀式之興衰條件。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊 59：131-142。

1991 形體、精氣與魂魄：中國傳統對「人」認識的形成。新史學2（3）：1-65。