國立臺灣博物館考古學蒐藏探微－日治時期遺物採集者之脈絡分析

國立臺灣博物館是目前國內蒐藏臺灣考古學遺物最早的機構，日治時期的相關典藏為其重要特色，此早期蒐藏體系反映了當時特殊的「採集的文化」之複雜知識性、社會性脈絡，而釐清環繞著遺物原始採集者而運轉的相關脈絡，以及博物館典藏格局之建構與此脈絡的對話關係，實為探討博物館早期臺灣考古學典藏的累積、推展與運用值得重視的一環，其中調查採集者的身分背景（人）、調查採集行動所涉及的社會脈絡（事）、採集地地緣特色與考古學發展的關係（地），以及博物館如何將這些採集（發掘）遺物納入典藏的歷史過程（時）可能是最基本的面相。透過較有線索可尋的470件博物館藏品解析此數面相的各別特色與意義，及其對早期臺灣考古學、博物館蒐藏體系的影響，本文初步獲致三項結論：（一）博物館對其典藏事務依據自身內在條件與外部博物知識圈的特性，不斷調整其取得典藏品之統籌模式（如博物館主位、供需關係、新夥伴關係），以持續擴增文物典藏與展示資源；（二）臺灣考古學遺物之「器物學」脈絡透過考古遺物知識「同質性結合」、「異質性結合」多元並進之方式，匯集文化史、考古學、自然史領域人士不同形式的「博物知識」而累積基本資料，且相當程度藉由自然史領域人士之涉入，帶來必要的革新，經過整合的過程而凝聚出較系統化的考古學知識內涵；（三）臺灣考古學調查與採集涉及知識性、社會經濟、殖民地管理、文化資產管理等多元社會介面，並與各區域統治結構的建立及發展關係密切，其與調查採集活動的結合，促使遺物採集活動不斷擴展，豐富了採集、發掘遺物的多樣性，並奠定日後臺灣考古學進一步發展之基礎。

關鍵字

考古學遺物；蒐藏體系；遺物採集者；臺灣考古學；社會介面

並列摘要

Being the earliest facility in Taiwan for collecting the artifacts of the Archaeology of Taiwan, National Taiwan Museum was acknowledged for its relevant collection handed down from the Japanese Colonial Era. This early system of museum collection reflects the complex connections with scholastic and social contexts of a special mode of ＂culture of collecting＂ of that time. The relevant contexts revolved around the theme of ＂collectors of artifacts,＂ and the dialogue between construction of the scale of museum collection and the former contexts are fundamentally important for investigations of the accumulation, expansion, and practical uses of early artifacts of the Archaeology of Taiwan in the museum. Among the constituent spheres of this theme, four can be discerned for their basic import, namely, the background expertise of collectors concerned, the social contexts involved in their activities of artifacts collecting, the correlation between the geo-niche where the activities were conducted and the overall development of the Archaeology of Taiwan, and the historical process of how the museum incorporated these collected (excavated) artifacts into its collection system. For this inquiry, 470 pieces of museum collection with relatively more concrete data are employed to analyze the specific feature and meaning of these four spheres, as well as their influences upon the development of the early Archaeology of Taiwan and the collection system of the museum. Conclusions are as the followings. First, to facilitate the growth of collections and exhibit resources, the museum accommodated suitable overall acquisition pragmatics according to its existing internal mechanisms and general conditions of the wider naturalistic community outside the museum. Secondly, the data necessary for the antiquity of the Archaeology of Taiwan was accumulated through co-existing panels of ＂homogeneous affinity＂ and ＂heterogeneous affinity,＂ in relation to the mode of affinity with acquired understandings of archaeological knowledge, thus incorporated various naturalistic outflows from members of different realms, such as cultural history, archaeology, and natural history. Also, to a considerable degree, the cross-over participation made by some experts from natural history realms led to some desirable innovations in archaeological study, further inducing a more systematic body of archaeological thinking through the succeeding process of integration. Thirdly, investigations of the Archaeology of Taiwan and activities of artifacts collecting involved multiple social interfaces, such as scholastic, socio-economic, colonial administrations, and management of cultural resources considerations. These interfaces were close related to the establishment and development of colonial administrations in different areas in Taiwan. Thus, the archaeological investigations and artifacts collecting were integrated into this process, rendering expansion of the activities of artifacts collecting, diversity of relevant artifacts, and paved the ground for the advance of the study of the Archaeology of Taiwan in later times.