臺灣古物分級制度發展之反思──從《文化資產保存法》談古物分級的進展

Reflections on the Development of Taiwan’s Antiquities Classification System—Progress on the Classification of Antiquities From the“Cultural Heritage Preservation Act”

臺灣文化資產保存歷經5個階段，其中1982年第一版《文化資產保存法》（以下簡稱《文資法》）第11條便已規範古物應進行分級。自1982年起古物分級雖有法令規範可循，各縣市與中央單位指定古物進程卻極為緩慢，這與過去文物普查未被納入《文資法》明文規範應實施有關。2016年當文物普查納入《文資法》並擴大實施後，各單位行政程序雖被確立，但仍呈現步調不一致現象；此外近年部分縣市對境內古物被指定「一般古物」後燃起提送「重要古物」或「國寶」之高度興趣，但如何填寫《古物分級指定及廢止審查辦法》中6項標準卻相當陌生。從縣市指定「一般古物」後到中央指定程序要求規範未標準化，也與《古物分級指定及廢止審查辦法》中所制定的6項標準基準不明、不易填寫有關。本文舉出並分析臺灣古物分級制度的發展進程與變革，也指陳現階段我國古物分級指定方式雖涵蓋2種方式，包括縣市主動規劃的普查，以及個人、團體提報的被動受理，但透過文物普查獲得的分級指定建議，不僅可作為文化資源力調查的前置作業，在各縣市有系統的短、中、長程的普查與調查研究規劃下，古物分級會更有系統性與整體性的指定策略。地方政府對於分級指定中古物的種類與數量方更能貼近地方社群開發史、信仰與歷史脈絡，指定的文化內涵也更呼應國民記憶、集體認同的需求。

The preservation of cultural heritage in Taiwan has spanned five stages of development. It was as early as 1982 when the first edition of the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act regulated in Article 11 that cultural heritage antiquities should be classified. In response to the requirement to build up a reference classification standard, in 2005 the government promulgated the“Regulations Governing the Review of Registration, Classification, Designation and Revocation of Antiquities.”Then, after going through several revisions, the title of the regulations was finalized in 2017 as the“Regulations Governing the Review of Classification, Designation and Revocation of Antiquities”(hereinafter referred to as“The Regulations”). Although the Act had been in place for guidance since 1982, at both the level of city/county governments and the central competent authorities, the progress of antiquities designation work was extremely slow. One of the reasons might be that conducting general survey of antiquities had not been regulated into the stipulation of the Act at that time. Thus when another revision of the“Cultural Heritage Preservation Act”was enacted in 2016, the implementation of a periodic survey encompassing a larger scope was incorporated into the Act. Although the administrative procedures were set up in compliance with the Act, somehow the administration units still could not coordinate with each other. More recently, some city/county governments have sought to re-submit those originally designated“general antiquities”for elevation to“significant antiquities,”although questions remain about how to complete the administrative documentation according to the six criteria as stipulated in The Regulations. The six criteria for sorting antiquities seems ambiguous for applicants to refer to, and this may have a negative effect on the standardization of the designation process between local government and the central competent authorities. This article describes and analyzes the development and evolution of Taiwan’s antiquities classification system, highlighting that there are three methods of designating antiquities by general survey or by request from individuals or groups. A classification designation obtained by general survey not only provides a starting point for investigation of cultural resources, but also will be more systematic in terms of overall designation strategy based on the short-, mid- and long-term survey conducted by each city and county government. Thus, the survey of antiquities will not be reduced to the action of an individual or local group according to their preferences, nor be a passive situation waiting for designation. Local city or county governments can conduct surveys to designate antiquities in a way that is closer to local community development, beliefs and history, and in this way cultural meaning of designated monuments will more likely correspond to national memory and collective identity.