凌純聲、中研院民族所與臺灣人類學的建制化

Dr. Ling, Shun-sheng (Ling, Chun-sheng) of the Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica and the Institutionalization of Anthropology in Taiwan

凌純聲先生（1900-1978）是中央研究院民族學研究所的創辦人，是開展臺灣人類學學科建制化最重要的人物之一；他的學術研究具有寬廣的時空場域，更跨越考古、歷史、民俗、博物館和文化人類學，海闊天空、精彩絕倫。然而，學界對他如何以一己之力建制立足於臺灣的人類學，所論甚少，本文即嘗試彌補此一空白。筆者認為凌的學術格局與其家庭養成、求學經歷、工作閱歷和時代脈絡息息相關。本文將從三個面向來討論：(1)成長與求學背景、(2)在大陸時期的民族學生涯經歷、(3)來臺後創建中研院民族所與民族學博物館的過程。資料來源有三：一是個人書信、出版品，以及他人對凌純聲的論述；二是中研院院史、公文，胡適檔案資料庫、史語所及民族所的書信、公文與影像資料庫；三是訪談，包括筆者訪問其女兒凌曼立，以及民族所博物館多年來進行的人類學家訪談計畫。這些資料所呈現出來的是性格內斂、沈穩、務實、堅毅而謹言慎行的凌純聲，同時也是一位想像力豐富、熱情感性、專業素養十足的學者。他在內斂而又感性，堅毅而又熱情的性格導引下，以其對人類學知識及開闊時空視野的信念，胸懷世界，堅毅地創立了獨立的民族學研究所，既發揚光大了中研院首任院長蔡元培的民族學理念和博物館願景，更奠定人類學在臺灣專業化的學科發展基礎。

This essay explores the biography of Dr. Ling, Chun-sheng, focusing on his family, colorful talent, and personal achievements before and after 1949, with particular emphasis on his time at the Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica. It highlights the significant roles played by two women in his life: his mother, Madame Yue, and his wife, Shi Zhe, whose contributions were crucial to his success. Beginning in 1926, Dr. Ling studied at the Institut de’ethnologie, University of Paris, under the guidance of Marcel Mauss, Marcel Granet, and Paul Rivet, earning his doctorate in 1929. This period, referred to by Dai Lijuan (2006) as“the museum age of French anthropology,”was formative for Dr. Ling. After returning from France, he joined the ethnology, archaeology, and anthropology team established by Academia Sinica’s founding father, Cai Yuan-pei, along with archaeologist Li Ji (Li Chi) and historian Fu Si-nian (Fu Ssu-nian). Dr. Ling began his career conducting ethnographic surveys along the Chinese borderlands. These ethnographic surveys wer preceded by research on ancient Chinese cultures using an ethnological approach that reflected the influence of Mauss and Granet.
Dr. Ling’s later work led to the founding of the Institute of Ethnology at Academia Sinica in 1955, marking the beginning of anthropology’s institutionalization as an academic discipline in Taiwan. The establishment of this Institute not only realized Cai Yuan-pei’s vision of ethnology and a Chinese ethnological museum but also embodied Dr. Ling’s commitment to achieving epistemological clarity in ethnology, distinguishing it from history. His anthropological research is particularly evident in the series“Ancient China and Circum-Pacific Cultures,”which integrates archaeology, history, museum studies, folklore, and cultural anthropology. Dr. Ling’s ethnographic surveys before 1949 in China and his work among Indigenous peoples in Taiwan afterward remain a valuable legacy for contemporary and future anthropology.
In addition to Dr. Ling’s own publications and his extensive correspondence with C. K. Chang, this essay draws from four primary sources. First, it includes a substantial collection of official documents from the Institute of History and Philology at Academia Sinica, the Institute of Ethnology at Academia Sinica, and the Hu Shi Archives. Second, it utilizes Dr. Ling’s official correspondence with his fieldwork research teams, including exchanges with other scholars. This correspondence is now digitized in databases. Third, it incorporates interviews with Dr. Ling’s former students and associates regarding fieldwork and museum collections. Fourth, it relies on interviews with Dr. Ling’s daughter, Ling, Manli (Ms. Mary Ling Chen). The overall picture emerging from these sources depicts Dr. Ling as reserved yet pragmatic and cautious in his actions, while also being passionate, creative, and notably persistent in his efforts to establish ethnology as an independent discipline from the Institute of History and Philology. Together with his contemporaries, Dr. Ling laid the institutional and intellectual groundwork for subsequent developments in anthropology and ethnology both in Taiwan and globally.