- 期刊
- OpenAccess
論宋代敕令格式的分別
The Four Divisions of Law in Sung China
並列摘要
The T'ang institution of the four divisons of law was adopted by Emperor Tai-tsu shortly after the founding of the Sung dynasty. The Sung Code (lü), as published in the Hsing-t'ung (Encyclopaedia of Penal Matters), was more or less a copy of the T'ang Code promulgated in 653 and preserved in the T'ang-lü shu-i (T'ang Code with Commentary). The Statutes (ling) and the Ordinances (shih) were administrative laws; usually the former dealt with general principles and major provisions while the latter provided supplementary details. As for the body of law known as the Regulations (ko) it included supplementary penal provisions as well as administrative rules. Hence, there was some confusion as to how to distinguish those administrative rules in the Regulations from the Ordinances. This question is as true for us today as it was for the officers in T'ang and in early Sung times. Since the question of the true nature of the Regulations is a very complicated subject, which cannot possibly be answered without a discussion of the process of the codification of law in Sui and T'ang. I shall deal with it elsewhere. In the present paper, it is pointed out that this confusion was eliminated when Emperor Shen-tsung ordered the re-alignment of the four bodies of law. Henceforth, the former dealt with ＂punishment and reward＂ while the latter provided various formats for official documents. When Emperor Shen-tsung undertook this reform, his primary concern was that the Code was ＂far from exhaustive in dealing with all sorts of crimes,＂ and should be replaced by Edicts (ch'ih). Without realizing that this shortcoming of the Code stemmed from the long tradition of fitting the punishment to the crime, the emperor thought that the problem could be solved by promulgating Edicts whenever needed. The compilation of these Edicts would then replace the Code. This solution seemed to be a radical change from the tradition of adopting the Code of the preceding dynasty. But it was radical only in the sense that the Code was no longer listed in the four divisions of law, although the Hsing-t'ung was still consulted. As to the updating of the law by promulgating Edicts, it was nothing more than a traditional approach. In fact, compilations of Edicts as supplementary laws had been a standard procedure employed throughout the T'ang and the early part of the Sung dynasty. In Tang times, they were called ko-hou ch'ih or ＂Edicts Promulgated as Supplements to the Regulations.＂ By early Sung, they were simply called pien-ch'ih or ＂Edictal Digests.＂ It would be wrong to suppose that Emperor Shen-tsung decreed the re-alignment of the four bodies of law partly because he wished to establish a clear distinction between administrative and penal laws. In the eyes of the ancient Chinese, all laws were administrative measures for the governance of the state. Hence, the Code focused an apt punishment not only on crimes committed by all, but also on culpable officers who, in conducting public affairs, failed to follow established procedures. The inclusion of the various provisions of reward in the Regulations was meant to show that punishment was the last resort. No punishment was to be meted out until moral teaching (li), admonishment against bad conduct (contained in the Statutes), and promotion of good by reward (in the Regulations) failed. Thus, for the first time, this Confucianist high idea about penal matters was clearly reflected in the four divisions of law. In view of this development, it stands to reason that the Confucianization of traditional Chinese law did not reach its climax in T'ang times as generally assumed. Rather, it reached in apex when Emperor Shen-tsung decreed the re-alignment of the four bodies of law in 1079.