曹魏法制综考

An Comprehensive Study of Cao Wei Legal System

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者:

梁健

归属院系:

行政法学院

作者:

梁健

导师:

龙大轩

学位:

博士

语种:

中文

关键词:

曹魏;律令体系;法律形式;法律儒家化;礼

摘要:

本论文着眼于曹魏法制的起源与发展,结合传世与出土文献所见曹魏各法律形式、制度规定、事例案情,以期动态把握曹魏法制的内在特质。具体说就是考察曹魏法制的表现形式,对律、令、科、律章句等进行细致研究;还原魏罪名篇属并与分析;通过对于八议与条教两个问题的研究,以揭示汉魏以来儒家思想、经义礼制、政教传统对曹魏法制甚至后世的影响。为说明问题之来龙去脉,某些论证又不为曹魏时代所限,按既有发展脉络进行适当的延伸,考渊论流而推汉衍唐,皆意图说明魏制在汉唐间的历史演变,非就魏论魏之断代研究。凡此所及非曹魏法制全貌,故名曰“综考”,取《易·系辞》“错综其数”之语,彰明错综总集之意也。繁文五章,每章又包含若干子题: 第一章“魏律通考”。首先围绕魏律编修、颁行时间,以及魏律篇目与次序等基本问题展开,以期能较清楚的揭示出魏律的外在面貌。其次,基于魏改秦汉旧律、晋律又袭之的历史事实,对魏律律目进行钩沉比勘;又以近年出土的晋律注为基础,对魏晋律的若干律语进行考证,试图厘清若干条文或规定在汉魏晋间的演变。本章研究作为论文的首篇,所及者不独于简单的时间、篇目、律目、律语考证,对于认识中国古代律令体系在魏晋间的转型甚有意义;就整篇论文布局而言,本章的基础性研究也是支持第三章若干考证、特别还原罪名篇目归属的有力证据。魏律编纂之事,唐前史书已不明了,唯《通鉴》系在太和三年,后世承此发挥以其始修、颁定施行皆在是年,窃以为谬;虽有质疑亦未详考。不辨其时,看似无关大体,实关魏晋成文法编纂、公布之意义,故有开篇驳论以明其始修与颁行有别,所言“始修于太和三年,修成颁行在太和六年至青龙元年之间”推断皆以曹魏法制相关事件、时间点以证其详,力图澄清旧说。魏律之篇目、次序,历代考证诸说并行,近世稍得其真。篇目之数,本文虽祖日人滋贺秀三之说,尚能借得滋贺氏所未见晋律注为之佐证一二。篇目之序,本文结合晋律、梁律以考篇次规律,重新排列魏律次序,别于往论,是为私见。 第二章“魏令、科、律章句考”。本章所论令、科、律章句三者,皆魏通行法律形式。就魏令而言,粗考其篇目、体例及与晋令之关系;细辨其三大篇目与具体令文;专论往者失考之官品令。就魏科而言,论魏改革汉科的具体情况,以明科与律令之关系;所辑考魏科及相关规定凡得九例。就律章句而言,其从律学注释到法律形式这一性质转换的过程是着力论证者。凡此三者虽不能尽概曹魏法律形式,但辑考颇多,可与第一章构成对曹魏法律形式的具体考证之文。魏令篇目与令文、魏科、魏律章句,沈家本、程树德尝考其大概又未得其细。凡此数者辑考之文,仿沈、程考证汉魏晋唐诸律之例,采先辈未览或未重视的若干出土与传世文献,冀以补其阙考之章、全其不周之论。 第三章“魏罪名考”。此章对曹魏罪名的钩沉,与以往按犯罪客体理论来划分古代罪名或犯罪行为的体例有别,所关注的是魏较汉律,废除、调整、新设了若干篇目这一变化。篇目的调整必然导致罪名在律篇中的归属差异,故本章所兼顾的不仅是罪名源流,也试图还原各罪名在魏律各篇的归属,又佐证以汉晋唐诸律,以此考察方能更深入的了解曹魏法制承前启后之意义,本章所设魏晋谋反罪中兄弟连坐之专题亦本此旨。 第四章“魏八议考”。八议一制,史称自魏入律;唯史乏其文,唐律虽本之,实不出汉儒经注左右。律文之外,先儒基于《周礼》“八辟”之文所作的经义诠释实是对此制度在思想上的共同体认,不失为考察八议的另一途径。作为法律儒家化与曹魏司法运行之表现,皆竭力搜罗魏八议事例以证。作为历史的考察,八议成制、特别是亲故贤能功贵勤宾八者的界定,要求其正解非独律令之文,亲亲、崇功、尚能、礼宾等文化是八议制度与思想延续的关键,此又与礼制相涉而浸濡经义。所考者,除厘清八议经义诠释外,专列篇什论功以明议功的文化与礼制影响亦其一。八议一制,今又辑曹魏八议与未得八议例以明其事。八议者如何界定,有何标准,并非律令条文规定所能完成之任务,礼制与儒家经义对八议者的诸多阐释与标准足以成为律令的参照;依据律令与礼制、经义的阐释和标准,曹魏能否找到具体的人证,有哪些人能够进入此种体制受益,当是对八议研究在律令、案例材料之外所要深入考察的。参以律令、案例纵可举证斯制,但求其思想本源,细化到亲故贤能功贵勤宾各者背后的文化发挥与礼制探讨,学者尚不深涉,故成文补之。 第五章“魏条教考”。儒家礼教在汉融入、影响政治,自魏晋迄唐,法律儒家化是为事实,借助条教考察儒家政教何以推行或是很好微观角度。唐前条教内容、思想的流变;儒家政教观念与实践的历史沉积也会有助认识唐人何以倡言“德礼为政教之本”,何以对礼法关系有如此高度总结。若专论曹魏条教与政教,成文自当不难,但要以之论证儒家政教传统和法律儒家化,无疑显得单薄;置此于汉唐历史发展,亦更能力证汉魏以来的政教之存与政教之传,故成此章。条教作为两汉以降所常见的地方性法规,今设专章辑考,集汉魏晋南北朝条教之例,得汉设条教者凡40人、魏设条教者凡20人、蜀吴南北朝设条教者凡71人,以明其源流、形式、内容,凡此工作法史学界尚不为多。分论条教与儒家政教传统确非新题,但宏观之外,微观而言政教如何推行,有何明证者尚稀。将条教与政教传统结合而论,既能察儒家礼教之义如何影响政令施行;亦能明条教作为政教之施,在汉魏晋南北朝的社会控制和社会秩序构建中,如何超越历史政权并发挥其影响,是为立于礼,辅于政,施于教。此点窃谓新论。

学科:

法律史学

提交日期:

2018-01-11

引用参考:

梁健. 曹魏法制综考[D]. 西南政法大学,2012.

全文附件授权许可:

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 曹魏法制综考
  • dc.title
  • An Comprehensive Study of Cao Wei Legal System
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • b2009030102014
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 梁健
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 博士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2012
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 龙大轩
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 曹魏;;律令体系;;法律形式;;法律儒家化;;礼
  • dc.subject
  • Cao Wei;;System of code and decree;;Legal forms;;Law Confucianization;;Ritual
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 本论文着眼于曹魏法制的起源与发展,结合传世与出土文献所见曹魏各法律形式、制度规定、事例案情,以期动态把握曹魏法制的内在特质。具体说就是考察曹魏法制的表现形式,对律、令、科、律章句等进行细致研究;还原魏罪名篇属并与分析;通过对于八议与条教两个问题的研究,以揭示汉魏以来儒家思想、经义礼制、政教传统对曹魏法制甚至后世的影响。为说明问题之来龙去脉,某些论证又不为曹魏时代所限,按既有发展脉络进行适当的延伸,考渊论流而推汉衍唐,皆意图说明魏制在汉唐间的历史演变,非就魏论魏之断代研究。凡此所及非曹魏法制全貌,故名曰“综考”,取《易·系辞》“错综其数”之语,彰明错综总集之意也。繁文五章,每章又包含若干子题: 第一章“魏律通考”。首先围绕魏律编修、颁行时间,以及魏律篇目与次序等基本问题展开,以期能较清楚的揭示出魏律的外在面貌。其次,基于魏改秦汉旧律、晋律又袭之的历史事实,对魏律律目进行钩沉比勘;又以近年出土的晋律注为基础,对魏晋律的若干律语进行考证,试图厘清若干条文或规定在汉魏晋间的演变。本章研究作为论文的首篇,所及者不独于简单的时间、篇目、律目、律语考证,对于认识中国古代律令体系在魏晋间的转型甚有意义;就整篇论文布局而言,本章的基础性研究也是支持第三章若干考证、特别还原罪名篇目归属的有力证据。魏律编纂之事,唐前史书已不明了,唯《通鉴》系在太和三年,后世承此发挥以其始修、颁定施行皆在是年,窃以为谬;虽有质疑亦未详考。不辨其时,看似无关大体,实关魏晋成文法编纂、公布之意义,故有开篇驳论以明其始修与颁行有别,所言“始修于太和三年,修成颁行在太和六年至青龙元年之间”推断皆以曹魏法制相关事件、时间点以证其详,力图澄清旧说。魏律之篇目、次序,历代考证诸说并行,近世稍得其真。篇目之数,本文虽祖日人滋贺秀三之说,尚能借得滋贺氏所未见晋律注为之佐证一二。篇目之序,本文结合晋律、梁律以考篇次规律,重新排列魏律次序,别于往论,是为私见。 第二章“魏令、科、律章句考”。本章所论令、科、律章句三者,皆魏通行法律形式。就魏令而言,粗考其篇目、体例及与晋令之关系;细辨其三大篇目与具体令文;专论往者失考之官品令。就魏科而言,论魏改革汉科的具体情况,以明科与律令之关系;所辑考魏科及相关规定凡得九例。就律章句而言,其从律学注释到法律形式这一性质转换的过程是着力论证者。凡此三者虽不能尽概曹魏法律形式,但辑考颇多,可与第一章构成对曹魏法律形式的具体考证之文。魏令篇目与令文、魏科、魏律章句,沈家本、程树德尝考其大概又未得其细。凡此数者辑考之文,仿沈、程考证汉魏晋唐诸律之例,采先辈未览或未重视的若干出土与传世文献,冀以补其阙考之章、全其不周之论。 第三章“魏罪名考”。此章对曹魏罪名的钩沉,与以往按犯罪客体理论来划分古代罪名或犯罪行为的体例有别,所关注的是魏较汉律,废除、调整、新设了若干篇目这一变化。篇目的调整必然导致罪名在律篇中的归属差异,故本章所兼顾的不仅是罪名源流,也试图还原各罪名在魏律各篇的归属,又佐证以汉晋唐诸律,以此考察方能更深入的了解曹魏法制承前启后之意义,本章所设魏晋谋反罪中兄弟连坐之专题亦本此旨。 第四章“魏八议考”。八议一制,史称自魏入律;唯史乏其文,唐律虽本之,实不出汉儒经注左右。律文之外,先儒基于《周礼》“八辟”之文所作的经义诠释实是对此制度在思想上的共同体认,不失为考察八议的另一途径。作为法律儒家化与曹魏司法运行之表现,皆竭力搜罗魏八议事例以证。作为历史的考察,八议成制、特别是亲故贤能功贵勤宾八者的界定,要求其正解非独律令之文,亲亲、崇功、尚能、礼宾等文化是八议制度与思想延续的关键,此又与礼制相涉而浸濡经义。所考者,除厘清八议经义诠释外,专列篇什论功以明议功的文化与礼制影响亦其一。八议一制,今又辑曹魏八议与未得八议例以明其事。八议者如何界定,有何标准,并非律令条文规定所能完成之任务,礼制与儒家经义对八议者的诸多阐释与标准足以成为律令的参照;依据律令与礼制、经义的阐释和标准,曹魏能否找到具体的人证,有哪些人能够进入此种体制受益,当是对八议研究在律令、案例材料之外所要深入考察的。参以律令、案例纵可举证斯制,但求其思想本源,细化到亲故贤能功贵勤宾各者背后的文化发挥与礼制探讨,学者尚不深涉,故成文补之。 第五章“魏条教考”。儒家礼教在汉融入、影响政治,自魏晋迄唐,法律儒家化是为事实,借助条教考察儒家政教何以推行或是很好微观角度。唐前条教内容、思想的流变;儒家政教观念与实践的历史沉积也会有助认识唐人何以倡言“德礼为政教之本”,何以对礼法关系有如此高度总结。若专论曹魏条教与政教,成文自当不难,但要以之论证儒家政教传统和法律儒家化,无疑显得单薄;置此于汉唐历史发展,亦更能力证汉魏以来的政教之存与政教之传,故成此章。条教作为两汉以降所常见的地方性法规,今设专章辑考,集汉魏晋南北朝条教之例,得汉设条教者凡40人、魏设条教者凡20人、蜀吴南北朝设条教者凡71人,以明其源流、形式、内容,凡此工作法史学界尚不为多。分论条教与儒家政教传统确非新题,但宏观之外,微观而言政教如何推行,有何明证者尚稀。将条教与政教传统结合而论,既能察儒家礼教之义如何影响政令施行;亦能明条教作为政教之施,在汉魏晋南北朝的社会控制和社会秩序构建中,如何超越历史政权并发挥其影响,是为立于礼,辅于政,施于教。此点窃谓新论。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Focusing on the origin and development of Cao Wei legal system, this dissertationintegrates the views of literatures handed down from ancient times and literatures unearthedregarding the various legal forms, institutions, rules, facts and cases of Cao Wei, in order toseize the intrinsic features of Cao Wei legal system dynamically. Specifically speaking, thisdissertation tries to hold a meticulous research towards the codes, decrees, Ke, and LvZhangju through the investigation in the manifestation of Cao Wei legal system. In themeanwhile, this dissertation also restores and analyzes which chapter the Crime of Wei shouldbelong to, and discloses the thoughts of Confucianism, ritual system established by Confucianclassics argumentation, and how the traditional relationship between the politics and religionsinfluenced the Cao Wei legal system and even the successive generations, through theresearches on Eight Deliberations and Tiao Jiao. And all the above considerations could notdefinitely cover every aspect of Cao Wei legal system. Therefore this dissertation shall betaken as a study towards the “several problems” hereof. Furthermore, the argumentation ofthis dissertation has gone beyond the limits of the exact period of Cao Wei for a detailedexplanation. According to the historical development, it extends properly to investigate thesource of such legal system, and deduct the situations of Han and Tang Dynasties, with a finalintention to account for the historical development of Cao Wei legal system during Han andTang Dynasties. For this reason, this dissertation is a dynamic research which does not onlylimit to the historical facts in Wei for the explanation of legal system then. With the title of AnComprehensive Study of Cao Wei Legal System, this dissertation consists of five chapters andeach chapter of it is comprised of several subtitles. Chapter one is the “comprehensive review of the code of Wei”. Firstly, it concentrates onsome basic problems, such as when the code of Wei was compiling, revising andpromulgating, and what are the titles and order of its compiling, for sake of disclosing theexternal features of the code of Wei. Secondly, the code of Wei derived from thetransformation of old codes in Qin and Han Dynasties. Then the code of Jin followed thepattern of Wei. Based on the aforesaid historical facts, this chapter makes efforts to rediscoverand reconsider the orders of the titles of the code of Wei. At the same time, this chapter alsoholds researches on some legal languages in code of Wei and Jin based on the annotations for the code of Jin unearthed in recent years, and tries to clarify the development of some clausesand regulations during the period of Han, Wei and Jin. As the first part of this dissertation,chapter one covers a lot of things, which does not only include simple facts such as time, titles,order, and textual research of legal languages, but also means significantly in understandingthe transformation of the legal systems of ancient China during Wei and Jin period. Moreover,for the whole dissertation, such fundamental research in this chapter shall be the forcefulevidence to support the researches in Chapter three, and especially for restoring where the titleCrime belong to. Chapter two is the “Study on Decree, Ke, and Lv Zhangju of Wei”. Decreee, Ke andLv Zhangju we discussed in this chapter are all the legal forms prevailing in Wei. For thedecree of Wei, this chapter gives a general review of its contents, styles and its relationshipwith decree of Jin, carefully distinguishes its three major chapter titles and their specificcontents, and pays specially attention to Decree of Ranks, which is less touched by thepredecessors. For the Ke of Wei, this chapter states the specific situations about how Weichanged the Han Ke in order to explain the relationship between Ke and decree. And from thestudy on Wei Ke as well as the relative regulations compiled under this chapter, we couldobtain nine examples. For the Lv Zhangju, this chapter mainly focuses on the process how ittransformed from the annotation of laws into a legal form. Although the three points abovecould not cover all the legal forms of Cao Wei, they enjoy rich compiling and studies.Therefore, combined with Chapter one, chapter two could constitute a specific study for thelegal forms during Cao Wei. Chapter three is the “Study on Crime of Wei”. The rediscovery of this chapter towardsthe Crime of Cao Wei is very different from the old system of dividing the crimes accordingto the objects of crimes. It pays attention to the comparison between the codes of Wei and Han.The codes of Wei abolished, adjusted and established several new chapter titles. And theadjustment of chapter titles must lead to a different classification of crimes in laws. Therefore,this dissertation does not only consider the source of the crimes, but also tries to restore thecorrect position of each crime in chapters of code of Wei. Meanwhile, it also takes the variouscodes of Han, Jin and Tang Dynasties as the evidences, for a further understanding in thesignificance, namely, the legal system of Cao Wei serve as a link between past and future. Forinstance, the subject of involving others in a crime under conspiracy in ancient China wediscussed in this chapter shall serve for the above purpose. Chapter four is the “Study on Eight Deliberations of Wei”. The system of “EightDeliberations” was historically described as to be accepted into laws since Wei, but it is lackof written literatures at that time. Although the Code of Tang has the written text for thissystem, most of those literatures are annotations for Confucianism classics. Except the legaltexts, the annotations made by early Confucianists for the writing of “EightConsiderations” for abatement in Zhou Li are the common understanding of such systeminwardly. They could also be regarded as another approach for investigating the EightDeliberations. Besides, all the manifestations of Law Confucianization and judicial operationof Cao Wei require an endeavor in searching facts of Eight Deliberations of Wei. As ahistorical investigation, how the Eight Deliberations became the system and especially how todefine the eight kinds of persons, such as Qin, Gu, Xian, Neng, Gong, Gui, Qin, and Binrespectively. It also requires a correct explanation of texts more than the laws only. The keypoints of Eight Deliberations and the inheriting of thinking are as follow, loving the kinsman,worshiping the achievements, respecting the able man, entertaining guests with ritual and soon. This also concerns the ritual system and soaking the argumentations of Confucian classics.Therefore, this dissertation is labeled with “Reanalysis”. Except the clarification ofmeanings of Eight Deliberations, this dissertation especially use a part to discusses the“Achievement” in order to expound the culture and ritual influences brought by thedeliberation for achievement. Chapter five is the “Study of Tiao Jiao of Wei”. In Han Dynasty, the feudal ethnics andrites of Confucian were integrated with politics, and at the same time influenced the politics.From Wei, Jin to Tang, Law Confucianization became the inevitable trend. Therefore,investigating how the Confucian unification of politics and Confucianism were carried out byTiao Jiao is probably a good microscopic point of view for such study. How the contents andthoughts of Tiao Jiao changed before Tang Dynasty? The politics and religious ideas ofConfucian and the historical deposits of their practices may be helpful for us to learn aboutwhat Tang people proposed as “The foundation of politics and religion lies in the virtue andrites”. Why the ancient people summarized the relationship between rites and laws at such ahigh level. If we only pay attention to Tiao Jiao and the unification of politics andConfucianism in Cao Wei, it is effortless to hand over a dissertation. However, a dissertationlike that is insufficient to prove the traditional Confucian unification of politics andConfucianism and Law Confucianization. Therefore, this dissertation is supplemented with the historical development of Han and Tang Dynasties in this part, in order to attest moreeffectively the existing and spreading of the unification of politics and Confucianism sinceHan and Wei.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D929
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2012-03-01
回到顶部