:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:唐宋時期法律形式的傳承與演變
書刊名:法制史研究
作者:戴建國
作者(外文):Dai, Jianguo
出版日期:2005
卷期:7
頁次:頁103-161
主題關鍵詞:唐宋法律形式律令格式格後敕編敕The Tang and the Song dynastyLegal formLaw decreesGe and typeImperial decree after the GeComplied imperial decree example
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(1) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:36
  • 點閱點閱:22
唐代中葉以降,法律形式變生了變化。唐格在這一變化過程中發揮了積極的變通作用。皇帝頒佈的制敕不具備法律的永久效力,只有經過一定的立法程式,將制敕加以刪定整理,去其重復抵牾,才能成為正式法律。開元以後制定的格後敕,是以開元二十五年所纂修的律、令、格、式為基準而制定的法,是一種綜合性法律規範。宋代承襲了唐代的做法,保持律的形式不變,而用外在的法律形式敕對其補充修正。而律在唐宋時期,自始至終都是在行的法律形式,從沒有被其他法律形式所取代。北宋前期,編敕是作為律、令、格、式的補充和修正而存在的。元豐以後,綜合性的敕不復存在,敕僅是刑事法律,只對律作補充修正,律保存不予改動。宋代不再用唐格的形式來補充修正律令。宋代的令與唐令是一脈相承的。唐格的法律形式,逐漸被宋代的格所取代。入宋以後,格已不具補充修改律令式等常法的功能。宋格是關於正確實施朝廷各項措施而設立的藉以比照和衡量的等級制度,入宋以後,宋式已不完全是令的實施細則,與唐式有著較大的差異。在唐律令體制下,例的運用規模並不大。例的大量應用,是在後來的宋代。宋代的申明實際上是朝廷立法機構對某些法律所作的解釋,具有補充、修改法的功能。但申明本身不能構成獨立的法律形式。宋代編集的所謂「指揮」,經立法程序,整理刪修後才能成為具有永久效力的法律。隋唐以來的律令制,入宋以後,並沒有退出歷史舞臺,宋代法律體制是唐律令制的延續和發展。
AbstractAfter middle period of the Tang Dynasty, the legal form changed. The Ge of Tang Dynasty had given play to the positive function of making changes according to specific conditions in the course of this change. The imperial decrees that were issued by the emperor did not possess the law to render a service for ever,only if they passed certain legislative procedure,they were made to put in order definitely and gotten rid of the content of repeating the contradiction among them.Then they would become the formal laws. Imperial decree made after the Kaiyuan years of the Tang Dynasty,which regarded the laws and decrees form of the 25th year of Kaiyuan as the datum, was a kind of comprehensive legal norm. Adopting the method of the Tang Dynasty, Song Dynasty kept the form of law arranged and adopted the external legal form --imperial decree -to amend it supplementarily. But the Law in the Tang and Song Dynasties was a current legal form all along. It had not been replaced by other legal forms. In the earlier period of the Northern Song Dynasty, the compiled imperial decrees existed with amending and supplementing to the Law, Decrees, Ge and Type. After the Yuanfeng years of the Song Dynasty, the comprehensive imperial decree had passed out of existence. The imperial decree was only a criminal law,which only amendd laws supplementarily. Law was kept and refused to change. In the Song Dynasty, supplementary and revising the form in which the laws and decrees did not adopt the Ge of the Tang Dynasty again. Amending and compiling the imperial decree in a large amount.The Orders of the Song Dynasty comes down in a continuous line with the Orders of the Tang Dynasty. The legal form of the Ge of the Tang Dynasty had been replaced by the legal form of Ge of the Song Dynasty gradually. During the Song Dynasty, the Ge did not possess and carry on the supplementary and function amendd to the current laws. The Ge of the Song Dynasty was a social estate system which was set up to be used for comparing and judging in order to implement every measure of imperial court correctly. During the Song Dynasty. The Type was not totally implementing regulations. There are greater differences between it and the one of the Tang Dynasty. Under the laws and decrees system in the Tang Dynasty, the application of the example was not big in scale. A large amount of application of the Example was in the Song Dynasty. In fact ,the statement in the Song Dynasty was a explanation made toward some laws of legislative body of imperial court. It had a supplementary function revising the laws. But the statement itself couldn't form the independent legal form. In the Song Dynasty,so-called " command " that was compiled compiled by the legislative procedure and put in order and amend.Then it could become a law that render a service for ever. Laws and decrees system of the Sui and the Tang dynasties had not withdrawn from the historical stage during the Song Dynasty. The legal system of the Song Dynasty was continuity and development of the system of laws and decrees of the Tang Dynasty.
期刊論文
1.孔學、李樂民(1998)。宋代全國性綜合編敕纂修考。河南大學學報(社會科學版),38(4),6-11。  延伸查詢new window
2.川村康(1995)。宋代斷例考。東洋文化研究所紀要,126,107-160。  延伸查詢new window
3.高明士(19930600)。論武德到貞觀律令制度的成立--唐朝立國政策的研究之二。漢學研究,11(1)=21,159-207。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.馬小紅(1987)。格的演變及其意義。北京大學學報,1987(3)。  延伸查詢new window
5.李玉生(2004)。唐代法律體系研究。法學家,2004(5)。  延伸查詢new window
6.侯雯(2002)。唐代格後敕的編纂及特點。北京師範大學學報,1。  延伸查詢new window
7.戴建國(2001)。唐「天寶律令式」說獻疑。法律史論集,3。  延伸查詢new window
8.柳立言(2004)。宋代分産法「在室女得男之半」新探。法制史研究,5。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.江必新、莫家齊(1985)。「以敕代律」說質疑。法學研究,1985(4)。  延伸查詢new window
10.孔學(2001)。論宋代律敕關係。河南大學學報,41(3),47-54。  延伸查詢new window
11.潘武肅(1978)。論宋代敕令格式的分別。香港中文大學中國文化研究所學報,9(1),201-217。  延伸查詢new window
12.戴建國(2001)。《天聖令• 賦役令》初探。文史,54。  延伸查詢new window
13.戴建國(1997)。宋代編敕初探。文史,42。  延伸查詢new window
14.呂志興(2004)。宋格初探。現代法學,4。  延伸查詢new window
15.霍存福(1992)。唐式性質考論。吉林大學社會科學學報,1992(6)。  延伸查詢new window
16.堀敏一、李柏亨(19850715)。中國律令法典的形成--其概要及問題。大陸雜誌,71(1),37-48。  延伸查詢new window
17.宮崎市定(1964)。宋元時代的法制與裁判機構。亞細亞研究,4。  延伸查詢new window
18.高明士(20031200)。從律令制的演變看唐宋間的變革。臺大歷史學報,32,1-31。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.戴建國(1999)。天一閣藏明抄本〈官品令〉考。歷史研究,1993(3),71-86。  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.池田溫(1987)。唐代法例小考。第三屆中國唐代文化學術研討會。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.羅禕楠。唐宋文官等級制度二題:以元豐改制前的演變為重點(碩士論文)。北京大學,北京。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.王應麟(1883)。玉海。浙江書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.蘇軾、孔凡禮。蘇軾文集。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
3.樓鑰。攻媿集。  延伸查詢new window
4.司馬光。溫國文正司馬公集。  延伸查詢new window
5.趙升。朝野類要。  延伸查詢new window
6.呂志興(2001)。宋代法制特點研究。成都:四川大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.丘濬。大學衍義補。  延伸查詢new window
8.郭東旭(2000)。宋代法制研究。石家莊:河北大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.陳顧遠(1934)。中國法制史。臺北:商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
10.唐六典。台北:文海出版社。  延伸查詢new window
11.宋綬(1958)。唐大詔令集。台北:鼎文書局。  延伸查詢new window
12.劉俊文(1996)。唐代法制研究。台北:文津出版社。  延伸查詢new window
13.謝深甫。慶元條法事類。哈爾濱:黑龍江人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
14.蘇頌。蘇魏公文集。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
15.李燾。續資治通鑒長編。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
16.鄭樵。通志。北京:商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
17.山本達朗、池田溫(1980)。敦煌吐魯番社會經濟史資料•法律文書。東京:東洋文庫。  延伸查詢new window
18.韓琦。安陽集。  延伸查詢new window
19.王溥(1990)。唐會要。台北:世界書局。  延伸查詢new window
20.張方平。樂全集。  延伸查詢new window
21.劉後濱(2004)。唐代中書門下體制研究。齊魯書社。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.姜伯勤(1998)。王涯與中唐時期的令與禮。中國古代社會研究--慶祝韓國磐先生八十華誕紀念論文集。廈門:廈門大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.劉俊文(1991)。論唐格--敦煌寫本唐格殘卷研究。敦煌吐魯番學研究論文集。上海:漢語大詞典出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉俊文(1986)。天寶令式表與天寶法制--唐令格式寫本殘卷研究之一。敦煌吐魯番文獻研究論集。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.劉俊文(1989)。天寶令式表與天寶法制--唐令格式寫本殘卷研究之一。敦煌吐魯番唐代法制文書考釋。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
5.高明士(2002)。唐代律令制度與盛唐政治。法制與禮俗第3屆國際漢學會議論文集歷史組。台北:中央研究院歷史語言研究所。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.戴建國(2000)。宋刑統制定後的變化--兼論北宋中期以後宋刑統的法律地位。宋代法制初探。哈爾濱:黑龍江人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.戴建國(2000)。論宋代的斷例。宋代法制初探。黑龍江人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
8.王凱(2003)。宋代指揮考。中國法制史考證甲編.歷代法制考.宋遼金元法制考。北京:中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.川村康(1993)。《慶元條法事類》及宋代的法典。中國法制史基本資料的研究。東京:東京大學出版會。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE