본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

出土文獻에 보이는 秦漢시기 令과 律의 구별

Differences between “Decree” and “Law” during Qin and Han Dynasties Found in Unearthed Literature

0

조회

0

다운로드

4

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류중국어와문학

초록

One of the important issues about laws and decrees during Qin and Han dynasties is whether “law” and “decree” were mixed. There are two types of interpretation for this issue: 1) According to Cheng Shude, the law and the decree were not strictly distinguished in Han dynasty. Names of laws and decrees were mixed. Sometimes, the decree was called law as well. 2) According to Kaoru Nakata, “decree turned into law” from the perspective of “conversion between law and decree”. The Decree of Gold and Cloth had been replaced by the Law of Gold and Cloth since a certain time. The author believes that the key to this problem is to analyze such terms as “incompliant to decree” and “incompliant to law” in the laws and decrees. “Incompliant to decree” means “when disobeying the existing legal provisions (“decree or law”), the person will be penalized”. In terms of the existing provisions, the referents of “incompliant to decree” and “the decree is not applicable” here can be considered as the proviso for judging whether the provision is a decree or a law. Cheng Shude held that decrees were mixed with laws at that time. However, it’s not because decrees were mixed with laws that the Decree of Gold and Cloth could be mixed with the Law of Gold and Cloth. Instead, it was a phenomenon occurring during the sorting of terms in the period of the bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy of Classical Learning. It was wrongly interpreted as mixed use of names of decrees and laws by scholars of later ages. Comparing “incompliant to law” and “incompliant to decree” from the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year with those from the laws of Qin dynasty, the sorting in the former is much clearer. In the 27 laws of the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, “incompliant to decree” was only used once, and all the others were changed to “the law is not applicable” or “incompliant to law”. It can be seen that the principle of using the term “law” in laws and the term “decree” in decrees had been established at that time. Why? Because in the period of preparing the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, the concepts of “law” and “decree” had been defined, so when “decree” was changed into “law”, it would be considered as contradictory to use “the decree is not applicable” under a law. It resulted from the sorting of concepts by the officials in charge of laws and decrees. Therefore, the author does not agree with the idea that “laws” and “decrees” were mixed in the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year. “Incompliant to decree”, “the decree is not applicable” and so on were still used in imperial edicts. Afterwards, when “decree” was changed into “law”, “incompliant to decree” turned to “incompliant to law” as well. As “incompliant to decree” was not distinguished from “incompliant to law” in the past, there were scholars deeming that there was no difference between “decree” and “law”. The concepts of “law” and “decree” were established during the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty unearthed at Shuihudi. “Incompliant to decree” was not completely transferred to “incompliant to law” in early laws of Qin dynasty. From the bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy, “incompliant to law” was used more frequently. During the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, based on existing concepts of law and decree, the preparation for laws and decrees was adjusted and unified, which has historical significance. Why wasn’t “incompliant to decree” replaced by “incompliant to law” before the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year? It’s because during the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty unearthed at Shuihudi and the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy, the laws kept by the Central Censor Office had not been modified yet.

Abstract

One of the important issues about laws and decrees during Qin and Han dynasties is whether “law” and “decree” were mixed. There are two types of interpretation for this issue: 1) According to Cheng Shude, the law and the decree were not strictly distinguished in Han dynasty. Names of laws and decrees were mixed. Sometimes, the decree was called law as well. 2) According to Kaoru Nakata, “decree turned into law” from the perspective of “conversion between law and decree”. The Decree of Gold and Cloth had been replaced by the Law of Gold and Cloth since a certain time. The author believes that the key to this problem is to analyze such terms as “incompliant to decree” and “incompliant to law” in the laws and decrees. “Incompliant to decree” means “when disobeying the existing legal provisions (“decree or law”), the person will be penalized”. In terms of the existing provisions, the referents of “incompliant to decree” and “the decree is not applicable” here can be considered as the proviso for judging whether the provision is a decree or a law. Cheng Shude held that decrees were mixed with laws at that time. However, it’s not because decrees were mixed with laws that the Decree of Gold and Cloth could be mixed with the Law of Gold and Cloth. Instead, it was a phenomenon occurring during the sorting of terms in the period of the bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy of Classical Learning. It was wrongly interpreted as mixed use of names of decrees and laws by scholars of later ages. Comparing “incompliant to law” and “incompliant to decree” from the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year with those from the laws of Qin dynasty, the sorting in the former is much clearer. In the 27 laws of the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, “incompliant to decree” was only used once, and all the others were changed to “the law is not applicable” or “incompliant to law”. It can be seen that the principle of using the term “law” in laws and the term “decree” in decrees had been established at that time. Why? Because in the period of preparing the Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, the concepts of “law” and “decree” had been defined, so when “decree” was changed into “law”, it would be considered as contradictory to use “the decree is not applicable” under a law. It resulted from the sorting of concepts by the officials in charge of laws and decrees. Therefore, the author does not agree with the idea that “laws” and “decrees” were mixed in the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year. “Incompliant to decree”, “the decree is not applicable” and so on were still used in imperial edicts. Afterwards, when “decree” was changed into “law”, “incompliant to decree” turned to “incompliant to law” as well. As “incompliant to decree” was not distinguished from “incompliant to law” in the past, there were scholars deeming that there was no difference between “decree” and “law”. The concepts of “law” and “decree” were established during the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty unearthed at Shuihudi. “Incompliant to decree” was not completely transferred to “incompliant to law” in early laws of Qin dynasty. From the bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy, “incompliant to law” was used more frequently. During the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year, based on existing concepts of law and decree, the preparation for laws and decrees was adjusted and unified, which has historical significance. Why wasn’t “incompliant to decree” replaced by “incompliant to law” before the period of Laws and Decrees of the Second Year? It’s because during the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty unearthed at Shuihudi and the period of bamboo slips of Qin dynasty collected by Yuelu Academy, the laws kept by the Central Censor Office had not been modified yet.

참고문헌 (37)

  1. 司馬遷, "史記" (1965), 中華書局
  2. 班固, "漢書" (1965), 中華書局
  3. 廣瀨薰雄, "秦漢律令硏究" (2010), 汲古書院
  4. 堀敏一, "律令制と東アジア世界──私の中國史學(二)" (1994), 汲古書院
  5. 大庭脩, "秦漢法制史の硏究" (1982), 創文社
  6. 冨谷至, "목간과 죽간으로 본 중국고대 문화사" (2005), 사계절
  7. 舒之梅, "雲夢秦簡硏究" (1981), 中華書局
  8. 睡虎地秦墓竹簡整理小組, "睡虎地秦墓竹簡" (1978), 文物出版社
  9. 沈家本, "歷代刑法考" (1985), 中華書局
  10. 劉信芳, "雲夢龍崗秦簡" (1997), 科學出版社
  11. 游逸飛, "戰國至漢初的郡制變革", 博士, pp.2014
  12. 張家山二四七號漢墓竹簡整理小組, (2001), 文物出版社
  13. 蔣禮鴻, "商君書錐指" (1996), 中華書局
  14. 張忠煒, "秦漢律令法系研究初編" (2012), 社會科學文獻出版社
  15. 程樹德, "九朝律考" (1963), 中華書局
  16. 陳松長, "嶽麓書院藏秦簡(肆)" (2016), 上海辭書出版社
  17. 陳偉, "里耶秦簡牘校釋(第一卷)" (2012), 武漢大學出版社
  18. 彭浩, "二年律令與奏讞書" (2007), 上海古籍出版社
  19. 湖南省文物考古硏究所, "里耶秦簡(壹)" (2012), 文物出版社
  20. 宮宅潔, "漢令の起源とその編纂", 中國史研究, 5 (1995)
  21. 廣瀨薰雄, "秦漢時代律令辨", 中國古代法律文獻研究, 7 (2013)
  22. 鄧薇, "從睡虎地秦簡看秦檔案及庫房的管理", 黑龍江史志, 9 (2010)
  23. 冨谷至, "晉泰始令への道⎯第一部秦漢の律と令", 東方學報, 72 (2000)
  24. 徐世虹, "漢代社會中的非刑法法律機制", 傳統中國法律的理念與實踐-中央硏究院歷史語言硏究所會議論文集, 8 (2008)
  25. 임병덕, "『九朝律考』 譯註 1 ― 漢律의 律名 1 ―", 중국고중세사연구, (27), pp.399~467 (2012), 중국고중세사학회
  26. 임중혁, "秦漢 율령사 연구의 제문제", 중국고중세사연구, (37), pp.1~52 (2015), 중국고중세사학회
  27. 井上亘, "漢代の書府—中國古代における情報管理技術—", 東洋學報, 87(1) (2005)
  28. 周海鋒, "嶽麓書院藏秦簡≪田律≫研究", 簡帛, 11 (2015)
  29. 朱紅林, "讀里耶秦簡札記", 出土文獻硏究, 11 (2012)
  30. 中田薰, "支那における律令法系の發達について", 比較法雜誌, 1(4) (1951)
  31. 中田薰, "支那における律令法系の發達について補考", 法制史硏究, 3 (1953)
  32. 陳松長, "嶽麓書院所藏秦簡綜述", 文物, 3 (2009)
  33. 陳松長, "嶽麓書院藏秦簡中的郡名考略", 湖南大學學報, 23(2) (2009)
  34. 陳松長, "岳麓秦简中的两条秦二世时期令文", 文物, 9 (2015)
  35. "從秦代官府年度律令校讎的制度論漢初≪二年律令≫的“二年>"[URL]
  36. 秦濤, "律令時代的“議事以制”漢代集議制研究", 博士, pp.2014
  37. "松柏漢簡“令丙九”釋解"[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (14건)