Legal Hitory Review vol.51 (2001)
Summaries of Articles

The Punishment Principle of the Complicity in the Qin ` Law and Han Law : About the Historical Change and Ideological Background
by Daisuke MIZUMA
+key wordsFComplicity, The Qin Law, The Han Law, Shoucong Zhi Fa ]V@, Chunqiu Zhi Yi tHV`,

        In recent years, the research on the criminal law during the Zhanguo 퍑, Qin and Han periods tends to become popular. However, it is mainly researched on the area of particular issues in criminal law which argues about the concrete contents and the methods of execution of punishment or the concepts of each crime. On the other hand, it is hardly researched on the area of the general theory of criminal law which aims to throw light on the general principle which is common to each provision. To review how the criminal law in those days tended to punish in general will be useful to know how the Qin-Han dynasty aimed to rule the people. Therefore, at this article, as the first thing of the research on the area of the general theory of criminal law during the Zhanguo, Qin and Han periods. I will review about the problems concerning the complicity in those days.
        First, in the Tang law, it was the principle that "zaoyi "ithe person who played a role most taking the lead in the forming of criminal intent and the plan of the crimejwas admitted as "shou "ithe principaljamong out of the accomplices, on the other hand, "suicongzhe ]"ithe persons except the zaoyi among out of the accomplicesjhad their sentences reduced one degree than zaoyi.
        But, the Qin law punished complicity in the way of being different from the Tang law completely. It was the principle that, in the Qin law, it sentenced all the accomplices to the same penalty, but the punishment by the shoucong zhi fa ]V@ithe law on principal and accessoriesjlike the Tang law isn't seen.
        On the other hand, during the Han dynasty, there were two ways to punish the complicity. That is, there are examples to sentence all the accomplices to the same penalty like the Qin law, on the other hand, there are examples to punish complicity in the way of being similar in the shoucong zhi fa of the Tang law which punished a mastermind heavily among out of the accomplices and inflicted a light penalty on the other accomplices relatively, too. Out of these two different punishment ways, the former was one by the regulation of the article in the law, whereas the latter was one by the extrajudicial executions which only the emperor could process.
        Then, a punishment to the complicity which is similar to the shoucong zhi fa during the Han dynasty was done by quoting so-called "Chunqiu zhi yi tHV`" which was based on the thought of "Chunqiu Gongyangzhuan tHr`". That the punishment which is similar to the shoucong zhi fa during the Han dynasty began to be done was related closely to the appearance of Gongyangzhuan since Wudi period of the Former Han. On the other hand, it thinks that to have inflicted all the accomplices on the same penalty during the Qin-Han dynasty was due to the influence of the legalist who tended to be admitted should conform the regulation of the law.
        But, to use as the standard which replaces law in the trial. Chunqiu zhi yi was very unstable because it was not a legal standard and was a moral standard. Therefore, Chunqiu zhi yi permitted state to do a severe punishment arbitrarily. However, the punishment of the complicity which is similar to the shoucong zhi fa eased the punishment of the complicity which was specified by the law. But, it becomes penalty relaxation consequently only by chance, as for emperor's being able to be anyway processed, the cause was the same as punishing severely arbitrarily completely. Therefore, the trial by Chunqiu zhi yi was one of the elements to support a despotic control by the emperor.

Die Entstehung der Reichsritterschaft
by Taku MINAGAWA
+SchlüsselworteFHegemonie der Fürstenhöfe, Lehensrecht, Viertelausschuß, allgemeines Privileg des Kaisers, kaiserunmittelbar

        Die Reichsritterschaft, die im frühneuzeitlichen Heiligen Römischen Reich ein eigner Stand war, war weder den Territorien noch dem Reich, sondern nur dem Kaiser zugehörig. Sie bestand aus den drei Ritterkreisen iSchwaben, Franken und am Rheinj in denen die einigen Ritterkantonen sich als ihre Bestandteile zusammengeschlossen haben. Als die eigenen politischen Verbände haben die ersteren die Viertelstage und die letzteren die Ausschütage gehabt. Seit dem Zeitalter der Publizisten haben die heftigen Diskussionen über ihren rechtlichen Stand gedauert, obwohl ihr Ziel seit dem 19. Jahrhundert vom juristischen zum historischen übergegangen ist. Über die erste Reichsritterschaft, also die in Schwaben, neigten die neueren Forschungen wie die von V. Press dazu, ihre Entstehungsphase und die Reichspolitik in Zusammenhang zu bringen und die Türkensteuer von 1542 für das entscheidende Moment ihrer Entstehung zu halten. Daneben müßte man aber auch die Existenzbedingungen der einzelnen Ritter berücksichtigen, weil sie an sich selbst ein politisches Subjekt gewesen sind.
        Wenn man dann aufgrund der lokalgeschichtlichen Forschungen die finanziellen Verhältnisse der Ritter beschaut, wird es bezeugt, daß sie kein autarchischer Grundherr waren, sondern als die Diener und die Lehensinhaber ihr Einkommen aus den vielfältigen fürstlichen und hochadeligen Höfen erwarben.
        Auf diesen Verhältnisse gab es im 15. Jahrhundert und am Anfang des 16. Jahrhunderts für die schwäbische Ritterschaft zwei Sogzentren : Fürstenhöfe und Rittereinungen wie die Gesellschaft mit St.Georgenschild. Aber diese Sogzentren funktionierten wegen der Verschwächerung der ritterlichen Militärkräfte, des Aufschwungs der bürgerlichen Beamtenschaft und der Auseinandersetzungen der fürstlichen Gönner immer weniger. Deshalb mußten die Ritter neuerdings einen neuen Weg suchen, rechtlich "frei" zu bleiben, um ihr Einkommenskomplex zu erhalten.
        Diesen Weg fanden sie im Verlauf der politischen Handlungen mit dem Kaiser Karl V. und dem König Ferdinand. Infolge ihrer Forderungen auf die Türkensteuer von 1532 und 1542 haben die prohabsburgischen Ritter nach der Form der Gesellschaft mit St. Georgenschild in vier ViertelniDonau, Necker-Schwarzwald, Hegau-Allgäu-Bodensee und Kocherjdie Rittertage veranstaltet, die Viertelausschüsse erwählt und den Viertelausschußtag eröffnet. Sie waren bereit, gegen die Lösung ihrer Beschwerden die geforderte Hilfe als "subsidia caritativa"idie freiwillige Hilfejzu bezahlen. Da sie aber keine positive Antwort von den Habsburgern erhalten haben, wurde diese Hilfe zum Kredit gemacht : die Hilfe war noch nicht die Steuer. In 1545 haben die Ritterausschüsse eine neue Strategie gestellt. Nämlich haben sie das allgemeine Privileg des Kaisers bestrebt, um nur den Kaiser- und Reichsgerichte zugehörig zu werden und ihre lehensrechtliche und dienstrechtliche "Freiheit" zu bewahren. Sie haben dafür nach 1547 die von den Habsburgern geforderte Hilfe als die Steuer bezahlt. Diese Neigung wurde durch die heftigen konfessionellen Auseinandersetzungen der Fürsten immer mehr verstärkt.
        Inzwischen haben der Kaiseri1547, 1552jund die Reichsständei1552jdie Ritterschaft zum Beitritt in den ständischen Bund geworben, um ihre politische Überlegenheit zu sichern. Aber die Ritter haben nach der Strategie alle Werbungen abgesagt und nur nach dem allgemeinen Privileg des Kaisers gestrebt. Die letzte Versuchung war die Beitrittsforderung in den schwäbischen Reichskreis, also in die Reichsverfassung, von 1556. Die Ritter haben auch dabei auf diese Strategie bestanden. Sie mußten mit der Unterstützung der Juristen ihre Regelung an sich selbst setzen und dem Kaiser Ferdinand sanktionieren lassen, um den Druck des Reichskreises zu vermeiden. Man kann leicht in dieser "Ritterordnung" von 1560/61 das politische Ziel der Ritterschaft herausfinden : die Überlegenheit der Kaiser- und Reichsgerichtsunmittelbarkeit gegen das Lehensrecht, das Dienstrecht und die landesherrliche Gerichtsbarkeit. Solche "Unabhängigkeit" oder "Freiheit" war der einzige Weg zur Bewahrung ihrer Einkommensquellen.

On the Feudal Lord in the Late MedievalVillage Community
by Ryo HATAKEYAMA
+key wordsFKuboij, regional community, feudal lord, SuganouraiYj, Hine-no-shoij

        Recent studies of the late medieval Japanese constitutional history focus on regional communities, and place special focus on the fact that the structure of social order was autonomous and self-enforced by the people themselves. These viewpoints are based upon the concept of the Kubo, which has a meaning of keeping the village community peace. Examining the term Kubo mainly, I will reconsider the position of the feudal lord in the late medieval village community.
        From the research of the Kubo in Suganoura during the Muromachi era, I found that the concept of the publiciOyake,uvjin the late medieval regional community has a strong relationship with the governmental authorities. This means that we have to attach more importance to the substance of the Kubo \ the governmental authorities, to say more, being the lord of the manor.
        Considering above, I carried out the research on the position of the feudal lord by examining Kujo Masamoto, who was a lord of Hine-no-sho. Kujo was struggling with the Hosokawa familyiShugo, jand the heads of the Negoro-temple for the dominance of the Hine-no-sho. Kujo's power base was not as strong as Hosokawa's, but the regional community never prevented Kujo from being the lord of the manor. This was because of the legitimacy derived from his position as the Kubo. I can also find that the Negoro-temple possessed the necessary qualities for the position as lord, as they had not only sufficient military forces but also religious authority accepted by the regional community. The Negoro-temple therefore succeeded Kujo as the next lord with few complications.
        In conclusion, although recent studies place too much emphasis on the said concept of the Kubo, it is impossible to clarify the whole constitutional situation during the late medieval period from these one-sided views. It is therefore necessary to regard the feudal lord from a more holistic perspective, in other words, by attaching importance not only to the concept of the Kubo but also to the substance of it.


Symposium : The Role of Historical Thinkingin Legal Scholarship

+key wordsFcritique, historicism, legal education, interpretation of law, constitutionalism

Introduction
by Yoichi NISHIKAWA

This symposium aimed to reconsider the role and possibilities of historical thinking, historical analysis and historical argumentation in the legal scholarship.

ιστοριη as Foundation of Legal System
by Akira KOBA
        Our conceptual universe of law has experienced several historical moments of total transformation, as the post-renaissance period or the early nineteenth century. It is not mere accident that every time it accompanied a profound historiographical innovation, for it needs a radical change of our whole way of critical perception of things. In this sense "ιστοριη" as a specific mode of critical thought which began in the early classical age of ancient Greece remains one of the foundations of the legal system itself. However, the juristic way of thinking which on the contrary has its origin in ancient Rome has been not always consistent with the historical method of critique, for several reasons. This problem is pertinent also in another context, that is the discrepancy between democracy and legalistic mind. Therefore it is our important task to prevent possible confusions, acquiring a new perspective on the historical method so that we could recreate a whole new world of juristic concepts.

Studies in Legal History : the Current Situation, Problems, and Some Possibilities
by Makoto OKANO
        This paper looks into the current situation and problems concerning research and education in the field of legal history in Japan. It takes the author's own experiences in oriental legal history education\both as student and teacher\as a starting point. It then summarizes the development of the author's research in Tang dynasty legal history, and shows how his original interest in the Tanglü shuyiithe Tang Code with Commentaryjbecame differentiated into four more concrete research topics. On this basis, the paper articulates some methodological issues that arose in the pursuit of these topics, and makes the distinction between the traditional "self-limiting, concentrated" approach and the "self-expanding, connective" approach, which bases itself on legal history but seeks points of contact and connection with other fields of study. In conclusion, it is argued that attempts using the latter approach would not only enrich, but also open new possibilities for, the study of legal history.

Historical Thinking in Legal Scholarship : especially concerning Constitutional Law
by Yoichi HIGUCHI

       Introduction
       I- Horizontal comparison rather than vertical view of history
       II- Importance of historical thinking for comparative law itself
       III- "piège" of historicism

return to Contents


retun to Homepage