Legal Hitory Review vol.37 (1987)
Summaries of Articles

On the Litigation in the Chunqiu Period


In the Chunqiu period a litigation was called yu –or song ×as in later ages.  Their definition in later ages is that “a larger suit is called yu and a smaller one song.” But in the Chunqiu period they, yu and song, meant two different stages of one procedure of a suit;yu was a dispute and verbal conflicts in the court between the parties, and to sit face to face for the occasion was called zuoyu¿–and to pass a judgement on the dispute duanyu’f–or zheyu Ü–; song itself was a procedure to originate a suit and it is found in historical materials written in a form such as “X (the plaintiff) brings Y (the accused) and appeals to Z (the judge). “This definite pattern shows the fact that there was a general practice that the plaintiff had the accused accompanied in bringing a suit in the Chunqiu period.

The judging standard of duanyu was the just in ability of the parties' arguments. This justifiability was called zhi ’¼and the illegal practice of buying off the judge was caned maizhi ”ƒ’¼ or to buy zhi. At the period there were no fulltime judges and those who were influential and celebrated filled the role of the judges at request. The litigant parties were often represented by advocates.

It may be proper to call the litigation in the Chunqiu period with these characteristics the “agonistic lawsuit.” And it was closely related with the law structure peculiar to the period where the self-help was generally accepted; the “agonistic lawsuit” and the self-help of the Chunqiu period were both derived from the constitution of the period, that is, the distributed army forces which were each possessed by respective shi Žin the form of shi Žº. The cause, then, of the disappearance of the “agonistic lawsuit” in the time of the Imperial China may be found in the disorganization of the constitution. The highly bureaucratic litigation system of the Imperial China was a historical product born and formed with the disorganization of the constitution.

Some observations on Lawsuit at District Magistrate Office in Qing China: Based on the Danshui-Xinzhu Archives as Source Materials

by Shuzo SHIGA

This article is twinning with the same author's another article: Shiga Shuzo, “Tanshin tōan no shohoteki chishiki: soshō anken ni arawareru bunsho no ruikei” (An Elementary Knowledge of the Danshui-Xinzhu Archives: Categories of Documents drawn up in Litigation Cases), in: Tōyōhōshi no tankyū: Shimada Masao hakase shōju kinen ronshū (Studies in Asian Legal History in Honor of Shimada Masao), Tokyo: Kyūko Shoin, 1987. Its purpose is to throw light on some aspects of traditional Chinese judicial system which can hardly be approached by the study of edited books as source materials and, in fact, dropped from the observations in the same author's former book: Shiga Shuzo, Shindai chūgoku no hō to saiban (Law and Justice in Qing China), Tokyo:

Sōbunsha, 1984.

Efforts are made to evaluate the function of government runners who executed various types of warrant:warrants of investigation; of production of documentary evidence; of pressing performance of a duty; of conciliation; of injunction of using force; of summon; of arrest, etc.; and also to analyze in what manner each case comes to an end.

In conclusion those points are argued: 1) In discussing litigation practices, it is inadequate to bring merely the process of hearings given by the magistrate sitting in court into focus. The foregoing process conducted by dispatched government runners with warrants in their hands is also important. Both processes were of the same nature as intervention of public authorities in disputes among people and should be taken into account together with each other as a whole. 2) It is also inadequate to treat lawsuit at the magistrate office and mediation among people themselves separately as two things standing in contrast to each other. The former was also nothing but a mediating process in its nature. Both processes used to go on side by side and functioned complementary to each other.

Les pouvoirs royaux et les évêchés en France aux 11e et 12e siècles

par Sétsuo WATANABE

Dans cet article, nous avons traité des rapports concrets entre les rois et les évêchés en France aux 11e et 12e siècles, dans le processus de l'enforcement des pouvoirs royaux. Au milieu de ces deux siècles, se situe l'affaire historique important que l'on nomme soit “la Réforme grégorienne”, soit “la Querelle des investitures”. Pour résoudre notre problème correctement, il nous importe, bien sûr, de la situer just au point. Cependant, au Japon, depuis longtemps, on met, d'une part, l'accent seulement sur les relations politiques entre la Papauté et son adversaire l'Empereur allemand de cet époque; et d'autre part, l'argument se concentre sur leurs conflits visant l'initiative de la domination sur l'Eglise.

Par contre, pour la structure des puissances, il va sans dire que la conséquence la plus importante de la Querelle consiste en la formation de la notion de “regalia”  signifiant les pouvoirs séculiers accumulés chez l'évêché, et en la préparation des conditions nécessaires pour mettre celui-ci dans la structure des puissances féodo-vassaliques. Quant au déroulement de ces deux effets au 12e siécle, dans le chapitre IV, avons nous exposé les causes historiques de leur réalisation tardive en France. Surtout, nous avons insisté à ce qu'elle avait besoin précédemment de la vassalisation du prince (ou comte) laīc vis-à-vis des évêques voisinants.

Nous exposons sommairement les conclusions présentées dans les trios chapitres precedents (I, II, III). Au chapitre I, nous avons éclairci qu'en France, il y a trois types de succession aux pouvoirs “publics” dévolus aux comtes carolingiens. En général, les princes (ou comtes nouveaux) laïcs y ont succédé principalement au détriment des évêques, a la différence du type “lorrain” où les évêques ont réussi à les accumuler presque exclusivement à l'aide des Empereurs allemands.

Au chapitre II, nous avons comparé, l'un à l'autre, les politiques ecclésiastiques des rois capétiens de l'époque de la “Réforme grégorienne” (Philippe I, Louis VI, Louis VII). Nous y avons éprouvé qu'ils se sont obstinés à maintenir leur control personnel sur les évêchés avec le droit d'approuver l'évêques élus, en attendant la diffusion de la notion réelle de “regalia”. Au chapitre III, nous avons traité de l'influence de la “Querelle des investitures” exercée sur le système pour dominer le royaume français, surtout sur la composition des agents ou des fonctionnaires royaux, en nous fondant sur le changement de celle des témoins de diplômes et des présents des réunions royales.

C'est ainsi que nous avons accompli un des travaux préparatifs de nos recherches que nous allons exécuter sur la formation des pouvoirs séculiers de l'évêché de Langres, vis-à-vis de celles des nobles laïcs de la Bourgogne septentrionale.

return to Contents

retun to Homepage