清代枷号研究

发布时间：2018-05-30 01:36

本文选题：清代 + 枷号　；参考：《中国政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 枷号是一种独立于五刑之外的特殊刑种,其由刑具发展演变成为一种独立的刑罚制度经历了漫长的过程。特别是枷号发展到清朝,已然从明朝时期的酷刑演变成为一种具有优待性质的替代刑及附加刑,对这个变化过程及其法律实践进行研究,我们可以从微观角度去探究清朝的法律制度,全面的了解具有少数民族统治特点的清朝刑罚体系。本文拟在清代史料的基础上对这一具有清朝统治特色的刑罚作一较为全面的阐述。本文在写作中运用了文献研究方法,以相关立法史料为基础考察清代枷号发展、清代枷号条例的制定及其在司法实践中的实际运用情况,同时也运用比较研究方法,将《大清律例》及《读例存疑》中的枷号条例作为考察对象加以比较,据此分析清代枷号缓慢的发展变化过程。全文以清代枷号发展变化的过程以及其在清朝的立法实践和司法适用为线索,分为前言和正文及结论三个部分对这一问题分别进行阐述。前言主要是叙述了本文写作的背景,目的以及意义。对现在枷号研究的成果作一简要总结,提出本文写作的目的及意义在于从微观角度对清朝的法律制度进行探讨,研究其作为少数民族统治政权的法律活动,补充对清代枷号研究不够全面的空白。正文分为三个部分。第一个部分从枷号的渊源着手,对枷号的产生与演变进行了概括与总结。追述了枷从农具发展成刑具后又演变成为独立刑种的过程,及在这个过程中所发生变化的内因,主要集中梳理和考证了清代枷号的形成及特点,初步勾勒出清代枷号的整体框架和发展演变的基本过程。第二部分阐述了清代枷号的立法实践。以清代枷号条例的立法实践为出发点,以《大清律例》(乾隆五年)和《读例存疑》(同治九年)为蓝本,对其中的枷号条例进行对比,以此为依据分析了清代枷号立法的背景及意图,对枷号条例实际执行的规定进行了探讨,揭示其在清代成为独立刑种的原因。第三部分以清代枷号刑在“旗”、“民”之间的司法实践不同为主,从宗室觉罗、普通旗人、民人及特定民人适用枷号刑的不同法律规定出发,通过研究清朝作为少数民族统治者在维护政权方面所采取的法律措施,了解清代“旗民异制”的刑罚表现。结论部分总结了清代枷号的特点,通过对以上内容的研究分析,进一步明确枷号作为替代刑及附加刑在清代刑罚制度中所起到的特殊作用以及清代刑罚体系的发展是一个从“旗民异制”向“趋于画一”的缓慢进程。
[Abstract]:Flail horn is a special kind of punishment which is independent of the five punishments. It has gone through a long process from the development of torture equipment to an independent penalty system. In particular, the development of the flail sign to the Qing Dynasty has changed from torture in the Ming Dynasty to a kind of substitute punishment and supplementary punishment with preferential nature. This change process and its legal practice have been studied. We can explore the legal system of the Qing Dynasty from the micro perspective, and understand the penalty system of the Qing Dynasty with the characteristics of the ethnic minority rule. On the basis of the historical data of Qing Dynasty, this article makes a comprehensive exposition of this penalty with the characteristics of Qing Dynasty ruling. This article uses the literature research method in the writing, based on the related legislation historical data, inspects the Qing Dynasty flail number development, the Qing Dynasty flail number regulation formulation and the actual application in the judicial practice, at the same time also uses the comparative research method. This paper compares the flail number regulations in Qing Dynasty and doubt in Reading, and then analyzes the slow development and change process of the flail number in Qing Dynasty. The full text takes the Qing Dynasty flail number development process and its legislation practice and the judicial application in the Qing Dynasty as the clue, divides into the preface, the text and the conclusion three parts carries on the elaboration to this question separately. The preface mainly narrates the background, purpose and significance of this paper. This paper makes a brief summary of the achievements of the present research on the flail number, and points out that the purpose and significance of this paper is to probe into the legal system of the Qing Dynasty from a micro perspective, and to study its legal activities as a minority ruling regime. To supplement the study of the Qing Dynasty flail number is not comprehensive blank. The text is divided into three parts. The first part generalizes and summarizes the origin of the flail number. This paper recounts the process of the development of the flail from agricultural tools to criminal implements and the internal causes of the changes in this process, mainly combing and researching the formation and characteristics of the flail number in the Qing Dynasty. Outline the whole frame and the basic process of development and evolution of the flail number in Qing Dynasty. The second part elaborated the Qing Dynasty flail number legislation practice. Taking the legislative practice of the regulations of the Qing Dynasty as the starting point, and taking the "Qing Dynasty Law" (five years of Qianlong) and the "doubt of Reading regulations" (nine years under the same rule) as the base version, the article makes a comparison of the flail number regulations among them. Based on this, this paper analyzes the background and intention of the legislation of the flail number in Qing Dynasty, probes into the provisions of the actual execution of the regulations on the flail number, and reveals the reasons why it became an independent punishment in the Qing Dynasty. The third part focuses on the different judicial practice between the "flag" and "people" in the Qing Dynasty, starting from the different laws and regulations of applying the flail number punishment to the religious clans, the ordinary flag people, the people and the specific people. By studying the legal measures taken by the Qing Dynasty as the rulers of ethnic minorities in maintaining political power, we can understand the penalty performance of the "banners and people's different system" in the Qing Dynasty. The conclusion part summarizes the characteristics of the flail number in Qing Dynasty, and through the research and analysis of the above contents, It is a slow process that the flail number as a substitute punishment and supplementary punishment plays a special role in the penalty system of Qing Dynasty and the development of penalty system in Qing Dynasty is a slow process from "the different system of flag and people" to "drawing one".
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D929;D924

【参考文献】