文档介绍：硕士学位论文明清司法裁断依据 The Judicial decisions basisin Ming and QingDynasties 作者姓名: 何定洁指导教师: 张培田西南政法大学 SouthwestUniversityof Political Science and Law 1 内容摘要中国传统司法裁断依据,特别是明清时期,近几十年来一直引起国内外中国法律史学者的讨论。然而,对这个问题的解读一直是众说纷纭,各执一词。参与讨论的学者依据各自的材料,沿着各自的研究路径去窥探这个问题的答案。笔者再去探讨这个问题时,就不得不对上述众说纷纭的观点给出自己的分析思考。究竟谁说的更合理?造成上述解读混乱的原因又是什么?明清司法裁断的依据究竟是什么?这是笔者试图努力去回答的问题。笔者浅见,造成上述解读混乱的第一个原因,是判牍材料选择的差异。不同层面的判牍材料呈现出不小的差异,以往学者没有对此予以足够重视,各自在各自研究的材料中专研,解读的混乱由此产生。造成研究者解读混乱的第二个原因, 是研究方法的差异。现象学和类型学这两种方法是以上学者主要的研究方法。这两种方法的各自优劣也导致了研究结论的区别。带着上述的反思,笔者深入判牍试图去做出自己的解读。笔者发现,“依情”、“依法”、“情法兼尽”等等概念去解释作为一个整体的明清司法裁断依据问题都有其中的合理性,或者说它们都窥探到了明清司法的一个面相。然而明清司法的更加全面真实的面相不是单单一个词汇能够概括的。解读明清司法裁断依据这个问题,离不开对明清司法案件的不同类型进行分别考察,而这种考察向我们展示明清司法的双重面相:在民事案件中,裁判依据是情法交融,以情为主;在刑事案件中是形式依法,情罪允协。关键词:明清时期; 司法; 裁断依据; 判牍 Abstract Chinese traditional justice based on a finding , especially Ming and Qing Dynasties , the discussion in recent decades has been caused by Chinese legal history scholars at home and abroad . However , the interpretation of this issue has been divergent views, and promising. Scholars participate in the discussion of the basis of their material , their research along the path to spy answer to this question . I go into this question , we have different opinions on the above statement given their analytical thinking . Who exactly is more reasonable ? What causes confusion is the above interpretation ? What is the basis of the Ming and Qing judicial finding ? This is the author trying hard to answer the question . The above interpretation of the chaos caused by the first reason is the difference Verdict material selection . Verdict different levels of material showing very difference , scholars in the past did not pay enough attention to this , secondary research material in their respective studies , interpretation of the resulting chaos . The researchers interpret the confusion caused by the second reason is the difference in research methods. Phen