A Study of Judgment system and Judgment documents in Mongolia during Ch'ing period

清代蒙古裁判制度及裁判文书研究

• 批准号: 09610366
• 负责人: HAGIHARA Mamoru
• 金额: $ 1.92万
• 依托单位: Kobe University of Mercantile Marine
• 依托单位国家: 日本
• 项目类别: Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
• 财政年份: 1997
• 资助国家: 日本
• 起止时间: 1997 至 1999
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-09610366/
• 关键词: Judgment Documents; Archives; Administration through Documents; Criminal Judgment; Form of Documents; Philology; アルヒ-ブ

Philological studies in Europe and Mongolia about Mongolian documents and legal historical studies in Japan and China about Chinese codes have no contact each other in Mongolian legal history of Qing dynasty. For example, Mr.Norobsambuu, only scholar who researched the form of Mongolian documents in Qing dynasty says that the form received the original tradition from Mongolian Empire in 13-th century and had no effect from other nation. But, the form in Qing dynasty don't have anything in common with the one in Mongolian Empire nor the one in 16-17-th century in Mongolia.As the form of Mongolian judgment documents we have the sender, receiver and short purpose in the beginning part and the main subject in next part of documents. After many other documents are often quoted in direct narration one upon another, we have the conclusion of sender. We have also some typical words and the date of issue in the last part of documents. Another papers which contain depositions of the criminals are often added to the last of main document. The criminals must stamp their fingerprints. The texts codes must be quoted in direct marration. These all aspects of form of Mongolian documents in Qing period are just similar to the form of Chinese documents of China proper in same period.So I conclude that the form of Mongolian documents in Qing dynasty receive no tradition of Mongolian Empire and they were imported from China proper through Manchurian documents. Because the judgment system of Mongolia in this period is also just similar to the Chinese one, I think that the form of documents and the system are imported together from China proper into Mongolia at once under the rule of Qing dynasty.

清代蒙古法律史上，欧洲和蒙古关于蒙古文献的文献学研究和日本的法律史学研究与中国关于中国法典的研究没有任何联系。例如，唯一一位研究清代蒙古文献形式的学者Norobsambuu先生说，这种形式继承了13世纪蒙古帝国的原始传统，没有受到其他民族的影响。但是，清代判决书的形式与蒙古帝国的判决书和16-17世纪的蒙古国判决书没有任何相似之处，作为蒙古判决书的形式，我们在文书的开头部分有发送者、接受者和短期目的，下一部分是主要的主体。在许多其他文件经常被直接引用后，我们就得出了发送者的结论。我们在文件的最后部分也有一些典型的文字和出具日期。另一份包含罪犯供词的文件经常被添加到主文件的最后。罪犯必须在他们的指纹上盖上印记。文本代码必须直接引用。清代蒙古文文献形式的这些方面都与同时期中国本人的汉文文献形式相似，因此，清代蒙古文文献的形式并没有受到蒙古帝国的传统影响，而是通过满文文献从中国本人传入的。由于这一时期蒙古国的裁判制度也与中国的裁判制度十分相似，笔者认为，在清朝统治时期，文书的形式和裁判制度是从中国本身一次又一次地传入蒙古的。

项目成果

HAGIHARA Mamoru: "About the Teachings of TO-WANG : teaching about the nomadic life in Khalkha-Mongolia during the 19-th century"Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology Special Issue. no.20. 213-285 (1999)

萩原卫：“关于土王的教义：关于19世纪喀尔喀蒙古游牧生活的教诲”国家民族学博物馆特刊公告。

HAGIHARA Mamoru: "Mongol law of the Qing dynasty and judgment system in Mongolia, 17-19th century"Bulletin of the Kobe University of Mercantile Marine. no.1. (2000)

萩原守：《17-19世纪清代蒙古法与蒙古审判制度》神户商船大学学报。

萩原 守: "近代政治史におけるモンゴル民族"小長谷有紀編草原の遊牧文明千里文化財団. 110-112 (1998)

萩原卫：《现代政治史中的蒙古族》，草原游牧文明千日文化基金会小永纪主编，110-112（1998）。

萩原 守: "ト・ワンの教えについて-19世紀ハルハ・モンゴルにおける遊牧生活の教訓書-"国立民族学博物館研究報告 別冊. 20号. 213-285 (1999)

萩原卫：《论土万的教诲——19世纪喀尔喀蒙古游牧生活的教训》国立民族博物馆研究报告特卷第20号。213-285（1999）。

萩原 守: "清朝支配下のモンゴル、モンゴルの独立から現代まで"小長谷有紀編暮らしがわかるアジア読本モンゴル河出書房新社. 87-98 (1997)

荻原卫：《清朝统治下的蒙古，从蒙古独立到现在》《亚洲读者》蒙古河出书房新社，小永谷由纪主编，87-98（1997）