Legal History

Japanese: 法制史 - ほうせいし

Legal history does not only refer to the history of legal systems or the historical development of legal phenomena, but also refers to legal history or legal historiography, which is a form of so-called basic legal science that conducts historical research on legal phenomena. Legal history has covered a very wide range of subjects since humanity first began to recognize law, and is not limited to the study of past legal systems or legal phenomena, but is also considered to contribute to clarifying the state of today's legal systems and the law that should exist in the future. The current state of legal historiography is divided into Japanese legal history, Chinese legal history or Asian legal history, Roman law, Western legal history, or the legal history of various countries such as the UK, France, and Germany, depending on the subject matter it deals with. On the other hand, the theory of legal genealogy is also deeply rooted, and there are still many methods of classifying law based on the lineage of legal norms, such as the continental law system, the Anglo-American law system, the Chinese law system, and the Islamic law system. However, legal history, like legal philosophy and the history of legal thought, must contribute to clarifying the essence of law and what law is, so the starting point for legal history is to clarify how law was specifically formed. Looking at the legal historical materials that remain, we can see that it is not the case that "where there is society, there is law," but rather that the formation of law is closely related to the emergence of the state. Furthermore, an important task in legal history is to clarify what the rulers of states of each era and ethnic group extracted as law from the many rules (social norms) that should be observed, or how they enacted laws and enforced them on the members of the state. Therefore, to analyze the relationship between law and the state in this way, not only must legal historical materials be used, but also various political, economic, social, and cultural phenomena must be taken into consideration broadly. In addition, comparative research with the laws of other nations and other ethnic groups (comparative legal history) is also an important method for clarifying law.

Insofar as legal history aims to study the history of legal phenomena, it has a particularly deep connection with history. For this reason, in some cases, legal history may become almost indistinguishable from general history. Even though legal history falls under the broad definition of history, it is the historical study of legal phenomena, so it naturally has to keep in mind present-day legal phenomena and legal systems, and in that sense it is closely related to sociology of law and comparative jurisprudence. In addition to the traditional historical study of individual legal systems and national systems, research on general theories of law and the history of law has also begun to be conducted.

[Atsushi Sato]

Western Legal History

The history of Western legal systems is extremely important in that it has given birth to the basic principles of the world's legal systems across most legal fields today. In Japan, in the early Meiji period, the law of advanced European countries such as France and England was studied, and foreigners such as Boissonade were invited to Japan to compile a modern legal code. After the establishment of a powerful constitutional monarchy modeled on the German Imperial Constitution, a debate on the legal code was sparked by Hozumi Yatsuka's essay "Civil Code: Loyalty and Filial Piety" (1891), and a civil code based on the German Pandekten (a compilation of theories) method was published and put into effect, and the ideas of German law came to occupy a large proportion of legal theory. After World War II, Japan was also influenced by American law. In this sense, the study of European legal history is essential not only for understanding the history of human legal culture, but also for understanding modern and contemporary Japanese law, which has adopted European and American law.

In Japan, the term "Western legal history" is used in two different senses. In the broad sense, it refers to the entire history of European law, including secular law, canon law, and legal thought, such as the law of classical ancient societies in Greece and Rome, the law of Germanic societies, and the law of European countries from the Middle Ages to the present day, such as England, France, Germany, and Italy. It also includes the ancient Eastern laws of Sumer, Babylonia, Assyria, Hebrew, and Egypt in order to clarify the law of ancient Europe. In the narrow sense, it is used in contrast to Roman law, and refers to the law of ancient Germanic law and the history of European law from the Middle Ages onwards. Since the course "Roman law and comparative legal history" (later to become Western legal history), which was started in the early Meiji period following the example of European universities, this narrow sense of Western legal history, centered on Germany, France, and England, has been established in Japan, absorbing the traditional European jurisprudence since the School of Historical Law, and after the promulgation and implementation of the Pandecten-system civil code, Western legal history has also been overwhelmingly influenced by German legal history. In Germany, empirical legal history had already become popular since the second half of the 19th century, beginning with Th. Mommsen (1817-1903), and many legal historical documents were reexamined. There was also a fierce conflict between those who wanted to consider the nature of law based on Roman law (Romanisten) and those who wanted to consider the nature of law based on Germanic law (Germanisten), and the debate over whether to follow Roman law or Germanic law had a major impact in Japan as well.

During the Second World War in Germany, the Nazis expelled Roman law (Pandegtectonic jurisprudence) and established the history of modern private law as an independent subject at universities. This was nothing but an attempt by the Nazis to adopt Germanic legal thinking in order to emphasize nationalism. However, contrary to such political intentions, the more research into legal phenomena was conducted, the more it became clear that Roman canon law and Roman jurisprudence were the basis of a common legal culture throughout Europe and were influential in the formation of modern law. This is clearly evident in the pan-European research activities shown in the works published after the war and the Medieval Roman Law Series. Through these studies, the meaning of early modern law that preceded modern law, the perspective of the inheritance of traditional Roman law and the contemporary usage of Roman law were examined, and the argument that European legal culture has been inherited in a unified and continuous manner since Roman law has become stronger, while linking it to the task of unifying law in the EC (European Community). Furthermore, interest has also begun to be paid to the legal history of the medieval Byzantine Empire and Eastern Europe, which had previously received little research in Japan.

On the other hand, research into the history of European medieval constitutions is also underway, with the aim of concrete, empirical historical analysis in relation to modern law. The topics covered are diverse, but the main ones include debates over the nature of law and the state in the early Middle Ages, issues surrounding the nature of medieval city law, issues surrounding the nature of medieval law as good old law, and the process of the formation of modern law. Furthermore, there has been strong interest in the history of jurisprudence, which has actually produced law. Such analyses of legal phenomena, on the one hand, clarify what concrete forms law took in each historical society, and at the same time, contribute to a theoretical clarification of what law is.

Recently, there has been a movement to position Roman law and legal history as a branch of history rather than law in university curricula (in the case of universities in Western countries such as France and Germany), but in Eastern European countries, Roman law and legal history are compulsory subjects in law faculties, and basic legal studies are emphasized. Today, when legal phenomena are undergoing major transformations along with the development of society, the study of Western legal history in a broad sense plays a large role as the basis for theoretical research on law and the state, the essence of law, and so on.

[Atsushi Sato]

Chinese Legal History

The development of national enacted laws is remarkable throughout China's legal history. Until the Spring and Autumn period (771-403 BC), oaths and vows also functioned as laws, but it is said that the "Criminal Book" was created as early as the 6th century BC, and it is believed that the six volumes of the "Fa Jing" (Book of Laws), which could be considered the ancestor of later legal codes, existed at the beginning of the Warring States period (403-221 BC). After the unification of the country by the Qin dynasty and the beginning of the Han dynasty (202 BC-220 AD), the "Nine Chapters of the Code" (Citation of Laws) became the core of the legal system, and many codes were created as secondary codes to the Code. While the Han dynasty was a period of legal creation and development, the following Wei, Jin, and Northern and Southern Dynasties (220-589) were a period of legal code compilation, with the Jin dynasty's Taishi Ritsuryo Code (267) establishing the two basic legal codes (criminal law and administrative law) side by side. The Northern Dynasties frequently revised the Ritsuryo Code, and the Sui dynasty (581-618) and Tang dynasties (618-907) saw the emergence of the Ritsuryo Formal Period. The Tang Code in particular is significant as the culmination of the development of national legal enactment since the Warring States period, and is not only the greatest legal code in the history of Chinese law, but also the quintessence of criminal law unparalleled in the world at the time, which was passed down to later generations and had a major influence on neighboring countries.

After the Five Dynasties, a legal system based on imperial decrees appeared in the Song dynasty (960-1279), but the Tang Code was the current law until the end of the Song dynasty. The Liao dynasty had a dual system of native law and Tang Code, and during the Jin dynasty, codes were created that were largely modeled after the Tang Code, while during the Yuan dynasty no codes were enacted. However, during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644), the Ming Code was enacted, which largely succeeded the Tang Code, and even during the following Qing dynasty (1616-1912), the Qing Code mostly followed the Ming Code. The legal code named Ling came to an end with the Ming dynasty. During the Ming and Qing dynasties, many secondary codes, ordinances, were enacted, and played a major role in providing laws that responded to the times. At the end of the Qing Dynasty, the creation of a modern legal code was attempted in response to the needs of the time, but this was not implemented, and in the Republic of China (1912-), civil law-based legal codes were gradually established. In the People's Republic of China (1949-), after going through twists and turns regarding codification, the number of socialist legal codes with unique Chinese characteristics is gradually increasing.

Throughout the imperial era from the Warring States period to the end of the Qing dynasty, traditional Chinese law basically inherited the old system, but developed into its own complete legal code. Written law consisted of criminal laws and administrative laws, and the former in particular had been highly developed since ancient times. This is comparable to the development of Roman private law, but at the same time it has characteristics that are antithetical to the Western legal system. On the other hand, a positive private law system was never created. All laws originated from the will of the emperor and were guidelines for the work of bureaucrats, and people could not invoke the law to assert their rights. Furthermore, as Confucianism became the guiding principle for national governance from the Han dynasty onwards, the codes of etiquette advocated by Confucianism were incorporated into the law, and this trend of integrating Confucianism and law determined the nature of national law. Regarding the understanding of the above-mentioned characteristics of Chinese law, the theory that national law was poorly implemented has been relatively prevalent in the past, focusing on the continuity of the basic legal code, but in recent years, research both at home and abroad has been emerging that sheds light on the implementation of law by placing emphasis on the existence of secondary legal codes that responded to changes in the times and the large number of case law collections.

Chinese law has had an enormous impact on neighboring countries such as Japan, Korea, and Vietnam. After the Taika Reforms in Japan, the series of legal codes from the Omi Code to the Yoro Code were modeled on the Tang Code, and the Code in particular was almost entirely inherited from the Tang Code. Moving forward, some of the feudal domain laws of the Edo period, as well as the New Code of Laws and Revised Codes of Laws in the early Meiji period, were significantly influenced by the Ming and Qing Codes.

[Shigeo Nakamura]

Japanese Legal History

Various attempts have been made to divide the history of Japanese legal systems into periods. Nakata Kaoru divides the period before the Meiji era into the pre-Taika period, post-Taika period, medieval period, and early modern period, Takigawa Masajiro makes a distinction by emphasizing the relationship between indigenous law and inherited law, and Maki Kenji distinguishes by political system. The author believes that an era can be divided into three periods: the early period, which is the development of the basic characteristics of that era, the middle period, which is the heyday of those basic characteristics, and the late period, which is the decline of those basic characteristics. Based on this idea, he divides the eras into the ancient, ancient, medieval, early modern, modern, and contemporary periods, and based on this period division, he will provide an overview of the transitions in the history of Japanese legal systems below.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

Ancient times

The ancient period was a clan era characterized by the inseparability of law and religion. It began around the 2nd or 3rd century BC, and the early Yayoi period lasted until around the 2nd century AD. During this period, there was conflict between the bronze sword and bronze spear culture centered in Kitakyushu and the bronze bell culture centered in Kinai, but it is thought that the two were unified by Himiko, queen of Yamataikoku, which belonged to the bronze bell culture, around the end of the 2nd century. It is understood that during the reign of Himiko's successor, Toyo, political power was transferred to the ancestor of the emperor (Emperor Sujin). The middle period was from the time of the unification by Himiko to the time when Empress Jingu is said to have appeared around 400 years ago. As can be seen in the legends of Himiko and Empress Jingu, during this period, what the Sumera Mikoto (the unifier) and the Uji no Kami (the god of the clan) said in a state of divine possession was "Nori," which was also law. This suggests that law and religion were not yet separated, but from around the beginning of the 5th century, the power of these gods gradually weakened. Then, at the point of this decline, the non-religious Ritsuryo system was adopted from China, and this is when the Kamisei era began.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

Past

The Joseiki period was from 603 (the 11th year of the reign of Empress Suiko) to the middle of the Heian period in 967 (the 4th year of Koho). The early period was until 702 (the 2nd year of the Taiho period). In 645 (the 1st year of the Taika period), the system in which the Emperor unified the various clans was abolished, and Japan became a unified nation in which the Emperor unified the entire country (Taika Reforms). In 702, the Taiho Code was enacted, completing the succession of the Ritsuryo system and establishing the form of a unified nation under the Ritsuryo code. The middle period was from this to 810 (the 1st year of the Kōnin period), the heyday of the Ritsuryo system, when the Emperor ruled directly above the public Daijōkan (Grand Council of State). The Emperor continued to rule directly after 810, but the power of the Daijōkan was transferred to the Kurodo-dokoro (Kurōdōkoro), which was established in the same year and had a strong private character and could be called the Secretariat Office. This period is the late Joseiki period.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

middle ages

The Middle Ages, from 967 to 1467 (Onin 1), when the Onin War broke out, was a time of mixing of public and private affairs. After 967, the political period saw the establishment of a permanent regent, followed by the period of cloistered rule by retired emperors. During this time, manors, which could be considered a concentrated expression of this mixing of public and private affairs, developed, and the development of the samurai was also seen. After the period of the Taira clan's mixed politics of court nobles and samurai, in 1185 (Bun'ei 1), the manor system and the lord-vassal system of samurai became politically linked, and a manorial feudal system was born that sought financial resources from manors, ushering in the Middle Ages (Kamakura period). In the middle period, manors and feudalism were in a state of equilibrium, and the emperor had a certain degree of political power, but the late period (Muromachi period) began with the fall of the Kamakura shogunate in 1333 (Ganko 3/Shokei 2). Wars continued during the Nanboku-cho period, and although the Muromachi shoguns managed to unify the various provinces, powerful samurai invaded manors, and the shugo of each province began to treat the territories under their jurisdiction as if they were their own fiefdoms, and the emperor almost lost power during this time.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

Early modern period

The period from 1467 (Onin 1) onwards marks the beginning of the early modern period. In the earlier Sengoku period, feudal lords ruled their own territories and there was no authority to unify them, but early modern villages developed during these wars. The middle period began in 1587 (Tensho 15), the year of Toyotomi Hideyoshi's invasion of Kyushu. Hideyoshi's Taiko land survey, which was based on villages, abolished the medieval land system that had remained until then and built the foundations of early modern feudalism based on villages. The Edo Shogunate responded by completing the feudal system of domains and villages (a feudal system in which the domains, or feudal lords' territories, were made up of villages). Japan became a unified feudal state with the Tokugawa Shogun as the unifier. The period up until the time of the eighth shogun, Yoshimune, was the height of feudalism, but it entered its later period in 1742 (Kanpo 2) when the Kujikata Osadamedeki (Civil Affairs Ordinance) was enacted. During this period, the Imperial Respect Movement rose, which, combined with diplomatic issues, shook the foundations of the shogunate. In 1858 (Ansei 5), the shogunate sought imperial approval for the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between the United States and Japan, but failed. This meant that the shogunate's role was called into question, and the period from this year onwards is considered the modern period.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

Modern

The Meiji government was established with the return of power to the Emperor in 1867 (Keio 3), and Japan became a "modern" unified nation with the separation of public and private life with the return of the domains and peoples to the Emperor in 1869 (Meiji 2). The early Meiji period was a transitional period from early modern to modern times, but the middle period began in 1882 with the enforcement of the old Criminal Code, which established the principle of criminal legality. Japanese law was modernized by the Meiji Constitution promulgated in 1889, the Civil Code, and other legal codes created under the influence of German and French law, but this modernization was incomplete, as is typical of constitutional systems with strong monarchical power. The late period began with the outbreak of the Manchurian Incident in 1931 (Showa 6), but the world was in a state of emergency, and even the parliamentarianism seen in the Meiji Constitution came to be disregarded. The end of World War II in 1945 marked the end of the modern period, and Japan entered the modern era of a democratic constitutional system of popular sovereignty, strongly influenced by Anglo-American law.

[Ryosuke Ishii]

"Steps Towards Modern Law" by H. Coing, translated by Kubo Masahata et al. (1969, University of Tokyo Press)" ▽ "Roman Law" by Funada Kyoji, 5 volumes (1968-72, Iwanami Shoten)" ▽ "An Outline of German Legal History" by Mitteris and Lieberich, translated by Sera Koshiro, revised edition (1971, Sobunsha)" ▽ "An Outline of French Legal History" by Olivier Martin, translated by Hanawa Hiroshi (1986, Sobunsha)" ▽ "Chinese Legal History" by Niida Sheng, revised edition (1963, Iwanami Shoten)" ▽ "Principles of Chinese Family Law" by Shiga Hidezo (1967, Sobunsha)" ▽ "Japanese Legal History, Volumes 1 and 2, by Takikawa Masajiro (Reprint edition, Kodansha Academic Library)" ▽ "Systematic Japanese History Series 4, by Ishii Ryosuke ``Legal History'' (1964, Yamakawa Publishing)'' ▽ ``Ryosuke Ishii's ``A Summary of Japanese National History'' (1972, University of Tokyo Press)''

[References] | Law | Jurisprudence

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

法制史とは、法制の歴史ないし法現象の歴史的展開をさしているばかりでなく、いわゆる基礎法学の一つとして法現象の歴史的研究を行う法制史学ないし法史学をも意味する。法制史学は、人類が法というものを認識するようになってから今日まで、その取り扱う範囲は非常に広く、単に過去の法制度ないし法現象の研究にとどまらず、今日の法制度のあり方や、将来のあるべき法を明らかにすることにも寄与すべきものと考えられる。今日の法制史学の現状は、その取り扱う対象によって、日本法制史、中国法制史ないし東洋法制史、ローマ法、西洋法制史ないしイギリス、フランス、ドイツなどの各国法制史というように分かれている。他方、法系論も根強く、大陸法系、英米法系、中国法系、イスラム法系など、法規範の系統を軸にして法を分類する方法もまだ多くみられる。けれども、法制史も法哲学や法思想史と同様、法の本質、法とは何かを明らかにするのに寄与しなければならないから、法制史にとっては法が具体的にどのように形成されたのかを明らかにすることがその出発点となる。残された法史料をみると「社会あるところ法あり」というようなものではなく、法の形成が国家の発生と密接なかかわりをもっていることがわかる。また、各時代、各民族の国家の支配者が、多くの守るべき規律（社会規範）から何を法として抽出したのか、あるいは法律を制定してどのように国家構成員に強制したのかを明らかにすることが法制史の重要な課題となる。したがって、このように法と国家との関係を分析するには、単に法史料のみでなく、広く政治、経済、社会、文化などの諸現象をも考慮に入れなければならないばかりでなく、法を明らかにするのに、他の国家や他の民族の法との比較研究（比較法史学）も重要な手法となる。

　法制史が法現象の歴史研究を目ざす限り、歴史学とはとくに深いかかわりをもっている。そのため、場合によっては法制史学が一般の歴史学とほとんど区別がつかなくなることもありうる。法制史学は、広い意味の歴史学に入るものとしても、法現象の歴史的研究であるから、当然今日の法現象や法制度を念頭に置かざるをえず、その意味で法社会学や比較法学とも密接なかかわりをもっている。従来の個々の法制度や国家制度の歴史的研究ばかりでなく、法の一般理論の研究や法学史の研究も行われるようになった。

［佐藤篤士］

西洋法制史

　西洋法制史は、今日のほとんどの法分野にわたって世界の法制度の基本原則を生み出した点で、きわめて重要な意義をもっている。日本では、明治初期にヨーロッパの先進的な国フランスやイギリスの法を学び、ボアソナードをはじめお雇い外国人を招聘(しょうへい)して近代的法典の編纂(へんさん)が試みられた。ドイツ帝国憲法を範とした強力な立憲君主制の欽定(きんてい)憲法が制定されると、穂積八束(ほづみやつか)の「民法出テ忠孝亡ブ」という論文（1891）を契機に行われた法典論争を経て、ドイツのパンデクテンPandekten（学説彙纂(いさん)）方式による民法典が公布・施行され、ドイツ法の考え方が法学説のなかに大きな比重を占めるようになった。第二次世界大戦後はアメリカ法の影響も受けている。このような意味で、ヨーロッパ法史の研究は、人類の法文化の歴史を認識するためばかりでなく、ヨーロッパやアメリカの法を受容した日本の近代法や現代法を理解するうえでも不可欠であるといえよう。

　わが国で西洋法制史という場合、広狭二つの意味で用いられている。広い意味では、ギリシア・ローマの古典古代社会の法、ゲルマン社会の法、イギリス、フランス、ドイツ、イタリアなどのヨーロッパ中世以降今日までの法というように、世俗法と教会法さらに法思想を含むヨーロッパの法の歴史全体をさし、またヨーロッパ古代の法を明らかにする意味でシュメール、バビロニア、アッシリア、ヘブライ、エジプトの古代東方法も含まれる。狭い意味では、ローマ法に対比して用いられ、ゲルマン古代の法と中世以降のヨーロッパ法の歴史をさす。明治初期に、ヨーロッパの大学に倣ってローマ法と比較法制史（のちに西洋法制史となる）という講座で出発して以来、日本ではこの狭義の、しかもドイツ、フランス、イギリスを中心とした西洋法制史が定着し、歴史法学派以来のヨーロッパの伝統的法学を摂取し、パンデクテン方式の民法典が公布・施行されてよりのちは、西洋法制史もドイツの法制史学の圧倒的影響を受けることになった。すでにドイツでも19世紀後半よりモムゼンTh.Mommsen（1817―1903）を嚆矢(こうし)として実証的法史学が盛んとなり、多くの法史料の見直しが行われるようになった。また、ローマ法を基礎として法のあり方を考えていこうとする人々（ロマニステン）と、ゲルマン法を基礎として法のあり方を考えていこうとする人々（ゲルマニステン）との対立も激しく、ローマ法かゲルマン法かという論争がわが国にも大きな波紋を投げかけた。

　第二次世界大戦中のドイツにおいては、ナチスがローマ法（パンデクテン法学）の排撃を行い、新たに大学に独立の科目として近世私法史を設置した。これは、ナチスが民族主義を強調してゲルマン法的思考を採用しようとしたものにほかならない。けれども実際の研究は、そのような政治的意図とは異なり、法現象を追求すればするほど、ローマ・カノン法ないしローマ法学がいかにヨーロッパ全体の共通の法文化の基礎となっていたか、また近代法形成にあずかって力があったかを知らしめることになった。このことは、戦後に発表された諸業績や中世ローマ法叢書(そうしょ)にみられるように汎(はん)ヨーロッパ的研究活動によく現れている。これらの研究を通じて、近代法に先だつ近世法の意味の検討、従来のローマ法の継受ないしローマ法の現代的慣用の視点を発展させて、EC（ヨーロッパ共同体）における法の統一という課題と結び付けながら、ヨーロッパ法文化がローマ法以来統一的に連続して継承されたという主張も強力になってきている。また、日本で従来ほとんど研究の行われていなかった中世ビザンティン帝国の法史、東ヨーロッパの法史にも関心が払われるようになった。

　他方、ヨーロッパ中世の国制史研究も進められており、近代法との関連で具体的、実証的歴史分析を目ざしている。論点は多岐にわたるが、その主要なものは中世初期の法と国家のあり方をめぐっての論争、中世都市法の性格をめぐる問題、古きよき法たる中世の法の性格をめぐる問題、近代法の形成過程などをあげることができる。さらに、最近は法を実際に生み出してきた法学の歴史にも強い関心が払われている。このような法現象の分析は、一つには法が各歴史社会においていかなる具体的現象形態をとっていたかを明らかにすることであり、同時に、法とは何かを理論的に明らかにするのに寄与することにもなる。

　最近、ローマ法や法制史を大学のカリキュラムで法律学から歴史学の一部門として位置づけようとする動き（フランス、ドイツなどの西欧諸国の大学の場合）もあるが、東欧諸国においては、ローマ法や法制史は法学部の必修科目であり、基礎法学が重視されている。法現象が社会の発展とともに大きな変容を遂げつつある今日では、法と国家、法の本質などについての理論的研究の基礎として、広義の西洋法制史研究の果たす役割も大きい。

［佐藤篤士］

中国法制史

　中国の法史を通じて国家制定法の発達が顕著である。春秋時代（前771～前403）までは誓・盟が法の機能をも果たすものであったが、すでに紀元前6世紀には「刑書」がつくられたと伝えられ、戦国時代（前403～前221）の初めころには、後世の法典の祖というべき「法経(ほうけい)」6篇(へん)が存在したと推測されている。秦(しん)の国家統一を経て漢代（前202～後220）に入ると、「九章律(きゅうしょうりつ)」が法体系の中心をなし、律の副次法典たる令が数多くつくられた。漢代が法の創成発展期であるのに対して、続く魏晋(ぎしん)南北朝（220～589）は法典編纂(へんさん)期であり、晋の「泰始(たいし)律令」（267）において、律令が二つの基本法典（刑罰法・行政法）として並び定まった。北朝ではしばしば律令の改纂が行われ、隋(ずい)（581～618）、唐（618～907）に至っては律令格式時代を現出した。とくに唐律は、戦国時代以来の国家制定法発達の集大成たる意義をもち、中国法史上最高の法典であるだけでなく、当時世界に類をみない刑法の精華であって、後代これを承(う)け、隣邦にも大きく影響した。

　五代を経て、宋(そう)代（960～1279）には勅令格式なる法体系が現れたが、唐律は宋末まで現行法であった。遼(りょう)の法は固有法と唐律との二元制をとり、金(きん)では唐律を大幅に模した律がつくられ、他方、元(げん)一代は律が制定されなかったという変遷はあるが、明(みん)代（1368～1644）に入ると、大筋として唐律を継いだ明律が制定され、続く清(しん)代（1616～1912）においても、清律はほぼ明律を踏襲するものであった。令と名づけられる法典は明代をもって終わった。明、清では副次法典たる条例が数多く制定され、時勢に応ずる法の役割を大きく担った。清代末期、時局の要請から近代的法典の制定が企てられたが、実施に至らず、中華民国（1912～）に入り、大陸法系の法典が逐次成立した。中華人民共和国（1949～）では、法典化をめぐる曲折を経たのちに、中国独自の特色を備えた社会主義法典がしだいに数を増しつつある。

　戦国時代以来清末に至る帝政時代を通して、伝統中国法は、基本的には旧制を継ぎながら独自完結的な律令法系を形づくった。成文法は刑罰法規と行政法規とからなり、わけても、前者において古くから優れた発達を遂げた。これはローマ私法の発達とも比肩するが、同時に西洋法系に対蹠(たいしょ)的な特徴をなしている。他方、実定私法体系はついに生み出されなかった。法はすべて皇帝の意思に発し、官僚の執務の準則であって、人民が法を援用して権利を主張できるというものではなかった。また、漢代以降儒教が国家統治の指導理念とされるに伴い、儒家の唱える礼の規範が法のなかに取り入れられ、このような儒法融合の趨勢(すうせい)が国家法のあり方を規定した。以上の中国法の特色のとらえ方をめぐっては、基本法典たる律の連続性に着目して、国家法は実効性に乏しかったとする説が、従来比較的に多数を占めたが、これに対しては、時勢の変動に即応した副次法典や、多量の判例集の存在を重視して、法の実効性を明らかにする研究が、近時内外に現れつつある。

　中国法が日本、朝鮮、ベトナムなど周辺諸国に与えた影響はきわめて大きい。わが国の大化改新以後、「近江令(おうみりょう)」から「養老(ようろう)律令」に至る一連の法典は、唐の律令を範としたものであり、とくに律はほぼ唐律を継受している。下って江戸時代の藩法の一部や、さらに明治初期の「新律綱領」「改定律例」には、明・清律の影響の著しいものがある。

［中村茂夫］

日本法制史

　日本法制史の時代区分については各種の試みがなされている。中田薫(かおる)は明治時代以前を大化前代・大化後代・中世・近世に区分し、滝川政次郎(まさじろう)は固有法と継受法との関係に重点を置いて区別し、牧健二は政体によって区別している。筆者は、一つの時代は、前期すなわちその時代の基本的特徴の発達期と、中期すなわちその基本的特徴の全盛期と、後期すなわち基本的特徴の衰退期の三期に分けることができると考え、この考えのもとに、上代・上世・中世・近世・近代および現代という時代区分をとるので、この時代区分法に基づいて、以下日本法制史の変遷を概観する。

［石井良助］

上代

上代は、法と宗教との未分離を特徴とする氏族時代である。その初めは紀元前2、3世紀ごろで、それから紀元後2世紀ごろまでの弥生(やよい)時代が前期で、この時期には北九州中心の銅剣銅鉾(どうほこ)文化圏と畿内(きない)中心の銅鐸(どうたく)文化圏との対立をみたが、両者は2世紀の末ごろ、銅鐸文化圏の邪馬台国(やまたいこく)の女王卑弥呼(ひみこ)によって統合されたと考えられる。卑弥呼の相続人臺与(とよ)の時代に、政権は天皇の祖先（崇神(すじん)天皇）に移ったと解する。卑弥呼による統合以後、400年前後神功(じんぐう)皇后が現れたといわれるころまでが中期であり、卑弥呼や神功皇后の言い伝えにみえるように、この時期では、すめらみこと（統合者）や氏上(うじのかみ)が神憑(かみがか)りの状態で述べるところが「ノリ」であり、それがまた法でもあった。ここに法と宗教との未分離がうかがわれるが、5世紀の初めごろからこの神の威力はしだいに衰えた。そして、その衰えたところに、中国から非宗教的な律令(りつりょう)制度が継受され、ここに上世が始まるのである。

［石井良助］

上世

上世は603年（推古天皇11）から平安時代の中ごろ967年（康保4）までである。前期は702年（大宝2）までである。645年（大化1）に、それまでの、天皇が諸氏上を統合する制は廃止されて日本は、天皇が全国を統一する統一国家となり（大化改新）、702年に大宝(たいほう)律令が施行されて律令制の継受は完成し、律令的統一国家の形式が整った。これ以後810年（弘仁1）までが中期で、律令制の全盛期であり、天皇は公的な太政官(だいじょうかん)の上にあって親政したのである。810年以後も天皇親政は続くが、太政官の権力は、同年設置の、私的性格の強い、秘書官局ともいうべき蔵人所(くろうどどころ)に移った。この時期が上世後期である。

［石井良助］

中世

中世は967年から応仁(おうにん)の乱勃発(ぼっぱつ)の1467年（応仁1）までで、公私混交の時代である。967年以後は政治的には摂関常置の摂関政治の時代となり、やがて上皇の院政時代となる。この間、公私混交の集中的表現ともいうべき荘園(しょうえん)が発達するとともに、武士の発達もみられる。平家の公家(くげ)武家混交政治の時代のあと、1185年（文治1）に源頼朝(よりとも)が日本66国の総守護総地頭(じとう)に任ぜられるに及び、荘園制と武士の主従制とは政治的に結び付いて、荘園に財源を求める荘園的封建制が生まれ、ここに中期（鎌倉時代）に入る。中期では荘園と封建制とはとにかく平衡状態にあり、天皇にもある程度の政治的権能はあったが、1333年（元弘3・正慶2）鎌倉幕府の没落とともに後期（室町時代）に入る。南北朝時代には戦乱が続き、室町将軍はいちおう諸国を統合するも、有力武士は荘園を侵略し、各国守護はその管轄国をあたかも領国のように扱うようになり、天皇はこの間にほとんど政権を失った。

［石井良助］

近世

1467年（応仁1）以後は近世である。その前期、戦国時代には、国主大名がその分国を支配し、彼らを統合する権力者は存在しなかったが、この戦乱の間に近世的な村落が発達した。1587年（天正15）豊臣(とよとみ)秀吉の九州征伐の年に中期に入る。秀吉の行った村を単位とする太閤(たいこう)検地は、そのころまで残存した中世的土地制度を廃して、村落を基礎とする近世的封建制の土台を築き、江戸幕府はこれを受けて藩村的封建制（藩すなわち大名の領分が村によって構成されている封建制）を完成させた。日本は徳川将軍を統合者とする封建的統合国家となったのである。8代将軍吉宗(よしむね)の時代までは藩村的封建制の盛期であるが、公事方御定書(くじかたおさだめがき)制定の1742年（寛保2）に後期に入る。本期には尊王論が勃興(ぼっこう)し、外交問題と合して、幕府の土台を揺すった。1858年（安政5）幕府は日米修好通商条約の勅許を求めたが失敗し、ここに幕府は鼎(かなえ)の軽重を問われることになったので、この年以後を近代とする。

［石井良助］

近代

1867年（慶応3）の大政奉還により、明治政府が成立し、69年（明治2）の版籍奉還により日本は「近代的」統一国家となり、公私は分離した。明治初年は近世から近代へ移る過渡期であるが、罪刑法定主義を定めた旧刑法の施行された82年をもって中期に入る。89年発布の明治憲法や民法その他ドイツ法またはフランス法の影響の下に成った法典によって日本法は近代化されたが、君権の強力な立憲制に典型的にみられるように、その近代化は不徹底であった。1931年（昭和6）満州事変の勃発とともに後期に入るが、世は非常時となり、明治憲法にみられる議会主義すら軽視されるようになった。そして45年の第二次大戦終結によって近代は終了し、英米法の影響を強く受ける国民主権の民主的立憲制の現代に入ったのである。

［石井良助］

『H・コーイング著、久保正幡他訳『近代法への歩み』（1969・東京大学出版会）』▽『船田享二著『ローマ法』全5巻（1968～72・岩波書店）』▽『ミッタイス、リーベリッヒ著、世良晃志郎訳『ドイツ法制史概説』改訂版（1971・創文社）』▽『オリヴィエ・マルタン著、塙浩訳『フランス法制史概説』（1986・創文社）』▽『仁井田陞著『中国法制史』増訂版（1963・岩波書店）』▽『滋賀秀三著『中国家族法の原理』（1967・創文社）』▽『滝川政次郎著『日本法制史』上下（覆刻版・講談社学術文庫）』▽『石井良助著『体系日本史叢書4　法制史』（1964・山川出版社）』▽『石井良助著『略説　日本国家史』（1972・東京大学出版会）』