《天聖令》復原唐令研究之二：〈假寧令〉

The Research on the Tang Statutes reinstated from the Tiansheng Statutes: Using the Leave Statutes as an example

在2006年12月，中國大陸「天一閣博物館」與北京社會科學院聯合出版了《天一閣藏明鈔本天聖令校證附唐令復原研究》一書，被視為是中國中古史學界、中國法制史學界共同矚目的大事。雖然該書曾經經過北京社會科學院「天聖令整理課題組」的專精研究與整理，鄙意仍有不少值得商榷之處。就以《天聖令‧假寧令》復原為《唐令‧假寧令》的內容來看，本文針對兩大主題提出個人見解：在第一部份（關於《唐令‧假寧令》復原問題）中，本文至少針對文字校勘，提出些許修正意見；也針對〈假寧令〉篇序的編排次第問題，提出個人淺見。在第二部份（關於《天聖令‧假寧令》中宋令修改或廢棄唐令的原因）中，本文主張《天聖令‧宋令‧假寧令》無論是修改或廢棄唐令的令文，其主要原因均是因為唐、宋體制的不同，而這正是攸關「唐宋變革期」的重要課題，值得研究法制史、政治制度史的學者們多加注意－－這更是《天聖令》此一新史料問世的最大價值所在。

On 2006, the publication of The Tiansheng Statutes reveals a new page of the research on the Chinese legal history. Although The Tiansheng Statutes has been thoroughly research, there still need to discuss.In this research the author point out two opinions about the Tiansheng Statutes of Leave. First is about reinstate the Tang Statutes, author provides few opinions regarding proofread of the text and arrange the order of articles.Second, in the Tiansheng Statutes, no matter revised or abolish the Tang Statutes these were based on differences between the Tang and Song dynasties. It reflects the problem of the period of Innovation in Tang and Song Dynasties and should pay more attentions for and is the core value of the Tiansheng Decrees.