| 英文摘要 |
“The politics of cruel officials (kuli酷吏)”during the period between Wu Zetian’s武則天reign and her accession to the throne (684-705) has always been a prominent topic in scholarly discourse. While significant insights have been gained from political history, social history, and gender history, the interaction between“the politics of cruel officials”and the legal system remains further exploration. This article seeks to address this gap by examining the interaction between the cruel officialdom and the legal system of the Tang and Zhou dynasties through the lens of legal history, focusing on the Treaties of Penal Law (Xingfa zhi刑法志) in the Old Book of Tang (Jiu Tangshu舊唐書). The article argues that Wu Zetian strategically circumvented the formal judicial system to enforce strict rule by law by establishing the“system of casket-delivery (tougui zhidu投匭制度),”deploying the“Commanding Investigating Censors (she jiancha yushih攝監察御史)”to detect illegal affairs, and tacitly permitting the formation of the“Court of Reasoning Commissioners (tuishishi yuan推事使院)”under the leadership of the cruel officials. In response, officials who opposed the cruel officials sought to preserve the existing legal system. While they were unsuccessful in blocking the new policies at the institutional level, they did manage to persuade the emperor to grant pardons in individual cases—an approach more acceptable to Wu Zetian. This somewhat helped to curtail the cruel officials’power to execute political rivals. Following the end of“the politics of cruel officials,”the edicts issued during the late Wu-Zhou武周(690-705), Zhongzong中宗(705-710), and Xuanzong玄宗(712-756) reigns reflected the Tang court's efforts to exonerate the victims of the cruel officials, but the identification of the group of cruel officials and the disposition of their descendants varied with changes in political power. This article contributes to the study of Wu Zetian’s reign by examining the lesser-known facets of“the politics of cruel officials”and highlighting the dynamic interplay between legal and political history. |