摘要
从量化历史角度开展中西诉讼比较,需注意诉讼率数字背后的陷阱,考虑到双方案件具体内涵的不同,我们更应探讨案件形成背后的司法制度根源。司法档案中的“案件”是司法制度运作中的人为制造之物,近代早期中国与英格兰不同的地方权力结构导致其司法制度资源配置的差异,由此对两国在立案时案件性质的严重程度、案件处理所需时间、当事人所需负担的诉讼费用,以及案件受理范围等方面产生了不同影响。归根结底,清代中国二元性地方权力结构使国家与地方社会相对隔膜,而英格兰的一元性地方权力结构使得国家的权力末梢深入到乡村一级,由此导致了两国具有不同的案件形成过程。
In the study of comparative legal history, the classic proposition that “people are fond of lawsuits in the West while the Chinese are reluctant to litigate” has aroused heated discussions among scholars in the Chinese academia. However, in recent years, the opinion that “the Chinese hate lawsuits”has gradually become unacceptable. Some historians of China have confirmed that vigorous lawsuits launched by local people can be found everywhere since Song China, and “litigious society” became the norm in Qing China. At the same time, the Western scholars have painted a picture that English people were very disgusted with litigation, thus shook the “litigation imagination” of the West. In the future,we can try to compare the litigation rates between China and the West from the perspective of quantitative history. The number of cases in judicial archives and the distribution of types of cases in various courts can be found through comparing litigation rates in early modern China and England.However, we should be alert to the pitfalls behind quantitative historical researches, and further investigate what is a “case” in the different judicial systems of China and England. When examining the number of cases, it cannot be ignored that the cases themselves have complex connotations. The purpose of our comparison of the litigation rate is not to find out who has more or less cases but to know the installation of system in which the litigation rates are generated. On the one hand, we need to count the litigation rates of China and England in a quantitative sense;on the other hand, we need to further explore the different process of case formation in China and England to understand the intention behind the litigation rates in the two countries. The local power structures and their judicial system resources of the two countries must be analyzed.“Cases” in judicial archives are artificial creations in the operation of the judicial system. The allocation of resources of judicial system under the influenc
作者
杨松涛
Yang Songtao(Institute of Crime Control and Criminal Policy,Henan University,Kaifeng 475001,China)
出处
《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2022年第6期133-145,共13页
Journal of Zhejiang University:Humanities and Social Sciences
基金
2020年度河南省教育厅哲学社会科学基础研究重大项目
2020年度国家社科基金西部项目(20XZS016)。
关键词
司法制度资源
诉讼率
近代早期
清代中国
英格兰
resources of judicial system
litigation rate
early modern
Qing China
England
