清代中后期州县衙门“叙供”的文书制作——以《南部档案》为中心

发布时间：2018-05-03 14:04

  本文选题：清代中后期 + 州县衙门　； 参考：《历史研究》2017年05期

【摘要】：有清一代,据供定案是州县官审断的基本方式。口供本乃"证据之王",是堂谕的基础,也是上级部门覆审的重要材料,而翻检清代州县司法档案,经当事人签字画押的原始口供并不见于讼状之中。清中后期的堂审记录,称"叙供"更为妥帖。《南部档案》显示,叙供多由案件承办房的书吏完成,并非仅出于"刑房";叙供经历了由早期不写房名,到后期具体到相应房,甚至兼及书吏名姓的演变;叙述结构,以道光七年、光绪十一年为界,呈现出三种样态。其他地区也多有类似情况,但不在同一时间点,区域性特征明显。一般而言,叙供与两造呈词的基本事实大体相当,但也有不少大相径庭的案卷存在。
[Abstract]:There was a Qing Dynasty, according to the decision is the basic state and county officials adjudication. The confession is the "king of evidence", is the basis of the oracle, and is also an important material for the higher authorities to review, and the original confession signed by the parties is not seen in the pleadings. The court records of the middle and late Qing Dynasty said that "giving evidence" was more appropriate. The "Southern Archives" showed that much of the narration of the confession was completed by the scribes who had handled the case, not just out of the "criminal room." the narration of the confession experienced a period when the name of the room was not written in the early period, but in the later stage, it was specific to the corresponding room. Even with the evolution of the first name of the scribe, the narrative structure, with Daoguang seven years, Guang Xu 11 years as the boundary, showing three patterns. Other regions also have more similar situation, but not at the same time, the regional characteristics are obvious. Generally speaking, the basic facts of the two words are roughly the same, but there are quite a few different files.
【基金】：香港中文大学历史人类学研究中心“香港特别行政区大学教育资助委员会·卓越学科领域计划”(The Historical Anthropology of Chinese Society) 国家社科基金重大项目“清代南部县衙档案整理与研究”(11&ZD093);“清代巴县衙门档案整理与研究”(16ZDA126)资助
【分类号】：K249
，

本文编号：1838777