Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Legal Thought of Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty (618–907)

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Frontiers of Law in China

Little scholarly work has been done on understanding Taizong’s (one of China’s most influential emperors) legal thought. Existing historiography has been descriptive and has not fully contextualized Taizong’s legal thought in his broader political thought. Furthermore, it has been influenced by the traditional bias in Tang historiography as a whole, which has been adulatory toward Taizong’s reign. Drawing from a variety of sources, including dynastic histories and Taizong’s writings, this article seeks to complicate the existing historiography. It lays out key characteristics of Taizong’s legal thought, situating them in the historical context in which Taizong operated, as well as contextualizing them within his broader political thought, to present a more balanced analysis. It will argue that Taizong was an emperor who was concerned with legality, competent legal administration, and leniency in punishments. His actions and rhetoric also suggest that he believed that law should be applied to the emperor’s conduct as well. At the same time, this article also argues that Taizong should not be viewed primarily as an innovative legal thinker or as someone with an ideological or idealistic commitment to legal reform for its own sake. Rather, he was a man whose views on law were greatly motivated by practical, political concerns, such as concerns regarding the stability and legitimacy of his rule. More broadly, this article contributes to the historiography of traditional Chinese legal history by complicating the so-called dominant narrative of the process of “Confucianization of law” in premodern Chinese history by highlighting the role that specific historical actors (such as Taizong) played in that process.

Norman P. HO, J.D., School of Law, New York University, New York, USA and A.M. in Regional Studies-East Asia (Chinese History), Harvard University, Cambridge, USA; Associate Professor, Peking University School of Transnational Law, Shenzhen 518055, China. Contact: nph225@nyu.edu
10.3868/s050-006-017-0031-3
/content/journals/10.3868/s050-006-017-0031-3
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.3868/s050-006-017-0031-3
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3868/s050-006-017-0031-3
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3868/s050-006-017-0031-3
2017-01-11
2018-09-21

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Frontiers of Law in China — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation