A new statute.“Hiding New and Old Fugitive Slaves of Manchus,”was added to the First version of the Qing code in 1647.and this statute surprisingly regulated that any offenders would be excluded from any amnesties.T...A new statute.“Hiding New and Old Fugitive Slaves of Manchus,”was added to the First version of the Qing code in 1647.and this statute surprisingly regulated that any offenders would be excluded from any amnesties.This is especially noteworthy because,according to both Ming and Qing codes,only severe crimes,such as treason and rebellion,were excluded from any amnesties.Previous scholars have not considered why the statute excluded any amnesties,nor have they analyzed how this amnesty policy was implemented in practice.This article contends that the exclusion did not arise from Manchu tradition.Instead,it was an exceptional response to the norms of amnesties in the Ming and Qing codes.Because the fugitive problem,involving slaves of Manchus fleeing from the banner system,endangered Manchus interests,the Qing court was compelled to exclude fugitive criminals from amnesties.However,the Qing court did not strictly apply the amnesty policy of this statute.Criminals in fugitive cases were sometimes pardoned because of amnesties during the Dorgon regency period.Dorgon,Shun/.hi.Oboi,and Kangxi all initially excluded those harboring fugitives from amnesties,but later changed their amnesty policies in this regard.Even though the crime of harboring fugitives became a permanent symbol of Manchu rule and was recorded in every emperor's enthronement edict from Kangxi to Xuantong.the Qing court gradually came to accept norms concerning amnesties as practiced in Han society and treated fugitive cases as ordinary court cases during and after the Kangxi emperor's reign.展开更多
基金This article is supported by the National Social Science Fund of China(Project No.15BZS068).
文摘A new statute.“Hiding New and Old Fugitive Slaves of Manchus,”was added to the First version of the Qing code in 1647.and this statute surprisingly regulated that any offenders would be excluded from any amnesties.This is especially noteworthy because,according to both Ming and Qing codes,only severe crimes,such as treason and rebellion,were excluded from any amnesties.Previous scholars have not considered why the statute excluded any amnesties,nor have they analyzed how this amnesty policy was implemented in practice.This article contends that the exclusion did not arise from Manchu tradition.Instead,it was an exceptional response to the norms of amnesties in the Ming and Qing codes.Because the fugitive problem,involving slaves of Manchus fleeing from the banner system,endangered Manchus interests,the Qing court was compelled to exclude fugitive criminals from amnesties.However,the Qing court did not strictly apply the amnesty policy of this statute.Criminals in fugitive cases were sometimes pardoned because of amnesties during the Dorgon regency period.Dorgon,Shun/.hi.Oboi,and Kangxi all initially excluded those harboring fugitives from amnesties,but later changed their amnesty policies in this regard.Even though the crime of harboring fugitives became a permanent symbol of Manchu rule and was recorded in every emperor's enthronement edict from Kangxi to Xuantong.the Qing court gradually came to accept norms concerning amnesties as practiced in Han society and treated fugitive cases as ordinary court cases during and after the Kangxi emperor's reign.
