THE JURIDICAL STATUS OF CHINESE WOMEN IN THE IMPERIAL PERIOD

In this article I shall be dealing with legislation referring to women in Imperial China. I shall mainly be looking at the last dynasty which, from a juridical and institutional point of view, allows us, more than any other period, to analyse the Confucianisation of Law, which may also be seen as the codification of Confucianism, which had begun in the Western Han Dynasty. The fusion of Confucian principles and the concept of legality meant that positive rules usually taken for granted were often ignored by the code, being only vaguely present in the minute specifications of transgressions and the corresponding punishment.

As far as women were concerned, Chinese law fully recognised the authority traditionally wielded over women by parents, husbands or parents-in-law. 1 Disputes and any important decisions within the family were settled by the head of the family, who exerted a double role: he was the moraliser and educator who controlled relatives' behaviour (for which he was held responsible before the law), and the arbiter of common property. The organisation of clans was also a factor which greatly limited the recourse to justice. In fact they provided for a direct control over all the families who made up the clan, and did this through their own laws and regulations. These were often written and provided for punishment, which was sometimes extremely severe. These norms often derived from Confucian doctrine and local customs and habits. 2

The judicial apparatus further discouraged recourse to the Law to settle controversy arising between individuals. A famous case in point is the edict promulgated by the Emperor Kangxi, who demanded that no pity be shown to those who turned to the court, so that the disgust and terror of appearing before a judge would prevail over the confidence felt in justice being able to solve problems. 3

In Imperial China, legal codes only marginally dealt with the relationships between individuals. Their main interest was in crimes committed against the state: most of the actions which led to punishment were in fact those which in some way interfered with the activity or functioning of the bureaucratic apparatus or which in some way threatened its stability. The jus civile of the Roman legal system was not present in the codes if not in an entirely exceptional way. There is, in fact, no clear and systematic exposition of the rights and duties of the citizen. The legislator is primarily interested in limiting the scope of the codes to those aspects pertaining to private and social life that in some way are of interest to the state.

Thus the private law norms contained in these codes mainly deal with tax collection and public duties. Even many of the norms pertaining to family law and inheritance law ought to be considered in this light, and in this sense it is highly significant that (The Penal Statutes and Regulations of the Great Qing Dynasty) Da Qing lüli 大清律例 includes them in the chapter describing the competence of the Board of Revenue (Hu Bu) 户部. The only section not directly linked with tax collection is the third, dealing with marriage and divorce. It should be noted, however, that even these norms, which would normally pertain to the area of civil law, are taken into consideration in that they are seen to be useful in terms of a correct and fair administration of the state. Nor are these norms designed to regulate the reciprocal duties of spouses, as not even in this case is the legislator primarily concerned with the individual. Rather, the main scope is the family to which the individual belongs.

These norms are given little coverage in the codes, mainly because of their prevalently penal nature. In fact, the main aim is to establish appropriate punishment for each transgression.

All of this makes it abundantly clear that positive law is, by itself, completely incapable of helping us understand how the relationships between individuals were actually regulated, as its role was decidedly secondary. Most of the questions dealing with civil and often also penal law were resolved within the family and the clan, as well as in other basic social units, where local customs and habits doubtless held greater sway than the codified laws. Only those very few litigations which were actually taken before a court were settled according to positive law and the magistrate however had to bear in mind the more firmly established habits of the population. Examining the cases included in special collections designed to help judges in their work demonstrates how at times solutions were adopted which were not covered by the codes. Often if the law was in clear contrast with local customs, then it was simply not applied. 4 For example, the code stipulated that the bride's dowry could be held by the family of the husband in case of divorce or if the woman in question re-married after the death of her husband. In practice, though, the woman's property was given back, and eventually the law itself was modified to reflect this custom.

Throughout the entire judicial system distinctions are made between crimes committed against those who are not members of the clan or family and crimes committed against those who are. Within the family, the following were taken into consideration: the person's sex, the degree of kinship, the generation to which the person belonged, the person's age and so on. Women occupied an inferior rung, similar to that of the younger members of the family, and were also held to demonstrate filial piety towards their parents-in-law. The circumstances which privileged the position of the woman within her new family were exceptional. The most important case was doubtless that of the mother of the head of the family, who was above any other authority. It is not surprising therefore that, on the one hand, she was granted privileges reserved for the infirm, children under the age of ten and the elderly over the age of eighty if she was involved in some generic crime against a person who was not a close acquired relative, while on the other she met with the severest punishment if found guilty of any crime against her husband and parents-in-law.

A woman suspected of committing crimes not considered to be very serious was not expected to appear before a judge, but one of her sons, a brother or a grandson were sent in her stead. 5 Not even in those cases in which a woman was involved in a rather serious crime, but which did not obviously involve capital punishment, was the woman judged and punished by the magistrate; rather, she was handed over in custody to her husband or, in very specific cases, to her family of origin. 6 Judges who did not follow these procedures were liable to face severe punishment. Extremely severe punishment was also reserved for anyone authorising the torture or execution of a pregnant woman, or of any woman up to one-hundred days from giving birth. 7

If a member of the family was found guilty of some very heinous crimes such as treason or parricide, then he was given the maximum penalty: death by ling chi 凌迟 (slicing). 8 Consequently, all male members of the family over the age of sixteen were sentenced to decapitation, and the women and children were reduced to servitude and appointed to the families of the more deserving functionaries. 9

Extremely severe punishments were reserved for women found guilty of crimes against other family members. If, for example, a woman hit and seriously wounded her husband she was sentenced to immediate strangulation; 10 if, on the other hand, the woman was found guilty of wounding either her husband's parents or grandparents, or even if she was found guilty of insulting or verbally abusing them, then she was sentenced to decapitation. 11 If, on the contrary, the husband was found guilty of beating and wounding his wife, his punishment was two levels lower than the punishment reserved for ordinary cases, and was three levels lower if he wounded his concubine. 12 Parents-in-law were not prosecutable, not even if they were responsible for the accidental death of their daughter-in-law. 13 Even for the much more serious crime of premeditated murder of a daughter-in-law, the punishment was several levels lower than the capital punishment specified for ordinary cases: one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and life exile at a distance of two-thousand li 里. If the woman in question was one of the son's concubines, then the punishment was yet another level lower than that established for ordinary cases. 14

The same disparity in punishment reserved for husbands and wives could also be found between wife and concubine. If, for example, a concubine accidentally caused the death of a wife, she was punished with one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and three years' redeemable exile, while no punishment was exacted if the wife caused the death of the concubine. 15 The wife was of equal if not superior social extraction to her husband, while the concubine normally came from a modest family, consequently the wife could not be demoted to the role of concubine. Any husband found guilty of demoting his wife was therefore punished with one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo. 16

Divorce, in most cases, was granted in the husband's interest, even when the heli 和离, or reciprocal consent, formula was used. The woman was almost always simply forced to accept the divorce: her role within the family was so impotent that she had no choice but to accept. If the conditions were particularly unfavourable for her, then her husband paid her family a certain amount of money. What happened even more often, however, was that the woman's family, hoping to be able to marry their daughter again, paid an amount of redemption money which in some cases was given over to the first husband's family when her new marriage had already been secured.

A wife could be repudiated for any one of seven reasons: lack of filial piety towards her husband's parents and grandparents; sterility; adultery; loquacity; theft; jealousy; malignant diseases. 17 None of the above could be applied by the wife against her husband in divorce proceedings. Except in the case of adultery, it was not possible to repudiate a wife who had properly followed the rites of mourning for the death of her parents-in-law, who had no family to return to or whose family had vastly improved its economic situation after her marriage. 18

Another form of divorce was called yijue 义绝, which was compulsory when one of the two spouses committed actions which annulled marital ties. These actions were considered crimes by the code, and were punished accordingly. Mostly, this type of divorce protected the woman's rights and was the only alternative to an otherwise impossible cohabitation with the husband's family. Some of the cases established were:

· a husband who committed adultery with his mother-in-law;

· a husband who gave his own wife or concubine in marriage, rented her or sold her to another man to use as his wife or concubine;

· a husband who allowed or forced his own wife or concubine to commit adultery or prostitution;

· a husband who maltreated his wife and falsely accused her of adultery;

· a husband who falsely accused his wife of incestuous relations with his father;

· a husband who beat his wife's parents or grandparents;

· a husband who killed his wife's relatives (brothers, sisters, maternal grandparents, paternal uncles and their wives, maternal aunts), etc. 19

Divorce proceedings were in this case independent from penal proceedings, even if the crime had been pardoned.

The wife could be granted divorce if her husband was absent for a lengthy period of time without notifying her of his whereabouts and without providing her with means of subsistence. After a period of three years, the marriage could be annulled without any obligation to give back any of the gifts received. The wife could not abandon her home during these three years. If she re-married after a long period of time, but which was nonetheless less than the mandatory three-year period, then she was punished with one-hundred blows of the heavy bamboo. 20

In practice, divorce was rather rare, and this was mainly due to economic reasons. Of the seven conditions justifying the repudiation of a man's wife, only two (adultery, and being unfilial to her husband's parents and grandparents) were actually invoked. Often a husband preferred quite simply to marry a second wife as the costs were relatively low and she could be sent away at his complete and arbitrary discretion.

Divorce cases were settled privately, unless the wife actually applied to the Court [Tribunal]. Amongst the poorer classes, a document would be drawn up which was kept by the wife's family and which was considered a legal document able to forestall any dispute.

The wife's dowry did not become a part of the property of the family and remained hers even though it was in fact administered by her husband. In case of a division within the family, or of a widow's re-marriage, or of divorce (except in the case of the repudiation of an adulteress), the dowry was given back. The same applied for other gifts received or which derived from dotal property. The wife, however, was excluded from all inheritance. If a husband died without heirs, then the woman could claim, for an adoptive child, that part of the inheritance which would have gone to him. If she wanted to re-marry, and therefore left her husband's family, she would then have to relinquish all properties belonging to her husband. 21

On apportioning the goods belonging to the common estate, the daughters were normally given a share that could be used for their dowry. 22

The Code dedicates an entire chapter to the selling or renting of a man's wife or daughter as a wife or concubine. This was, in fact, common practice amongst the poorer classes and sometimes the same couple would trick different "clients" into buying or hiring the same woman. In these cases, the husband was punished with eighty blows of heavy bamboo, 23 while the wife was not prosecutable unless she had taken part in the swindle pretending to be the husband's sister and been given over to the other man as such. 24 The purchaser, if in good faith, was not punished; if, on the other hand, it could be proven that he was aware of the situation, he was liable to the same punishment meted out to the husband. The wife was forced to return to her natal family, unless she had been sold because of poverty. In this latter case, she remained the property of the buyer. 25

In fact, even though the law did not overtly specify as much, poverty was considered an extenuating circumstance. Fraud and false pretences as well as the abduction of a wife who had been illegally consigned were considered aggravating circumstances, instead.

Only an adulterous wife could be sold, but not to her lover. If this norm was violated, then the punishment was eighty blows of heavy bamboo. 26

Both the purchase and selling of a woman for purposes of prostitution and instigation to prostitution were prohibited as well. 27

The Code also makes many references to rape. The term used for this crime is qianjian 强奸, and also includes any sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of twelve. 28

For this crime there were different levels of punishment, depending on the circumstances in which the crime was committed. The Code was nonetheless consistently severe. In ordinary cases, attempted rape was punished with one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and life exile at a distance of three-thousand li. The standard punishment, which was meted out when the rape actually took place, was strangulation after the assizes for the main guilty party, and one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and life exile at a distance of three-thousand li for any accomplice. 29

Different aggravating circumstances were provided for. The Code considered, for example, if the rape was committed along with other crimes: if it was accompanied by theft, the punishment was decapitation after the assizes; 30 if it was committed by brigands or bandits, then the punishment was immediate decapitation with public exposure of the head in a cage; 31 and in case the rapist had organised a group of people with the intent of abducting the victim, then the punishment was immediate decapitation for the ringleader and strangulation after the assizes for his accomplices, 32 and so on.

The Code also contemplated cases in which the woman was killed or committed suicide because of the shame ensuing from rape. Raping and then murdering a woman was considered one of the most serious crimes, and was punished with immediate decapitation with public exposure of the head in a cage. If the woman was killed before the man in question managed to rape her, the punishment was slightly less severe: immediate decapitation. 33 The same punishment was meted out if the raped woman was under the age of ten. If, on the other hand, she was between the ages of ten and twelve, then the punishment was two levels lower in entity. 34 It is also interesting to note that whoever was found guilty of wounding, and therefore causing the death of, a woman in attempting to rape her, was punished in the same way as anyone found guilty of leading or pressing an adulterous woman to commit suicide (decapitation after the assizes). 35 The same punishment was applied if the woman committed suicide because of the rape. If the attempted rape was not carried out and the victim nonetheless committed suicide, the punishment was the same applied to the ordinary crime of rape (strangulation after the assizes). The same applied in cases where the woman's relatives committed suicide. 36

The severity of the punishments applied to the crime of rape is further backed up by the Law which excluded rapists from the privilege of a mitigated punishment if they reported themselves to the authorities. 37

We have yet to see how the victim is considered. An article in the Code affirmed the nonguilty and non-prosecutable nature of the victim of rape. 38 The need to specify this demonstrates how complex and delicate a question was the apportioning of responsibility in these cases. The Code recognised the woman's right to legitimate defence, but even in this particular case the victim was not permitted to be disrespectful towards the members of the family.

A woman who wounded39 or killed her rapist "on the spot"40 was not prosecutable. But if the aggressor was a member of the family, in the most common of cases the victim's father-in-law, then the victim was punished rather severely if guilty of seriously wounding him. The Code also included some examples. Amongst these there is the case of a woman who bit her father-in-law's upper lip after his attempting to rape her, thus forcing him to abandon his intentions. The Supreme Court did not find her guilty, maintaining that the familial tie linking the two people in question had been broken by the man's behaviour and by other circumstances. The sentence, however, was later impugned and the woman was condemned to penal servitude in Turkestan. 41 The new sentence, which was probably severe enough to be considered exemplary, underlines how the law was in some cases applied according to a judge's discretion and that there was no overall uniformity in the judges' interpretation of the Code. In another case a woman who in similar circumstances killed her father-in-law was sentenced to decapitation after the assizes. 42 Finally, in a third example, a woman who killed her aggressor without realising it was her father-in-law (the whole incident took place at night, in the dark), was sentenced to deportation. 43

Great importance was placed on whether the killing took place "on the spot". If the aggressor was killed afterwards, the Code distinguished between cases in which the aggressor had tricked the woman in order to rape her and cases in which the man had used violence. In the former case, the woman was sentenced to life exile, and in the latter to three years' exile. In both cases, however, it was possible to obtain monetary redemption. 44

Husbands or relatives responsible for killing an aggressor were not prosecutable either. If, however, the killing did not take place "on the spot", then those involved were sentenced to capital punishment (strangulation after the assizes). 45

Cases involving superiors and inferiors not pertaining to the same family were treated separately. If a servant raped the wife or daughter of his master, he was sentenced to decapitation. 46 On the other hand, if the master raped the servant's wife or daughter and thus pressed her to commit suicide, then the punishment was much less severe: one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and military exile to a nearby frontier. 47

The Code in no way prohibited women from obtaining an abortion. No importance was attributed to the woman's marital status. The few articles dedicated to the question deal with abortion as the direct result of a blow received by the woman and with abortion procured through the use of potions, drugs or other systems.

In both cases, even though there were precise references to the point in time in which the foetus begins to assume a human form (one-hundred days after conception), the foetus was considered pars viscerum matris until the end of the gestation period. Abortion was therefore not considered as murder. However, what was punishable was any harm brought to a woman. In this case the harm inflicted was comparable to a slight wound. As for abortions or premature births caused by a blow, the person found responsible was punished with eighty blows of heavy bamboo and two years' exile; exactly the same punishment reserved for those guilty of breaking a woman's rib. 48 This was what happened if the woman survived. If the woman died within a maximum period of fifty days, then the person responsible was sentenced to strangulation, regardless of the maturity of the foetus or of whether it survived or not. 49

Procuring an abortion was treated differently. As the Code did not contain any law specifically covering those who actually performed abortions, it is not really clear what law was applied in these cases. From an article in the Code it is possible to deduce that reference could be made to punishments reserved for pharmacists who, aware of the criminal intent of those purchasing certain drugs or potions, nonetheless sold these substances. 50 In this case it is obvious that it was not the aborting of the foetus that was punishable, but rather the ensuing death of the woman.

Another law that could be used for reference in these cases was the one which established punishment for those guilty of wounding a person on his or her own request: eighty blows of heavy bamboo if the person involved survived; one-hundred blows of heavy bamboo and life exile at a distance of three-thousand li if the person died. 51 This seems to be the law applied to those people who actually performed the abortion, as is demonstrated by the cases inserted in the code and in the (Conspectus of Penal Cases) Xingan huilan 刑案汇览. 52

In the case of adultery, the man found guilty of pressing the woman to abortion or who was simply aware of her intentions, was considered guilty to exactly the same extent as the person who actually performed the abortion. Yet, if he was unaware of the woman's intentions, he was simply punished as an adulterer. 53

In both cases it is clear that the legislator was only interested in the life of the woman involved and in providing sufficient protection for her. It is also interesting to note that the law was interested in the question of abortion only insofar as the pregnancy was the direct result of an adulterous relationship.

Merely examining the Code is obviously insufficient for a full understanding of the real social position of women in Imperial China. In fact, even if most laws can be seen as favourable to women, a woman could only have recourse to these laws if her family or husband reported any infractions of these Laws to the Authorities in her stead. A woman could go directly to a magistrate only if the crime in question was committed against the State, or if the crime was committed by a member of her own family. Taking legal action against a member of the family was extremely dangerous for a woman. In fact, she not only paid with her own life for false accusations brought against her husband or parents-in-law, but she could also be punished by the law even if her accusations were demonstrated to be founded and the accused found guilty. **

Translated from the Italian by: Salvatore Mele

CHINESE GLOSSARY

Bao Shuyun 鲍书芸

Da Qing lüli 大清律例

Da Qing lüli huitong xinzuan 大清律例会通新纂

Hu Bu 户部

Hu Yangshan 胡仰山

li里

ling chi 凌迟

Pan Wenfang 潘文肪

qianjian 强奸

Shanghai 上海

ShenZhiqi 沈之奇

Xingan huilan 刑案汇览

Xinjiang 新疆

Xu Jianquan 徐谏荃

Yao Yuxiang 姚雨芗

yijue 义绝

Zhao Fengjie 赵风喈

Zhongguo funü zai falü shang zhi diwei 中国妇女在法律上之地位

Zhu Qingqi 祝庆祺

TABLE 1: PUNISHMENTS AS ESTABLISHED IN THE DA QING LüLI (1740)

TABLE 2: PUNISHMENTS AS ESTABLISHED FOR HUSBANDS COMMITTING CRIMES

AGAINST WIFE OR CONCUBINE AND VICE VERSA；AND BY THE WIFE AGAINST

CONCUBINE AND VICE VERSA.

NOTES

** Revised reprint from: SCARPARI, Maurizio, Lo status giuridico della donna cinese nel periodo imperiale, in LANCIOTTI, Lionello, ed., "La donna nella Cina Imperiale e nella Cina repubblicana", Firenze, Leo S. Olschki, 1980, pp.79-94.

1My analysis shall be based exclusively on the Codes. I shall be referring only very generally to the better-known and more thoroughly researched aspects (for example, women and their relationships with parents, within marriage and in various forms of adoption, etc.). There are far too many works dealing with these elements for me to be able to list all of them. There are vast bibliographies that can be found in the more important studies.

Here I would like to cite at least one work which, albeit of great importance, is often unjustly overlooked: ZHAO Fengjie 赵风喈, Zhongguo funü zai falü shang zhi diwei 中国妇女在法律上之地位 (The Juridical Status of Chinese Women), Shanghai, 1928.

2What should be underlined here is the clan's fundamental and preponderant role. The clan was sometimes complementary, but often outright alternative to and substituted itself for the role exerted by the judicial apparatus.

See: HUI-CHEN Wang Liu, The Traditional Chinese Clan Rules, Locust Valley, New York, J. J. Augustin Incorporated Publisher, 1959; NOBURU, Niida, Chugoku hoseishi kenkyu (Researches in the History of Chinese Law), Tokyo, Toyobunka Kenkyujo, 1959-1962,4 vols., vol. 3, part. 2: Kazoku sonrakuho (Law of Family and Village), 1962 - For a detailed analysis of the norms governing clans and the relationship between clans and the judicial apparatus,

3JERNIGAN, T. R., China in Law and Commerce, New York, Macmillan & Co., 1905, p. 191 - For its translation.

4See: NOBURU, Niida, op. cit., vol.4: Ho to kanshu; Ho to dotoku (Law and Custom; Law and Morality), 1964, as well as the already-cited vol.3, part 2 - On the relationship between customary law and positive law.

Also see: VALK, Marius Hendrikus van der, Custom in Modern Chinese Private Law, "Monumenta Serica", S. Augustin/Germany, 1972-1973, pp. 220-258; McALEAVY, Henry, Certain Aspects of Chinese Customary Law in the Light of Japanese Scholarship, in "Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies", London, (17) 1955, pp. 535-547; SPRENKEL, Sybille van der, Legal Institutions in Manchu China. A Sociological Analysis, London, The Athlone Press - University of London,1971.

5BOULAIS, Guy, trans, Manuel du code chinois, Shanghai, Mission Catholique, 1923-1924, n.1703 [Reprint: Taipei, Chengwen Publishing Co., 1966].

See: Da Qing lüli大清律例 (The Penal Statutes and Regulations of the Great Qing Dynasty), in: YAO Yuxiang 姚雨芗, ed., (with original commentary by SHEN Zhiqi沈之奇 and added commentary by HU Yangshan 胡仰山), Da Qing lüli huitong xinzuan 大清律例会通新纂 (Comprehensive New Edition of the) (The Penal Statutes and Regulations of the Great Qing Dynasty), Peking, 1873 [Reprint: Taipei, Wenhai Publishing Co., 5 vols., 1964].

6BOULAIS, Guy, trans., op. cit., n.1698.

7Ibidem., ns. 1699, 1700 and 1702.

8It is possible to evaluate the severity of a crime simply by referring to the severity with which the Code punished the criminal. For this reason, I will always list the punishment established by the Code along with the crime itself. On the punishments implemented during the Qing Dynasty, See: BODDE, Derek - MORRIS, Clarence Law in Imperial China. Exemplified by 190 Ch'ing Dynasty Cases (Translated from the Hsing-an hui-lan). With Historical, Social, and Judicial Commentaries, (Harvard Studies in East Asiatic Law), Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1967, pp. 76-112; SCARPARI, Maurizio Alcune osservazioni sulla punizione ling ch'ih, "Cina", Rome, 14, 1978, pp.35-42. I have also provided a table (Table 1) containing the various punishments set out in the Da Qing lüli 大清律例.

The five punishments (wu xing 五刑) are: 1) Light bamboo (chi 苔) divided into 5 degrees, 10, 20, 30,40, 50 nominal blows, reduced to actual 4,5, 10,15, 20;

2) Heavy bamboo (zhang 杖) divided into 5 degrees 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 nominal blows, reduced to actual 20, 25, 30,35,40;

3) Penal servitude (tu 徒) divided into 5 standard degrees plus 3 supplemental degrees;

4) Life exile (qianxi 遷徒), divided into two sub-categories:

a) Life exile (liu 流) divided into 1 preliminary degree (qian xi life exile at a distance of 1,000 li 里, about 333 miles) and 3 standard degrees ->at a distance of 2,000 li 里 2,500 li 里, 3,000 li 里);

b) Military exile (chong jun 充军) divided into 5 standard degrees plus 1 supplemental degree: (fu jin)附近 "very near" -> 2,000 li 里, (jin bian) 近边 "nearby frontier" -> 2,500 li 里 (bian yuan) 充军 "distant frontier": 3,000 li 里 (ji bian 极边)"farthest frontier"->4,000 li 里 (yan zhang 烟障) "in a malarial region"-> 4,000 li 里 (fa qian 发迁) "deportation" -> life service as slave in a Manchu or other Tartar military post in northern Manchuria or western Xinjiang); 5) Death (si 死) divided into 5 degrees: Strangulation (jiao绞), after the assizes (jian hou 坚候); Decapitation (zhan 斩) after the assizes; Strangulation, immediate; Decapitation, immediate; Death (ling chi 凌迟), by slicing.

9BOULAIS, Guy, trans. op. cit., n. 1024.

10Ibidem., n.1401.

11Ibidem., n. 1419.

12Ibidem., n.1403.

13Ibidem., n.1421.

14Ibidem., n.1420.

15Ibidem., n.1403 and 1405.

16Ibidem., n.562.

17Ibidem., n.634.

18Ibidem., n.641.

See: TAI Yen-hui, Divorce in Traditional Chinese Law, in: BUXBAUM, David C., ed., "Chinese Family Law and Social Change in Historical and Comparative Perspective", Seattle - London, University of Washington Press, 1978, pp.75-106 - For the best study, not in Chinese, on divorce in Imperial China.

19TAI Yen-hui, op. cit., pp.91-94 - For a complete list.

20BOULAIS, Guy, trans., op. cit., n.637.

21TAI Yen-hui, op. cit., pp. 105-106.

22SHUZO, Shiga, Chugoku kazokuho no genri (Principles of Chinese Family Law), Tokyo, Sobunsha, 1967, pp. 175-179, quoted in MEIJER, M. J., Marriage Law and Policy in the Chinese People's Republic, Hong Kong, Hong Kong University Press, 1971, p. 11.

23BOULAIS, Guy, trans., op. cit., n.556.

24Ibidem., n.557.

25Ibidem., n.558.

26Ibidem., n.1584.

27Ibidem., ns. 1629 and 1630.

28Ibidem., n.1583.

29Ibidem., ns.1582 and 1594.

30Ibidem., n.1063.

31Ibidem., n.1065

32Ibidem., n.611.

33Ibidem., n.1332.

34Ibidem., n.1589.

35Ibidem., n.1332.

See BODDE, Derek- MORRIS, Clarence, op. cit., pp. 175-179 and pp. 517-533-On the use and role of analogy in Imperial Chinese Law.,

Also see: FU-Mei Chang Chen On Analogy in Ch'ing Law, in "Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies", Cambridge/Massachusetts, (30) 1970, pp.212-224; and FU-Mei Chang Chen, (the Review of the Bodde and Morris book), in "Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies", Cambridge/Massachusetts, (29) 1969, pp.274-284 - For a different treatment.

36BOULAIS, Guy, trans., op. cit., n.608.

37Ibidem., n.1075.

38Ibidem., n.1585.

39Ibidem., n.1661.

40Ibidem., n.1239.

41Ibidem., n.1429.

42Ibidem., n.1428.

43Ibidem., n.1430.

44Ibidem., n.1239.

45Ibidem., ns.1661 and 1238.

46Ibidem., ns.1609 and 1613.

47Ibidem., n.1612.

48Ibidem., n.1346.

49Ibidem., n.1360. The fifty day period was maintained until 1525, when it was changed to seventy days.

50Ibidem., n.1330.

51Ibidem., n.1576.

52Ibidem., ns.1578 and 1579.

Also see: ZHU Qingqi 祝庆祺 - BAO Shuyun 鲍书芸 (with a Supplement by PAN Wenfang潘文肪 - XU Jianquan 徐谏荃, suppl., Xingan huilan 刑案汇览 (Conspectus of Penal Cases), Shanghai, Tushu jicheng Publishing Co., 1886, chap.51, p.27a.

53BOULAIS, Guy, trans., op. cit., n. 1330.

*Director of the Sezione Sinologica (Sinological Section) and Vice-President of the Dipartamento di Studi Indologici ed Estremo-Orientali (Department of Indian and Far-Eastern Studies), in the Università degli Studi di Venezia (University of Venice), Venice, Italy. Professor of Classical Chinese. Member of Italian and European Associations of Sinology. Author of numerous articles and publications, including La concezione della natura umana in Confucio e Mencio (The Conception of Human Nature in Confucius and Mencius), 1991, and lntroduzione allo studio del cinese classico (Introduction to the Study of Classical Chinese), 1995.