The article continues the discussion of the issues raised in our article "Criminal laws of the Tang Dynasty on the discipline of officialdom"*. If in the first article the study was based on the prohibitive laws of the Tang Dynasty, then here, on the contrary, prescriptive laws of the same time are considered. The state sought, on the one hand, to block the undesirable behavior of an official, prohibiting him under penalty of certain actions, and on the other hand, to optimize the conditions of his activity and life, allowing him those actions that, generally speaking, were prohibited or simply could not be committed by members of other social groups and estates. Unlike commoners, who at that time could live almost all their lives (unless they joined the army) in their native places without leaving, the official was obliged, firstly, to constantly move from one place of service to another, and secondly, to periodically "recharge" with official zeal at palace events, in particular who had the opportunity to have direct contact with the emperor's special person. But when he left his family, he ran the risk of being a disrespectful son and a bad relative, and when he voluntarily left his place of service to visit the capital and the palace, he risked being an unscrupulous employee. To resolve these contradictions and introduce them into the optimal legal framework, a complex and sophisticated system of holidays and days off for officials was developed. It is interesting that, unlike other cultures, where the main share of non-working days was due to religious dates, in Confucianism, this share was determined by the motives of strengthening family ties and fulfilling kinship duties.
During the Tang Dynasty of China (618-907), there were four types of legislation. First, criminal, or, to put it more precisely, prohibitive regulations , i.e. prescriptions that actually list what should not be done, and establish the correspondence of undesirable actions to certain punishm ...
Read more