摘要
光棍在今天除了指單身漢外，也容易令人聯想到流氓。在明代，光棍近于「無賴」，也指稱恐嚇詐欺之人。在清代，光棍的含義逐漸複雜。專門懲治光棍的「光棍例」是近幾年法史界的關注之一，但光棍例因旗下人犯罪而產生的滿洲特色，向較為學界所忽略。筆者認為，首先明代光棍事例發展的部分歷史原因與懲處權貴屬下人相關，到清代則適用于懲處滿洲旗下奴僕。再者，光棍例被適用在社會各階層的不安定分子，與雍正朝陸續制定援用光棍條例定罪條例相關，光棍擬斬在施刑上有極佳的時效性，可以較快的懲治擾亂秩序者。乾隆朝適用光棍例的條例更涉及對聚眾鬧事恐嚇、詐欺、強姦的定罪。大陸刑法的流氓罪，名義上借鑒蘇聯法律，但在實踐上很可能還存留著清代制定光棍條例的心態。
In the Ming Dynasty, “bare stick” meant “rogue” and cheater, but the meaning of “bare stick” gradually was be complicated in Qing. Recently academics presented high interest on “bare stick legislation” including of the developing history about the ordinance. However, researchers seldom notice “the Manchu feature” resulted from “bare stick legislation”. First of all, the making of “bare stick legislation” in Ming was used to punish the servants who were taken by the noblemen，but it was aimed the servants of Manchu Eight Banners in next dynasty. Furthermore, “bare stick legislation” was applied to the civil disorders with serious punishment after YongZheng reign. Until Qianlong reign, the legislations and cases which were adopted on “bare stick legislation” involved the crime of extortion, fraudulent, and rape. Generally, “bare stick legislation” had made historical influence on the offense of rogue in modern Criminal law in China.
關鍵詞
光棍例、流氓罪、旗下人、滿洲特色、恐嚇取財
bare stick legislation、hooliganism、the servants of Manchu Eight Banners、Manchu feature、extortion
