| As the most fundamental order of society, legal order implys normol state of social relations by means of legal regulation. Because of the differences of ecnomic and social conditions, legal order of different eras and countries shows respective characteristics.Chinese traditional law flied its own colours with redard to spirit and system. The design of Chinese ancient legal law was also characteristic of cultural features. Based on the patriarchal society structure and patriarchal mentality, feudal rulers selected a"Li Fa Bing Yong" construction pattern of social order. Thus, social relations was changed into patriarchal relations by law and the line-like patriarchal order was formed. Chinese ancient legal order existed in the patriarchal society structure which centered on the family. Family systerm was the unique reflection of Chinese traditional society structure. Because of the patriarchal society systerm centering on the family, Chinese ancient society could not adopt the contract and law-ruling order construction pattern which depended on western individualism, but adopt the design principle of the order which adapted to both "country"and "family"in the theory. That is the social control pattern named as "Li Fa Bing Yong"and "De Zhu Xing Fu".Chinese anciect legal order formed by merging ethics into law under the control of politics. Pushed forward by the feudal rulers, as the aim and way of the order construction, political control and merging ethics into law effected each other and advanced mutually. Li was changed into laws by the power. Main society relations became patriarchal relations and the line-like patriarchal order formed.The legal regulations of Chinese ancient times consisted of statutory laws and family laws. The statutory laws were the main part of the feudal legal system. The family laws were applied broadly in the basic society. They coexisted and formed the feudal legal system.The distribution of right and obligation was one-way arrange. The main function of Chinese traditional law was not to protect the rights and interests of individuals, but... |