Sealed letters

Sealed letters (璽書) in Themiclesia are documents issued by the monarch or a public official to exercise some form of authority. In the documentarian administration of Themiclesia, the letter is the primary vehicle by which authority is exercised; if an official is unable to issue letters, they were unable to exercise most, if not all, of their authority in a recognized way. There was an increasingly-elaborate body of rules that governed the issuance of letters, often to the end of authentication and elimination of errors.

Depending on the issuing authority, sealed letters have varying degrees of competences. Traditionally, the monarch's sealed letters are considered to have unrestricted competence, while a public official's sealed letters were considered to have the competence of that public official. A royal letter must have unrestricted competence since it is the way by which parliamentary statutes are made, under the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.

Etymology

The word sealed corresponds to the Shinasthana word sniq (璽), which is usually considered a causative reading of niq, meaning "wrap, bundle". A niq was used to keep long threads and yarns tidy, amongst other things. Ancient Themiclesians, like Mengheans, wrote on long strips of bamboo or wood, which were strung together and kept as a bundle with a string. Additionally, the word sniq could also have the meaning of "tie", which was accomplished by knotting the remaining string, thus closing the document.

Royal letters

Royal letters (公璽書) have the highest legal authority in Themiclesia and are considered to embody the monarch's unlimited, sovereign authority completely. The monarch's oral expressions, however they are worded, are considered to have no legal effect by the early 18th century, since they are open to doubt by individuals who did not hear the monarch.

In the early Medieval period (mid-3rd to mid-6th centuries), the monarch had a rather fluid function and sometimes concerned himself sometimes with minor tasks, issuing commands, for instance, to regulate the seasonal contents of his flowerbeds, while significant authority was sometimes delegated away with little apparent oversight. As government became more complex and expansive in Themiclesia, particularly after the Mreng Restoration in 542, the monarch needed to rely on the ideas and efforts of others but retain systematic control over them. These parallel and somewhat contradictory demands meant monarch rarely initiated letters but mostly responded to letters sent by officials; that is, most of the monarch's letters were rescripts rather than proclamations. Even in cases when no official would have a genuine initiative, for instance to grant money to an unimportant person who found royal favour in some way, such letters were still framed as rescripts.

The legal maxim "follow the words in the palace; follow the seal outside" (中聽言 外聽璽) was developed in the 7th century to regulate the manner in which royal commands are conveyed; it was hoped that by this way, even if a royal command by word were counterfeited, its effect would be restricted to the palace.

It seems, in most reigns, it was not typical for monarchs to respond by personally making an entry on a letter. This might be done occasionally for a particularly favoured sender or a royal relative, but such private letters were considered more personal than official, and so their contents may not be deemed enforceable if brought before an official. Instead, most of the time administrative letters were read or summarized by his barons-in-waiting (侍中徹矦), and his responses were also recorded by them. The task of sorting, drafting, and safekeeping the physical letters, was done separately by the secretaries (尚書), while the proofreading, opening, affixation of the monarch's seal and wrapping of the letters was done at yet another department, that of the royal tribune. There was thus need for a system of authentication that faithfully conserves the verbal remarks of the monarch as well as the context in which that remark was given.

The lengthy eschatocol of royal letters usually records the way a document was transmitted within the various offices in the palace and contains several features that permit authentication. Starting at least from 549, the normal arrangement for baron-attendants waiting on the monarch is for four of them to be present at the same time. One read the letter, one asked for his remark, and two recorded his responses simultaneously. After the day's business has been dispatched by the monarch, the two who recorded the responses reported them to the secretaries, who examined if the responses were the same and, if so, set them down on the letters' originals. The barons-in-waiting who recorded the responses then signed the originals; the two other barons-in-waiting subscribed their signatures, certifying that the response was accurately recorded.

The originals were then released to the tribunes, who, checking the barons' signatures against those on file, further endorsed the barons' signatures by printing their names next to the signatures. The original letter was checked against forgery by examining it against a copy of the original made when it was first opened by the tribunes; if the check was true, the response was set down on the copy as well.

The tribunes' endorsement was deemed necessary because they kept records of who entered and left the royal presence and were thus able to understand who actually saw the monarch on a given day. If a letter was forged by an individual who was not privy to the inner court, it would very likely have an incorrect list of barons-in-waiting, which could be checked against the record kept by the tribunes. The barons-in-waiting who waited upon the monarch were also chosen for the day by the Chancellor from the barons who were living in the capital city, since they were usually required to spend at least a few months there every year.

Unsealed letters

During the Pan-Septentrion War, the government asked the emperor to send letters to the front lines to signify his personal support. These letters did not pass the imperial seal and thus were not sealed letters in the legal sense and were not legal instruments.