在2006年12月，中國大陸「天一閣博物館」與北京社會科學院聯合出版了《天一閣藏明鈔本天聖令校證附唐令復原研究》一書，被視為是中國中古史學界、中國法制史學界共同矚目的大事。雖然該書曾經經過北京社會科學院「天聖令整理課題組」的專精研究與整理，鄙意仍有不少值得商榷之處。
就以《天聖令‧捕亡令》的內容來看，本文針對兩大主題提出個人見解：在第一部份（關於《唐令‧捕亡令》復原問題）中，本文至少針對文字校勘、及條文編排次序上，提出些許修正意見；也針對〈捕亡令〉篇序的編排次第問題，提出由此可知《天聖令》極可能主要參考的是《開元七年令》而非《開元二十五年令》（這是與一般學界看法不同之處）；本文並針對〈捕亡令〉兩條令文的合宜性，提出質疑。
在第二部份（關於《天聖令‧捕亡令》中宋令修改或廢棄唐令的原因）中，本文主張《天聖令‧宋令‧捕亡令》無論是修改或廢棄唐令的令文，其主要原因均是因為唐、宋體制的不同，而這正是攸關「唐宋變革期」的重要課題，值得研究法制史、政治制度史的學者們多加注意－這更是《天聖令》此一新史料問世的最大價值所在。
On 2006, the publication of The Tiansheng Decrees reveals a new page of the research on the Chinese legal history. Although The Tiansheng Decrees has been thoroughly research, there still need to discuss.
In this research the author point out two opinions about the Tiansheng Decrees of Arrest and Fight. First is about reinstate the Tang Codes, author provides few opinions regarding proofread of the text and arrange the order of articles. Furthermore, the Tiansheng Decrees was based on the Kaiyuan Decrees which declared in 737 this is different opinion from other scholars who believe the Tiansheng Decrees was based on the Kaiyuan Decrees declared in 719.
Second, in the Tiansheng Decrees, no matter revised or abolish the Tang Decrees these were based on differences between the Tang and Song dynasties. It reflects the problem of the period of Innovation in Tang and Song Dynasties and should pay more attentions for and is the core value of the Tiansheng Decrees.
