唐朝是官员丧葬制度的确立和成熟时期。唐玄宗朝的《开元礼》包括了官员丧礼和葬礼的全部仪节。唐初服制的数次编修都有皇帝的直接参与，这使服制的内容更加切合实际生活需要和统治者的要求，并且彰显了皇帝权威和皇室的正当性。《开元礼》官员丧葬礼基本都以官品定限。五品以上官员享受的丧葬礼，渊源虽自古礼，但有的部分是对古礼的综合和简化，有的部分则比古礼更详细。其中“敕使吊”条，不但可以在古礼中找到根据，而且对争议较多的部分进行了确定，提高了《开元礼》的威望和正统性。对于赠谥，朝廷的管理很严格，主要目的是提高皇帝权威。唐代官员丧葬礼、令的角色不同，《开元礼》官员丧葬礼是丧葬礼举行的大原则，而官员《丧葬令》的条文，则大部分是为执行官员凶礼的用物仪制所作的规定。两者可互为补充和参考。唐初开始厚葬较为普遍，而《丧葬令》按官品严格划分仪制，使朝廷各个机构能够有效地管理官员丧葬活动。唐代武则天、玄宗等皇帝不断扩大了与父母丧服有关的解官范围，并且将之全面制度化，以此作为制约官员的手段。《开元礼》中的官员丧葬礼的规定，参考了魏晋以来士人丧葬礼的内容，而重新加以整理和综合。敦煌卷子P.4024卷和S.1725卷书仪是士族制作的家庭礼制，书仪所载的丧服制度反映了当时士族的俗礼。《开元礼》吸收了书仪中的俗礼，皇帝试图用这样的方法扩大对官员士人的影响力。但书仪丧服和官员丧服之间的差距仍然存在。安史之乱引发其后政治、经济、社会的巨大变化，使《开元礼》的权威发生动摇，皇帝和朝廷不再具备调整和统一礼制的能力。因此官员和士人编撰的礼书明显增多。唐后期随着商品经济的发展，商人、工人、庶人不断试图模仿士人的礼仪生活，成为唐后期频繁发生庶人丧葬僭越现象的重要原因之一。但是官员不愿自己的特权被侵犯，不断控制丧葬用器的形制和数量。唐后期丧葬礼仪的中心从皇帝转移到了士人阶层。唐后期有些新的服纪，是士人书仪中先反映出来，之后在民间得到普及。唐前期书仪关于丧礼的主要内容在于对丧事的细致规定。《开元礼》编撰后，开元、天宝时期书仪的注重点则转移到了语言规范方面。但安史之乱后，官员丧葬礼、令均已失去其社会控制功能，士人书仪的俗礼取代了官员丧葬礼、令的功能。

It was in Tang Dynasty that official funeral and burial rites were established, developed and matured. All those rituals, ceremonies and other relevancies were introduced in the Kaiyuan Book of Rites, which was written and edited in the name of Emperor Tang Xuanzong. Personal involvements of three Emperors in the early editing and amendments of the Book made it more practical to practice and justified further the Emperors’ sovereignty.Since most funeral and burial rites in the Kaiyuan Book were defined by different official ranks, each official over the ninth grade could be included in the category and those high-ranking officials over the fifth grade were privileged with more elaborate prescriptions on the rituals and ceremonies. Though such rites had been originated from the ancient customs, yet some were synthesized or simplified and some were recorded with more detailed information and elaboration, such as the Chapter of Mourning on Provincial Governors. Its contents could not only be supported by the ancient practices, but settled those controversial parts by making them clarified, which helped much in establishing the whole Book’s authority and legitimacy. As to the posthumous title, the government had strict regulations on it and the reason behind this was to confirm the Emperor’s sovereignty. In Tang Dynasty, there were both the Rite and the Decree written on official funeral and burial services. The Rite was about the general principles and guidance on how to hold the services and the Decree was about the specific and detailed prescriptions on what might have been offered and used in the services. The two parts were taken for complements and references. Even from the Earlier Tang, people tended to hold the funeral and burial services more grandly. Such practices made the government declare the Decree to effectively manage and supervise the relevant activities according to the different official ranks.During the reign of Empress Wu Zetian, the problem of “more people for fewer positions” was becoming more and more severe. To alleviate it, one of the measures the government was taking was the official-dismissing system, which required those officials when their mother or father died to abandon their positions to observe mourning. Many emperors in Tang Dynasty invited the same solution and developed it as a matured policy to restrict or punish the officials concerned.The official funeral and burial rites enlisted in the Kaiyuan Book took the reference from and synthesized the common practices among the scholars from Wei and Jin Dynasty, which could be proved by those historical records from Mogao Caves, P.4024 and S.1725, of ancient scholars’ family letters on rites and manners. The emperors in Tang Dynasty invited the same custom to assert more influence over the officials and non-governmental scholars as well. However, there were still differences between the two. The cataclysmic An-Shi Rebellion not just brought about political, economic and social upheavals, but made the Book less authoritative and less administrative. The Emperors and the government could no longer unify and supervise the whole nation’s practice of rites. There appeared books on rites written by common officials and scholars. In Later Tang, with the growth of market economy, more businessmen, craftsmen and other common people liked imitating and following scholars’ ritual life and this was actually one of the reasons that led to the frequent misdoings and offending in common people’s funeral and burial practices. On the other hand, officials had the final decision on what might have been offered and used in the services and how many there might have been, since they hated to be imitated and offended. Thus, in the Later Tang, the focus of funeral and burial rites shifted from the Emperor to the scholars. It was from scholars’ practices that some new mourning customs first took shape and they then became popularized among the common people. Thus, it can be concluded that in the Earlier Tang, most records of funeral and burial services were about the detailed and informative prescriptions of the ceremonies; when the Kaiyuan Book was written and edited, it was emphasized more on how to use the appropriate language for the Rite; and after the An-Shi Rebellion, scholars’ practices gradually took the place of the official Rite and Decree to cast the guidance in managing the social life.