Within the traditional Chinese legal system, there was no “civil code” in the modern sense. The academic circle even produced an argument of “the unity of all laws and no distinction between civil and criminal matters” to support the view that traditional China lacked a civil code. However, throughout its millennia-long legal civilization, China developed numerous legal mechanisms for dispute resolution that fall within the conceptual domain of “civil law,” with its “contractual culture” being the most prominent. In the daily life of traditional China, contracts were ubiquitous in activities such as sales, loans, leases, partnerships, and inheritance. Honoring contracts was regarded as a lofty moral virtue. Behaviors like “breaking one’s word” or “breaching a contract” were considered “loss of face” for both individuals and organizations and were despised by the public. Contracts were used both in official and private contexts but were predominantly a feature of private dealings. They exhibited distinct characteristics of private law, with a pronounced function of self-governance, guided by the morality of good faith. Therefore, the existence of contractual practices in the absence of a “commercial code” serves as the primary reason why traditional China did not develop a formal systematic and officially promulgated “civil code” in the modern sense. Nevertheless, this should not be taken as proof positive that traditional China lacked rules of civil law.