Hispanopedia Wiki
Articulo de referencia

Anglo-Hindu law

Anglo-Hindu law is the case law that developed in British India , through the interpretation of the Hindu scriptures and customary law in the British courts. [ 1 ] The first pha...

Hispanopedia WikiContenido en espanolLectura gratuita

Anglo-Hindu law is the case law that developed in British India, through the interpretation of the Hindu scriptures and customary law in the British courts.[1]

The first phase of Anglo-Hindu law started in 1772,[2] and lasted till 1864, during which translations of ancient Indian texts along with textual interpretations provided by court-appointed Hindu Pandits were the basis of jurisprudence.[3] During the same period, the Anglo-Muslim law for Indian Muslims was similarly extracted from Quran with interpretation provided by Muslim Qadis.[4] The second phase of Anglo-Hindu law started in 1864, when the Hindu Pandits along with Muslim Qadis were dismissed due to growing inconsistencies in interpretation of texts and suspicions of corruption.[2][4] The existing case law, along with textbooks that systematised it, were used for jurisprudence.[3][5] The Anglo-Hindu law was also extended and modified by a series of Acts between 1828 and 1947, which were based on political consensus rather than religious texts.[6]

History

In 18th century, the British East India Company, which started out as an agent of the Mughal emperor, soon took over the political and administrative powers in India, it was faced with various state responsibilities such as legislative and judiciary functions.[3] The administration pursued a path of least resistance, relying upon co-opted local intermediaries that were mostly Muslims and some Hindus in various princely states.[7] The British exercised power by avoiding interference and adapting to law practices as explained by the local intermediaries.[8] The colonial state thus sustained what were essentially pre-colonial religious and political laws for resolving conflicts, well into the late nineteenth century.[3][7]

That in all suits regarding inheritance, marriage, caste and other religious usages or institutions, the law of the Koran with respect to Mahometans [Muslims], and those of the Shaster [Shastra] with respect to Gentoos [Hindus] shall be invariably be adhered to.

—Warren Hastings, August 15, 1772[1]

Para los musulmanes de la India, el código de la ley musulmana estaba fácilmente disponible en al-Hidaya y Fatawa-i Alamgiri, escritos bajo el patrocinio de Aurangzeb . Para los hindúes y otros no musulmanes, esta información no estaba disponible. [ 3 ] Los funcionarios coloniales británicos, en la práctica, intentaron extraer del Dharmaśāstra las categorías inglesas de derecho y religión para los fines de la administración colonial. [ 9 ] [ 10 ]

El período inicial del derecho anglo-hindú (1772-1828) se estructuró según las líneas de la práctica del derecho musulmán. Incluía fragmentos de derecho extraídos de un Dharmaśāstra por eruditos designados por los británicos (especialmente Sir William Jones , Henry Thomas Colebrooke , Sutherland y Borrodaile) de manera similar a al-Hidaya y Fatawa-i Alamgiri islámicos . [ 4 ] [ 11 ] [ 12 ] También incluía el uso de pandits judiciales en los tribunales británicos para ayudar a los jueces británicos en la interpretación de los Shastras, al igual que los Qadis (Maulavis) para la interpretación del derecho islámico. [ 4 ]

La llegada de William Bentinck como Gobernador General de la India británica en 1828 marcó un cambio hacia un código civil universal, cuya administración enfatizó la preferencia por la misma ley para todos los seres humanos, el individualismo y la igualdad de trato para ayudar a liberar, empoderar y poner fin a las prácticas sociales entre hindúes y musulmanes de la India que habían recibido mucha cobertura pública en Gran Bretaña a través de las publicaciones de misioneros cristianos e individuos como Thomas Macaulay . [ 13 ]

El gobernador general Dalhousie , en 1848, extendió esta tendencia y declaró su política de que la ley debía "tratar a todos los nativos de manera muy similar". Con el tiempo, entre 1828 y 1855, se aprobaron una serie de leyes del Parlamento británico para revisar las leyes anglo-hindúes y anglo-musulmanas, como las relativas al derecho a la conversión religiosa, el nuevo matrimonio de las viudas y el derecho a crear testamentos para la herencia. [ 13 ] En 1832, el gobierno colonial británico abolió la aceptación de fatwas religiosas como fuente de derecho. [ 14 ] En 1835, los británicos comenzaron a crear un código penal que codificaría el código penal existente, que era una mezcla compleja y conflictiva de leyes derivadas de textos musulmanes (Corán) y textos hindúes (Shastras), y este código penal común estuvo listo para 1855. [ 14 ] Estos cambios fueron bien recibidos por el movimiento de reforma del derecho hindú, pero se consideró que abrogaban las reglas definidas por la religión dentro del derecho musulmán. Los cambios provocaron descontento, llamamientos a la yihad y a la guerra religiosa, y fueron en parte responsables de la revuelta india de 1857 contra el dominio británico. [ 15 ] [ 16 ]

En 1864, tras la disolución de la Compañía Británica de las Indias Orientales y la incorporación formal de la India al Imperio Británico , el derecho anglo-hindú entró en una segunda fase (1864-1947), en la que los tribunales coloniales británicos en la India dependieron menos de los cadíes musulmanes y los pandits hindúes para determinar las leyes religiosas respectivas, y se basaron más en una ley escrita. [ 13 ] En 1864 se adoptó un código penal universal para la India, que se amplió para incluir un código procesal y comercial en 1882, el cual anuló las leyes anglo-hindúes y anglo-musulmanas preexistentes. [ 14 ] Sin embargo, las leyes personales para los musulmanes siguieron basándose en la sharia, mientras que el derecho anglo-hindú se promulgó independientemente de cualquier texto en asuntos como el matrimonio, el divorcio y la herencia, y abarcaba a todos los hindúes, jainistas, sijs y budistas de la India. [ 17 ] La corona británica promulgó la Ley de Matrimonio Cristiano Indio de 1872, que abarcaba las leyes de matrimonio, divorcio y pensión alimenticia para los cristianos indios de todas las denominaciones, excepto los católicos romanos. [ 18 ]

El desarrollo del pluralismo jurídico, es decir, la existencia de leyes separadas basadas en la religión de cada individuo, fue controvertido en la India desde sus inicios. [ 1 ]

Fuentes del derecho anglo-hindú

En 1910, John Mayne escribió que el derecho hindú clásico posee el linaje más antiguo de cualquier sistema jurídico conocido . [ 19 ] Mayne señaló que, si bien es antiguo, los textos contradictorios sobre casi todas las cuestiones presentan una gran dificultad para determinar qué era el derecho hindú clásico. A medida que surge más literatura, y se traduce o interpreta, Mayne observó que el conflicto entre los textos sobre cada asunto legal se ha multiplicado, y que existe una falta de consenso entre los juristas occidentales residentes en la India. [ 19 ]

Mayne y otros utilizaron el Smriti para extraer elementos del derecho anglo-hindú. [ 20 ] Sir William Jones tradujo el Manu Smriti al inglés, y fue en gran medida la base inicial del derecho anglo-hindú. [ 21 ]

Con el descubrimiento de nueva literatura, como el Naradasmriti y el Mitakshara , las discrepancias entre los smritis se volvieron difíciles de resolver. Autores posteriores asumieron que los smritis constituían un único cuerpo de leyes, donde una parte complementaba a la otra y cada parte era susceptible de ser conciliada con las demás. [ 22 ] [ 23 ] Las diferencias regionales en los textos complicaron aún más la situación. [ 24 ]

Resúmenes

Se elaboraron dos compendios bajo influencia europea. El Vivadarnava Setu fue compilado a petición de Warren Hastings y se conoce comúnmente como el Código Gentoo de Halhed. El Vivada Bhangarnava fue compilado a petición de Sir William Jones por Jagannatha Turkapunchanana y traducido por Henry Colebrooke. Se le conoce comúnmente como el Compendio de Jagannatha o el Compendio de Colebrooke. El Código Gentoo , en su traducción al inglés, es "inútil" [ 25 ] porque Halhed lo tradujo del persa, no del sánscrito. Este no fue el caso del Compendio de Colebrooke [ 26 ] .

El código y su desarrollo

El código jurídico hindú colonial abarca un extenso período de casi doscientos años, desde 1772 hasta 1947. Este período se puede dividir en dos fases principales. La primera fase, que comienza en 1772 y termina en 1864, se caracteriza por tres factores clave: las traducciones de los dharmasastras por parte de los eruditos administradores británicos, el uso de pandits judiciales para definir leyes y normas, y el surgimiento de la jurisprudencia. La segunda fase, que comienza en 1864 y termina en 1947, se caracteriza por la destitución de los pandits judiciales, el auge de los procesos legislativos y un sistema jurídico codificado. [ 27 ] [ 28 ]

Traducción de fuentes

Los británicos estaban convencidos de que todas las tradiciones indias se basaban en textos e ignoraban su significado consuetudinario. Además, creían que los diferentes comentarios e interpretaciones podían clasificarse sistemáticamente por escuela y región. Esto condujo a la «objetivación» de la India, donde la traducción del código legal indio facilitó aún más la colonización. [ 29 ] Los británicos seleccionaron arbitrariamente los códigos contradictorios de los textos antiguos para favorecer sus objetivos coloniales mediante la traducción. [ 30 ]

El plan de Warren Hastings de 1772 motivó a los británicos en la India a aprender sánscrito, ya que era necesario para gobernar Bengala. En el plan de Hastings, los indios debían regirse por principios indios, particularmente en lo relativo a la ley. [ 31 ] Esta colección de código legal, extraída de textos antiguos de la India, llegó a conocerse como derecho anglo-hindú. Hastings era consciente de que el derecho británico era demasiado técnico, complicado e inapropiado para las condiciones de la India. En 1774, Hastings escribió al Lord Presidente del Tribunal Supremo negando la idea de que la India estuviera gobernada únicamente por "voluntades arbitrarias, juicios sin instrucción o sus gobernantes temporales". Hastings confiaba en que los hindúes y otros habitantes originarios de la India conocían las leyes escritas, y que estas se encontraban en antiguos textos sánscritos. Inicialmente, ningún europeo en Calcuta sabía sánscrito, por lo que se contrató a pandits hindúes para la tarea. El texto sánscrito original se tradujo a una lengua local, que posteriormente se retradujo al inglés. Las cadenas de traducciones eran bastante comunes y afectaban negativamente el valor del texto original. La traducción, completada por NB Halhed , se publicó en 1776 con el título de A Code of Gentoo Laws ; or Ordinations of the Pundits . [ 32 ] El código se utilizó en los tribunales de la Compañía Británica de las Indias Orientales hasta principios del siglo XIX. [ 33 ]

El plan de Warren Hastings de 1772

Warren Hastings was appointed under a new act of Parliament, the East India Company Act 1772 (13 Geo. 3. c. 63), to the newly created position of governor-general and was instructed by the Court of Directors to stabilise the governance of the Bengal territories. Hastings' plan for the better administration of Bengal was centred on British officers being designated a "collector".[34] The collector would be assigned to a defined area (district) with provincial boundaries and would have mixed executive and judicial power in these areas. Hastings is a very significant figure in the realm of British Imperialism; he was the man who knew the natives and who was to represent the forces of law and order.

He maintained that the natives had an effective administration structure consonant with Indian theory and practice. Though it was clearly not based on European principles, he premised his plan on this notion. Unfortunately, during the fifty years leading up to Hastings' plan, the Bengali system had nearly collapsed. Fortunately, Hastings was more than qualified to essentially start anew. He had a European education and for the first fifteen years of his career, he was stationed near the court of the last effective provincial governors of Bengal. Hastings knew how an Indian state functioned and believed that it was the textual tradition that was relevant to developing British administrative institutions.

Hastings' plan called for two courts. One court dealt with revenue and civil litigation and was called the court of Dewani. The other court dealt with internal order and criminal law and was called the Faujdari court. The "collector", as mentioned above, acted as a judge as he established the facts in the case based on testimony, most commonly depositions from the witnesses, and the documentary evidence was put before the court. His assistant (dewan) and a pandit then found the law that was applicable to the case. Legal specialists, or law professors, interpreted the codes in the legal texts and provided authoritative decisions on the applicable codes. This was the basis for Anglo-Hindu case law. Hastings' was responsible for rejecting the despotic model of Indian law as he stressed the importance of utilising "Indian law" throughout his career.

Colebrooke's Two Schools of Law

Colebrooke was appointed to the East India Company in 1782. He was skilled at Sanskrit and developed his own conception of the nature and function of Hindu law. Colebrooke led the English in fixing an interpretation of variation in legal texts and this eventually became standard in the British courts in India. He suggested that regional variations or differences existed in India, leading to various interpretations of the same text.

The term "school of law" as it applies to legal opinions of India was first used by Colebrooke.[35] Colebrooke established only two schools that were marked by a vital difference of opinion: those who follow the Mitakshara and those who follow the Daya Bhaga.[36] The Daya Bhaga and the Mitakshara differ in the most vital points[37] because each applied different principles. First, the Daya Bhaga treated religious efficacy as the ruling canon in determining the order of succession, rejecting the preference of agnates to cognates. Secondly, the Daya Bhaga denies the doctrine that property is by birth, the cornerstone of the joint family system. Thirdly, the brothers of the joint family system in the Daya Bhaga recognize their right to dispose of their shares at their pleasure. Fourthly, the Daya Bhaga recognises the right of a widow to succeed her husband's share.[38]

Colebrooke's assumed that the commentaries on Hindu legal texts were the works of "lawyers, juriscouncils and lawgivers", and that these texts were actual law of India before the arrival of Islam, an assumption later scholars found as flawed.[39] Moreover, the British made a false analogy between Hindu law and Muslim law. The British were familiar with the latter, from other British colonies in Africa and the Middle East, as well as having initially worked as agents of the rulers of Mughal Empire. As a result, Colebrooke sought from Hindu texts and yielded a Hindu law to match what were thought of as the schools of Muslim law.[40]

In Colebrooke's view each school had fixed "doctrines" and English judges therefore needed access to the reasons and arguments by which each school supported their doctrine. When Indian scholars could not provide the texts that demonstrated this, European methods were used. After Jones announced that he intended to provide Hindus with their own laws through the mediation of English judges assisted by court appointed pandits, a legal code was in practice. The British sought consistency over time and this created a case law based on precedent.[41]

Jones' Digest

Sir William Jones was appointed judge in the Supreme Court of Calcutta in 1783. He had studied Persian and Arabic at Oxford and had published a number of translations. Additionally, Jones had an active political career and was a very influential figure of the time. After beginning his judicial career in India he found Halhed's code to be more curious than it was useful. Though he had no intention of ever learning Sanskrit, reacting to the defectiveness of the available translations, he became motivated to do so. By 1786, Jones' Sanskrit was good enough to decide between conflicting opinions of his pandits by reading the appropriate translation of the appropriate text. He was able to discern whose interpretation of the law was correct.[42]

Jones believed there was a fixed body of laws and codes that had been objects of corruption over time. He wanted to provide the British courts in India, the Crown and the East India Company with a basis on which decisions could be rendered consonant with a pure version of Hindu law. Thus, believed Jones, the Anglo-Hindu law could become consistent and fair.[43]

By 1787, Jones had created a plan for the administration of justice in India that reflected the Indian's own principles of jurisprudence. He envisioned a digest (translation completed by Colebrooke) complete with Hindu and Muslim law on the subjects of contracts and inheritances. Jones plan was to find and fix a Hindu civil law with the topics that affected the ownership and transmission of property.[44]

In 1788, Jones requested government support from his plan by reiterating to Cornwallis that it would establish a standard of justice with principles and rules accessible to the English. Cornwallis agreed, and from 1788 until his death in 1794 Jones devoted his time to what would become "The Digest of Hindu Law on Contracts and Successions". By the time of his death he had compiled the Digest in Sanskrit and Arabic and had begun translating them to English. Colebrooke completed the translation in 1797.[45]

Other Anglo-Hindu law manuals

The digests and manuals that followed Halhed's contained more substance and covered more topics of Hindu law, simply because scholars acquired more texts and regional language skills over time. Sir Thomas Strange was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Madras from 1801 to 1817. He, in 1825, published a manual of Hindu law.[46] Other sources on Hindu Law include:

  1. Mayne, John Dawson. 1906. A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage
  2. Aiyar, Nandivada R. Narasimha. 1893 The Principles of Hindu Law
  3. Stokes, Whitley. 1887. The Anglo-Indian Codes
  4. Grady, Standish Grove. 1871. A Manual of Hindu Law
  5. Strange, Thomas Andrew. 1830. Hindu Law (This is a unique text in so far as it addresses the opinions of the pandits in a question and answer format.)
  6. Coghlan, William Mant. 1876. An Epitome of Some Hindu Law Cases
  7. Rattigan, William Henry. 1871. Select Cases in Hindu Law Decided by Her Majesty's Privy Council and the Superior Courts in India

Case law

Hindu law was codified by the British in multiple ways: translation, case law, and enactment of various laws based on debate rather than texts. Legislation came to be the strongest source of law in India in so far as it held the highest jurisdiction when sources conflicted.[47][48] Examples include,

  • The Hindu Widow's Remarriage Act of 1856: Allowed widows to remarry in certain situations.
  • The Native Convert's Marriage Dissolution Act of 1866: Allowed for Hindus who had converted to Christianity to dissolve their marriage.
  • The Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929: Restricted marriages of children below a certain age.
  • The Hindu Married Women's Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance Act of 1944: Gave special rights to Hindu married women.

Timeline of Court System

  • 1726 - Charter by King George I
    • This is where the British judicial system in India began.
    • Made important changes to judicial administration in the three main Presidency towns of Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras.
  • 1772 - Plan for the Administration of Justice
    • Devised by General-Governor Warren Hastings
      • Hindu law is formally established as part of the British legal system administered in colonial India.
      • "In all suits regarding inheritance, marriage, caste and other religious usages or institutions, the laws of the Koran with respect to the Mohamedans and those of Shaster with respect to the Gentoos shall invariably be adhered to" (Sec. 27 of the Administration of Justice Regulation of 11 April 1980).
  • 1773 - The East India Company Regulating Act
    • Made provision to establish Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William at Calcutta, which would supersede the then prevalent judicial system.
  • 1774 March 26: the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William was established.
    • Supreme Court: had full power and authority to hear and determine all complaints against any of His Majesty's subjects for any crimes and also to entertain, hear and determine any suits or actions against any of His Majesty's subjects in Bengal, Biar, and Orissa.
  • 1780 - The Regulating Act
    • Important date because it ended the practice of applying English law to Hindus and Muslims. It required all judges to administer the Islamic and Hindu law. Before this, it was certain whether the judges would apply English or religious law in a particular case.
  • 1800 - Established Supreme Court of Madras under Charter issued by King George III
  • 1803 - Established Supreme Court of Bombay under Charter issued by King George III
    • Replaced the Recorder's Court
  • 1833 - The India Charter Act
    • Called for the creation of the Indian Law Commission, that would be composed of Hindu legal experts, appointed to identify various rules under Hinduism that could be applied to the laws and court system of British India. They were asked to make recommendations for how to consolidate or amend these laws in ways that would prevent gaps in the law.[49]
  • 1859 - The Code of Civil Procedure and the Law of Limitation
  • 1860 - The Penal Code
  • 1861 - The Code of Criminal Procedure
  • 1861 - The Indian High Court's Act
    • "Reorganised the then prevalent judicial system in the country by abolishing the Supreme Courts at Fort William, Madras, and Bombay, and also the then existing Sadar Adalats in the Presidency Towns. The High Courts were established having civil, criminal, admiralty, vice-admiralty, testimony, intestate, and matrimonial jurisdiction, as well as original and appellate jurisdiction."[50]
  • 1909 - Government of India Act
    • Allowed for Indian participation, albeit limited, in both provincially and central legislative councils. Important step because it allowed Indians, to have a bigger influence the laws that would be administered to Hindus.
  • 1935 - Government of India Act
    • Provisions were included for the establishment of a Federal Court, which was necessary in order to make judicial administrations in various provinces more competent between the governmental bodies themselves. This was an important step in unifying India. The Federal Court was a precursor to the Supreme Court of India, which was inaugurated in 1950.

The High Courts of British India

The three High Courts of Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras were established in the three Presidency towns by Letters Patent from Queen Victoria. Before the Indian High Courts Act of 1961, all three Presidencies had Supreme Courts that were in charge of administering justice. Several other High Courts were established during British rule such as the Allahabad High Court and Karnataka High Court, established in 1866 and 1884, respectively.

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council served as the highest court of appeals for Anglo-Hindu law and British Indian law. The Privy Council, located in London, did not only handle Indian appeal cases, its jurisdiction spanned throughout many parts of the British Empire. With regards to India, the Privy Council was successful at infusing English concepts and principles into the British Indian legal system and they thus became an integral part of Indian law.

The right of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council was retained after Indian independence, but terminated when the Abolition of Privy Council Jurisdiction Act 1949 came into force on 26 January 1950, when the Republic of India was declared. The Federal Court of India was replaced by the Supreme Court of India.

See also

References

  1. 123Rocher, Indian Response to Anglo-Hindu Law (1972).
  2. 12Rocher, Creation of Anglo-Hindu law (2010).
  3. 12345Davis, Historical overview of Hindu law (2010).
  4. 1234Anderson, Michael R. (1993), "Islamic Law and the Colonial Encounter in British India", in David Arnold; Peter G. Robb (eds.), Institutions and Ideologies: A SOAS South Asia Reader, Psychology Press, pp. 165–, ISBN 978-0-7007-0284-8
  5. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), pp. 74–75
  6. ↑Smith, India as a Secular State (1963), pp. 276–277.
  7. 12Washbrook, D. A. (1981). "Law, State and Agrarian Society in Colonial India". Modern Asian Studies. 15 (3): 649–721. doi:10.1017/s0026749x00008714. JSTOR 312295. S2CID 145176900.
  8. ↑Kugle, Scott Alan (May 2001). "Framed, Blamed and Renamed: The Recasting of Islamic Jurisprudence in Colonial South Asia". Modern Asian Studies. 35 (2). Cambridge University Press: 257–313. doi:10.1017/s0026749x01002013. JSTOR 313119. S2CID 146583562.
  9. ↑Rocher, Ludo (2012), "Hindu Law and Religion: Where to Draw the Line", in Donald R. Davis, Jr.; Richard W. Lariviere (eds.), The Nature of Hindu Law, Volume 1, pp. 83–102, doi:10.7135/UPO9780857285782.007, ISBN 9780857285782 also in Malik Ram Felicitation Volume. ed. S.A.J. Zaidi (New Delhi, 1972), 190–1.
  10. ↑ JDM Derrett, Religion, Law, and the State in India (Londres: Faber, 1968), 96; Para una distinción relacionada entre derecho religioso y secular en Dharmaśāstra , véase Lubin, Timothy (2007). "Castigo y expiación: dominios superpuestos en el derecho brahmánico". Indologica Taurinensia . 33 : 93–122 . SSRN 1084716 . 
  11. ↑ K Ewing (1988), Sharia y ambigüedad en el Islam del sur de Asia, University of California Press, ISBN 978-0520055759
  12. ↑ Compendio de la ley moohummudan sobre los temas a los que suelen aplicarla los tribunales británicos de justicia en la India. Neil Baillie, Smith, Elder & Co. Londres.
  13. 1 2 3 Rudolph, Susanne Hoeber; Rudolph, Lloyd I. (agosto de 2000). "Vivir con la diferencia en la India". The Political Quarterly . 71 (s1). Wiley: 20– 38. doi : 10.1111/1467-923X.71.s1.4 .
  14. 1 2 3 A.K. Giri en Costa, Pietro; Zolo, Danilo (2007), The Rule of Law History, Theory and Criticism , Springer Science & Business Media, pp. 596– 597, ISBN  978-1-4020-5745-8
  15. ↑ Llewellyn-Jones, Rosie (2007), El gran levantamiento en la India, 1857-58: historias no contadas, indias y británicas , Boydell & Brewer, págs. 111–112 , ISBN  978-1-84383-304-8
  16. ↑ Cook, David (23 de mayo de 2005), Entendiendo la yihad , University of California Press, págs. 80–83 , ISBN  978-0-520-93187-9
  17. ↑ Kunal Parker en Larson, Gerald James, ed. (2001), Religion and Personal Law in Secular India: A Call to Judgment , Indiana University Press, pp. 184–199 , ISBN  0-253-10868-3
  18. ↑ Mallampalli, Chandra (2004), Cristianos y vida pública en el sur de la India colonial, 1863-1937: Lidiando con la marginalidad , Routledge, pp. 59–64 , ISBN  978-1-134-35025-4
  19. 1 2 Mayne, Tratado sobre el derecho y las costumbres hindúes (1878) , Stevens and Hynes, Harvard Law Library Series, véase la sección del prefacio.
  20. ↑ Mayne, Tratado sobre la ley y las costumbres hindúes (1878) , Cap. 2, págs. 14-15
  21. ↑ Mayne, Tratado sobre la ley y las costumbres hindúes (1878) , Cap. 2, págs. 20-22
  22. ↑ Mayne, Tratado sobre la ley y las costumbres hindúes (1878) , Cap. 2, págs. 26-27
  23. ↑ Brown, Mackenzie (1953). Pensamiento político indio de Manu a Gandhi . University of California Press. pág. 164. 
  24. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 27-28
  25. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 33
  26. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 33-34
  27. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Introduction. pp. 5-6
  28. ↑Lariviere, Justices and Panditas: Some Ironies in the Hindu Legal Past
  29. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Foreword. pp. xv
  30. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 2. pp. 20-21
  31. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 2. pp. 26
  32. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), p. 66
  33. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 67
  34. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge 1996, p. 60.
  35. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 38
  36. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 38-39
  37. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. p. 40
  38. ↑Mayne, A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage (1878), Ch 2. pp. 40-41
  39. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 73
  40. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 74
  41. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3
  42. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 68
  43. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 69
  44. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 69-71
  45. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 70
  46. ↑Strange, Thomas Andrew. A Manual of Hindu Law on the Basis of Sir Thomas Strange
  47. ↑Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge (1996), Ch 3. pp. 71
  48. ↑Marc Galanter, Law and Society in Modern India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989)
  49. ↑Gilchrist, R.N. (1921). Principles of Political Science. Longmans, Green and Company. p. 201.
  50. ↑"GlobaLex - A Guide to India's Legal Research and Legal System". nyulawglobal.org. Retrieved 1 October 2014.

Sources

  • Cohn, Bernard S. (1996), Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-00043-3
  • Timothy Lubin; Donald R. Davis Jr.; Jayanth K. Krishnan, eds. (2010), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-139-49358-1
    • Davis, Donald R. (2010), "A historical overview of Hindu law", in Timothy Lubin; Donald R. Davis Jr.; Jayanth K. Krishnan (eds.), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, pp. 17–27, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511781674.005, ISBN 978-1-139-49358-1
    • Rocher, Rosane (2010), "The creation of Anglo-Hindu law", in Timothy Lubin; Donald R. Davis Jr.; Jayanth K. Krishnan (eds.), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, pp. 78–88, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511781674.008, ISBN 978-1-139-49358-1
  • Rocher, Ludo (July–September 1972). "Indian Response to Anglo-Hindu Law". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 92 (3): 419–424. doi:10.2307/600567. JSTOR 600567.
  • Smith, Donald Eugene (1963), India as a Secular State, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-1-4008-7778-2{{citation}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  • Mayne, John Dawson (1878). A Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage. Higginbatham.