On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya
This paper reflects on legal pluralism. How did medieval societies incorporate both unwritten customs and written law at the same time? How did they constitute the process of finding justice? What is the essense of legal pluralism, and will it help us understand the situation of Taiwan’s indigenous...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2016
|
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=5906124 |
| Source: | Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History, ISSN 1619-4993, Nº 24, 2016, pags. 251-256 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
This paper reflects on legal pluralism. How did medieval societies incorporate both unwritten customs and written law at the same time? How did they constitute the process of finding justice? What is the essense of legal pluralism, and will it help us understand the situation of Taiwan’s indigenous population?
We aim to solve these problems by taking a closer look at medieval Saxony: for around 400 years, both laws given by the authorities and traditional customs in Saxony worked fine in parallel. The latter were put into writing by the legal practitioner Eike von Repgow around 1230 for reasons unknown. We refer to his collection of laws and customs of the Saxons as the Sachsenspiegel (»Mirror of Saxons«).
While Saxons certainly differed from Taiwan’s indigenous population for many reasons, such as the supposedly weaker egalitarianism among the Saxons than among at least some indigenous groups, the two show some remarkable similarities nonetheless. Just like the Taiwanese Gaya, the Sachsenspiegel’s spiritual origin raises the claim to validity. Furthermore, comparing the handling of a person’s sale of inherited property, the legal situations in the Sachsenspiegel and Taiwan’s unwritten customs resemble each other. The heir can transfer only property he acquired personally. Furthermore, the author discusses the different character of courts and procedure under oral law in contrast to written modern law.
Finally, the paper concludes with some remarks about a learned commentary on the Sachsenspiegel written around 1325, combined with an outlook on the possible future of Taiwanese customs. |
|---|