On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

dialnet-ar-18-ART0001322284

dialnet

dialnet-ar-18-ART00013222842019-07-20On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in GayaKannowski, BerndThis 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.2016text (article)application/pdfhttps://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=5906124(Revista) ISSN 1619-4993Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History, ISSN 1619-4993, Nº 24, 2016, pags. 251-256engLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI

Dialnet

Dialnet AR

Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History, ISSN 1619-4993, Nº 24, 2016, pags. 251-256

English

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.

Article

Kannowski, Bernd

Kannowski, Bernd
On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

Kannowski, Bernd

Kannowski, Bernd

On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

On Legal Pluralism and Ghosts in the Sachsenspiegel and in Gaya

on legal pluralism and ghosts in the sachsenspiegel and in gaya

2016

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=5906124

1709749288069758976