Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T19:21:03.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Reinvention of Sharī‘a under the British Raj: In Search of Authenticity and Certainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2010

Elisa Giunchi
Get access

Abstract

Influenced by Orientalist assumptions and Utilitarian ideals, and needing to enforce a system of adjudication that responded to their interests, the East India Company's officers selected among varied religious texts a set of norms and tried to apply them consistently. The decision to rely on texts rather than practice, the choice of certain precepts at the expense of others, and their rigid application ran counter to the traditional administration of justice, which had been fluid, contextual, and plural. They also distorted the meaning of Hanafi fiḳh, turning what had been an instrument of legitimation, a moral reference, and a source of social standing into a system of organized dispute settlement. The emphasis on religious textual sources and the attempt to use them as a basis for codification coincided with the idea, which gained ground in the nineteenth century among Muslim reformist movements, that political weakness could be countered by returning to a pristine scripturalist Islam, focused on its legal aspects and seen as a systematic doctrine devoid of ambiguities. These ideas can be also found in the Islamist thought that subsequently spread among urban reformist movements and in legal reforms adopted in Pakistan. A review of case studies, however, suggests that the flexibility and contextuality that characterized the enforcement of Islamic law in precolonial Islam is still to be found in legal practice.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 69 , Issue 4 , November 2010 , pp. 1119 - 1142
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Abdur Rahim, M. A. 1911. The Principles of Muhammadan Jurisprudence according to the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali Schools. Lahore: PLD Publishers.Google Scholar
Abu Zayd, Nasr Hamid. 2006. Reformation of Islamic Thought: A Critical Historical Analysis. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Ahmad, M. B. n.d. The Judicial System of the Mughal Empire … Based Mainly on Cases Decided by Mughal Courts in India. Karachi: Pakistan Historical Society.Google Scholar
Ahmad, M. B. 1939. “An Outline of the System of the Administration of Justice under the Muslims of India between 1206–1750 ad.” Master's thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Akbar, Muhammad. 1984. The Administration of Justice by the Mughals. Lahore: M. Ashraf.Google Scholar
Ali, S. Ameer. 1929. Mahomedan Law Compiled from Authorities in the Original Arabic. 2 vols. Calcutta and Simla: Thacker, Spink and Co.Google Scholar
Anderson, Michael R. 1996. “Islamic Law and the Colonial Encounter in British India.” Occasional Paper no. 7, Women Living under Muslim Laws. http://www.wluml.org/node/5627 [accessed August 5, 2010].Google Scholar
Anderson, Michael R. 1999. “Legal Scholarship and the Politics of Islam in British India.” In Perspectives on Islamic Law, Justice, and Society, ed. Khare, R. S., 65–91. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Bayly, C. A. 1983. Rulers, Townsmen, and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion, 1770–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1843. “Essay on the Influence of Time and Place in Matters of Legislation.” In The Works of Jeremy Bentham, Published under the Superintendence of His Executor, John Bowring, vol. 1, chap. 5. Edinburgh: William Tait.Google Scholar
Bernier, Francois. 1826. Travels in the Mughal Empire. London: W. Pickering.Google Scholar
Bhattacharya, Neeladri. 1996. “Remaking Custom: The Discourse and Practice of Colonial Codification.” In Tradition, Dissent and Ideology: Essays in Honour of Romila Thapar, ed. Champakalakshmi, R. and Gopal, S., 20–51. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Breckenridge, Carol A., and van der Veer, Peter, eds. 1993. Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament: Perspectives on South Asia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Briggs, John, Trans. 1919. History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India till the Year a.d. 1612. Trans. from the original Persian of Mahomed Kasim Ferishta. Calcutta: Indian.Google Scholar
Bryce, James. 1914. The Ancient Roman Empire and the British Empire in India. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland H. 1964. Oriental Jones: A Biography of Sir William Jones, 1746–1794. Bombay: Asia Publishing House.Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland H. ed. 1970. The Letters of Sir William Jones. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Carusi, Evaristo. 1919. Il problema scientifico del diritto musulmano [The scientific problem of Muslim law]. Roma: Athenaeum.Google Scholar
Chaudhary, Muhamman Azam. 1999. Justice in Practice: Legal Ethnography of a Pakistani Punjabi Village. Karachi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cohn, Bernard S. 1996. Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Colebrooke, Thomas Edward. 1884. Life of the Honourable Mountstuart Elphinstone. 2 vols. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Derrett, J. Duncan. 1968. Religion, Law, and the State in India. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Fawcett, Charles. 1979. The First Century of British Justice in India: An Account of the Court of Judicature at Bombay, Established in 1672, and of Other Courts of Justice in Madras, Calcutta and Bombay, from 1661 to the Latter Part of the Eighteenth Century. Aalen: Scientia.Google Scholar
Fish, Jörg. 1983. Cheap Lives and Dear Limbs: The British Transformation of the Bengal Criminal Law, 1769–1817. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
Fyzee, Asaf Ali Asghar. 1955. Outlines of Muhammadan Law. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fyzee, Asaf Ali Asghar. 1963. “Muhammadan Law in India.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 5 (4): 401–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc. 1968. “The Displacement of Traditional Law in Modern India.” Journal of Social Issues 24 (4): 65–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmartin, David. 1988. “Customary Law and Shari'at in British Punjab.” In Shari'at and Ambiguity in South Asian Islam, ed. Ewing, Katherine P.43–62. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Giunchi, Elisa. 2005. “Ritorno alla sharī‘a e prassi sociale: i reati sessuali in Pakistan” [The return to sharī‘a and social praxis: Sexual crimes in Pakistan]. Sociologia del Diritto 1: 107–36.Google Scholar
Guha, Ranajit. 1997. Dominance without Hegemony: History and Power in Colonial India. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hallaq, Wael B. 1984. “Was the Gate of Ijtihad Closed?” International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 16 (1): 3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallaq, Wael B. 1997. A History of Islamic Legal Theories: An Introduction to Sunni usul al-fiqh. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, Charles, ed. 1870. Hedāya or Guide: A Commentary of the Mussalman Laws. Lahore: Popular Press.Google Scholar
Hassan, Syed Riazul. 1974. The Reconstruction of Legal Thought in Islam. Lahore: Law Publishing House.Google Scholar
Heer, Nicholas, ed. 1990. Islamic Law and Jurisprudence: Studies in Honour of Farhat H. Ziadeh. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Hidayatullah, M., and Hidayatullah, Arshad, eds. 1990. Mulla's Principles of Mahomedan Law. Bombay: N. M. Tripathi.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric. J., and Ranger, Terence, eds. 1992. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hussain, Abul. 1935. Muslim Law as Administered in British India. Calcutta: A. Hussain.Google Scholar
Jain, B. S. 1970. Administration of Justice in Seventeenth Century India. Delhi: Metropolitan.Google Scholar
Jones, M. E. Monckton. 1918. Warren Hastings in Bengal, 1772–1774. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kopf, David. 1969. British Orientalism and the Bengal Renaissance: The Dynamics of Indian Modernization, 1773–1835. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozlowski, Gregory C. 1985. Muslim Endowments and Society in British India. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kugle, Scott Alan. 2001. “Framed, Blamed and Renamed: The Recasting of Islamic Jurisprudence in Colonial South Asia.” Modern Asian Studies 35 (2): 257–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaulay, Thomas Babington. 1898. Complete Works of Thomas Babington Macaulay. London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Macnaghten, W. H. 1825. Principles and Precedents of Moohummudan Law Being a Compilation of Primary Rules Relative to the Doctrine of Inheritance, … Contract and Miscellaneous Subjects. Calcutta: Atheneum Press.Google Scholar
Mahmood, Tahir. 1982. The Muslim Law of India. Allahabad: Law Book Company.Google Scholar
Majeed, Javed. 1990. “James Mill's ‘The History of British India’ and Utilitarianism as a Rhetoric of Reform.” Modern Asian Studies 24 (2): 209–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manucci, Niccolas. 1907. Storia do Mogor: 1653–1708. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Marshall, Peter James. 1973. “Warren Hastings: A Scholar and a Patron.” In Statesmen, Scholars and Merchants: Essays in Eighteenth-Century History, ed. Anne Whitman, J. S. Bromley, and Dickinson, P. G. M., 242–62. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Peter James, and Williams, Glyndwr. 1982. The Great Map of Mankind: British Perceptions of the World in the Age of Enlightenment. London: Dent and Sons.Google Scholar
Mawdudi, Sayyid Abul A'la. 1960. Islamic Law and Constitution. Lahore: Islamic Publications.Google Scholar
Mawdudi, Sayyid Abul A'la. 1992. Purdah and the Status of Women in Islam. 7th ed.Lahore: Islamic Publications.Google Scholar
Mayer, A. E. 1990. “The Shari'ah: A Methodology or a Body of Substantive Rules?” In Islamic Law and Jurisprudence: Studies in Honour of Farhat H. Ziadeh, ed. Heer, N., 177–98. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Menski, Werner. 2003. Hindu Law beyond Tradition and Modernity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Misra, Bankey Bihari. 1959. The Central Administration of the East India Company, 1773–1834. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Monserrate, Anthony. 1922. The Commentary of Father Monserrate on His Journey to the Court of Akbar. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, S. N. 1968. Sir William Jones: A Study in Eighteenth-Century British Attitudes to India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nanji, Azim. 1988. “Shari'at and Haqiqat: Continuity and Synthesis in the Nizāri Ismai'ili Muslim Tradition.” In Sharī‘at and Ambiguity in South Asian Islam, ed. Ewing, Katherine P., 63–78. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Poonacha, Veena. 1996. “Redefining Gender Relationships: The Imprint of the Colonial State on the Coorg/Kodava Norms of Marriage and Sexuality.” In Social Reform, Sexuality and the State, ed. Patricia, Uberoi, 39–64. New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Raman, Kartik Kalyan. 1994. “Utilitarianism and the Criminal Law in Colonial India: A Study of the Practical Limits of Utilitarian Jurisprudence.” Modern Asian Studies 28 (4): 739–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roe, Thomas. 1732. “Sir Thomas Roe's Journal of His Voyages to the East Indies, and Observations during His Residence at the Mogul's Court, as Ambassador from King James the First of England, Taken from his Manuscripts.” In A Collection of Voyages and Travels, ed. Churchill, Awnsham and Churchill, John. London: John Walthoe.Google Scholar
Roy, Olivier. 2002. L'islam mondialisé [Globalized Islam]. Paris: Editions du Seuil.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, Edward W. 1993. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Sangar, Satya Prakash. 1967. Crime and Punishment in Mughal India. Delhi: Sterling.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Jadunath. 1920. Mughal Administration. Calcutta: M. C. Sarkar.Google Scholar
Schacht, Joseph. 1964. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sharma, Sri Ram. 1951. Mughal Government and Administration. Bombay: Hind Kitabs.Google Scholar
Singha, Radhika. 1998. A Despotism of Law: Crime and Justice in Early Colonial Rule. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skuy, David. 1998. “Macaulay and the Indian Penal Code of 1862: The Myth of the Inherent Superiority and Modernity of the English Legal System Compared to India's Legal System in the Nineteenth Century.” Modern Asian Studies 32 (3): 513–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, Eric. 1990. The English Utilitarians and India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Torri, Michelguglielmo. 1987. “Surat during the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century: What Kind of Social Order? A Rejoinder to Lakshmi Subramanian.” Modern Asian Studies 21 (4): 679–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tupper, C. L. 1881. Punjab Customary Law. A Selection from the Records of the Punjab Government. Vol. 1. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing.Google Scholar
Tyabji, Faiz Badruddin. 1919. Principles of Muhammadan Law. Calcutta: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Tyabji, Faiz Badruddin. 1940. Muhammadan Law: The Personal Law of Muslims. Bombay: N. M. Tripathi.Google Scholar
Washbrook, David A. 1981. “Law, State and Agrarian Society in Colonial India.” Modern Asian Studies 15 (3): 649–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. K. 1894. An Introduction to the Study of Anglo-Muhammadan Law. London: W. Thacker.Google Scholar
Yusuf, K. M. 1965. “The Judiciary in India under the Sultans of Delhi and the Mughal Emperors.” Indo-iranica 18 (4): 1–12.Google Scholar

Documents

East India. 1842. Copies of the Special Reports of the Indian Law Commissioners. School of Oriental and African Studies, London.Google Scholar
Government of Pakistan. 1948–54. Constituent Assembly (Legislature) of Pakistan Debates. Official Report, Karachi.Google Scholar
Woodman, J. V., ed. 1878. Digest of the Cases Reported in the Bengal Law Reports. Vols. 1–15 and Supplemental Volume of Full Bench Rulings. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink and Co.Google Scholar

Law Reports

Aga Mahomed Jaffer v. Koolsom Beebee (1897), 25 Cal. 9Google Scholar
Agha Ali Khan v. Altaf Hasan Khan (1892), 14 All., 429Google Scholar
Abdul Hussein v. Sona Dero (1917), 45 IA 10Google Scholar
Advocate general v. Jimba Bai and other, AIR 1915 Bombay 151Google Scholar
Ameer-on-nissa and others v. Moorad-on-nissa and others (1855), 6 MIA, 211Google Scholar
Ashrufood Dawlah Ahmed Hossein Khan Bahadoor and Wazeroon Nissa Begum v. Hyder Hossein Khan (1866), 11 MIA, 94Google Scholar
Aziz Bano v. Muhammad Ibrahim Husein (1925), 47 All., 823Google Scholar
Baqar Ali v. Anjuman (1902), 25 All., 236Google Scholar
Budansa Rowther and another v. Fatima Bi and others, AIR 1914 Madras 192Google Scholar
Dahyabhai Motiram Bhat and others v. Chunilal Kishoredan Andya and others, AIR 1914 Bombay 120Google Scholar
Khajah Hidayut Oollah v. Rai Jan Khanum (1844), 3 MIA, 295Google Scholar
Kusom Beebee v. Golam Hossein Cassim Arif (1905), 10 CWN. 449Google Scholar
Jan Mohamed Abdullah Datu and others v. Datu Jaffer and others, AIR 1914 Bombay 59Google Scholar
Jeswunt Sing-Jee Ubby Sing-Jee v. Chuter Sing-Jee Deep Sing-Jee Uby Sing-Jee (1844), 3 MIA, 245Google Scholar
Mirza Himmut Bahadoor v. Mussumut Sahebzadee Begum (1873), 1 IA 23Google Scholar
Moonshee Buzlar Ruheem v. Shumsoonnissa Begum and Jodonath Bose v. Shumsoonissa Begum (1867), 11 MIA, 551Google Scholar
Muhammad Ibrahim v. Altagan and others (1925), 47 All., 243Google Scholar
Narayanaswami Naidu v. Balijepalli Sundaramiah and others, AIR 1915 Madras 1127Google Scholar
Raj Bahadur v. Bishen Dayal (1882), 4 All., 343Google Scholar
Shakinallah K. V. Abdulla K. (1912), 15 IC, 939Google Scholar
Hazoor Bakhsh vs. the Federation of Pakistan and M. I. Chaudhry and others vs. the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, PLD 81 FSC 145Google Scholar
Federation of Pakistan vs. Hazoor Buhksh and two others, PLD 83 FSC 255Google Scholar
Muhammad Imtiaz and another v. the state, PLD 1981 FSC 308.Google Scholar
Muhammad Siddique and another v. the State, PLD 1983 FSC 173Google Scholar
Muhammad Ashraf v. the State, PLD 1981 FSC 323Google Scholar
Noor Khan v. Haq Nawaz and two others, PLD 1982 FSC 265Google Scholar
Muhammad Nawaz and others v. the State, PLD 1983 FSC 522Google Scholar
Zaheer-ud-Din v. the State, 1993 SCMR 1718Google Scholar
Aga Mahomed Jaffer v. Koolsom Beebee (1897), 25 Cal. 9Google Scholar
Agha Ali Khan v. Altaf Hasan Khan (1892), 14 All., 429Google Scholar
Abdul Hussein v. Sona Dero (1917), 45 IA 10Google Scholar
Advocate general v. Jimba Bai and other, AIR 1915 Bombay 151Google Scholar
Ameer-on-nissa and others v. Moorad-on-nissa and others (1855), 6 MIA, 211Google Scholar
Ashrufood Dawlah Ahmed Hossein Khan Bahadoor and Wazeroon Nissa Begum v. Hyder Hossein Khan (1866), 11 MIA, 94Google Scholar
Aziz Bano v. Muhammad Ibrahim Husein (1925), 47 All., 823Google Scholar
Baqar Ali v. Anjuman (1902), 25 All., 236Google Scholar
Budansa Rowther and another v. Fatima Bi and others, AIR 1914 Madras 192Google Scholar
Dahyabhai Motiram Bhat and others v. Chunilal Kishoredan Andya and others, AIR 1914 Bombay 120Google Scholar
Khajah Hidayut Oollah v. Rai Jan Khanum (1844), 3 MIA, 295Google Scholar
Kusom Beebee v. Golam Hossein Cassim Arif (1905), 10 CWN. 449Google Scholar
Jan Mohamed Abdullah Datu and others v. Datu Jaffer and others, AIR 1914 Bombay 59Google Scholar
Jeswunt Sing-Jee Ubby Sing-Jee v. Chuter Sing-Jee Deep Sing-Jee Uby Sing-Jee (1844), 3 MIA, 245Google Scholar
Mirza Himmut Bahadoor v. Mussumut Sahebzadee Begum (1873), 1 IA 23Google Scholar
Moonshee Buzlar Ruheem v. Shumsoonnissa Begum and Jodonath Bose v. Shumsoonissa Begum (1867), 11 MIA, 551Google Scholar
Muhammad Ibrahim v. Altagan and others (1925), 47 All., 243Google Scholar
Narayanaswami Naidu v. Balijepalli Sundaramiah and others, AIR 1915 Madras 1127Google Scholar
Raj Bahadur v. Bishen Dayal (1882), 4 All., 343Google Scholar
Shakinallah K. V. Abdulla K. (1912), 15 IC, 939Google Scholar
Hazoor Bakhsh vs. the Federation of Pakistan and M. I. Chaudhry and others vs. the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, PLD 81 FSC 145Google Scholar
Federation of Pakistan vs. Hazoor Buhksh and two others, PLD 83 FSC 255Google Scholar
Muhammad Imtiaz and another v. the state, PLD 1981 FSC 308.Google Scholar
Muhammad Siddique and another v. the State, PLD 1983 FSC 173Google Scholar
Muhammad Ashraf v. the State, PLD 1981 FSC 323Google Scholar
Noor Khan v. Haq Nawaz and two others, PLD 1982 FSC 265Google Scholar
Muhammad Nawaz and others v. the State, PLD 1983 FSC 522Google Scholar
Zaheer-ud-Din v. the State, 1993 SCMR 1718Google Scholar