THE MITAKSARA BIRTHRIGHT: A COMPARATIVE STUDY IN THE
— — ■!— ■ - -f M U ... ...
LIGHT OF ANT 1C1PATED LEGISLATION IN INDIA
Ph.D. Thesis In Law, University of London
Submitted by:
ADITYA PRASAD MUKHOPADHYAY
School of Oriental and African Studies
In two volumes
V o l. I.
A u g u s t,1978.
ProQuest Number: 11015585
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The qu ality of this repro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t upon the q u ality of the copy subm itted.
In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u th o r did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be note d . Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved,
a n o te will in d ica te the deletion.
uest
ProQuest 11015585
Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C op yrig ht of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS
Adltya Prasad Mukhopadhyay
The Mltaksara Birthright: A Comparative Study In the Light of Anticipated Legislation In India.
This thesis Is primarily about the relevancy of the Mltaksara birthright, the pivot of the juridical Hindu joint fam ily, In the context of codification of a uniform C iv il Code or Code of Family Law In India. It also represents an enquiry Into the origination of the concept and a study of It In Its historical and compara
tive perspective. The comparative framework of the thesis shows that a Hindu legal Institution, which governs about one-sixth of the human race, may stand comparison with the Institutions of any system with which It Is like ly to be com
pared. In compliance with the progress of social science, the study of law Is heading towards an Inter-disciplinary approach, and In the present study atten
tion Is also focussed on the operation and veritable social role o f the juridical concept of join t fam ily. Contemporary attempts at creating a uniform world law have come Into the foreground, prompted basically by socio-economic changes throughout the w orld. In the context of this global unification move
ment, the present study Indicates that any viable attempt to reform, modernise and unify the personal laws (e .g . Hindu law) In India deserves a comparative awareness of other legal systems of the world, past and present.
Chapter 1 deals, generally, with the justification of a comparative study of Hindu law with other legal systems. The chapter also explains the scope, purpose and methods adopted In the present study.
Chapter 2 deals broadly with the proprietary concepts In Roman family law and examines particularly the hypothesis that the Institution of join t family existed In pre-classlcal Rome.
Chapter 3 deals with the proprietary relationship existing between male ascendants and descendants In ancient Greek, Albanian and South Slavonian laws.
Cbapter 4 Is a study of the ancient C eltic fam ilial Institutions and an explora
tion of the Identical Hindu and C eltic juridical concepts In respect of ownership o f property.
Chapter 5 examines the soctal and juridical relationships In Germanic law, particularly a son's position In the Germanic scheme of Inheritance.
Chapter 6 Is a comparative appraisal of Babylonian, Assyrian, Elamite and H lttlte laws relative to the son's right In family property.
Chapter 7 Is an attempt to focus attention on those aspects of Jewish law which cla rify the son's position In relation to property In the hands of his father.
Chapter 8 Is a discussion of the points of sim ilarity and difference between Sasanlan and Hindu fam ilial Institutions.
Chapter 9 Is an attempt to make a rapid survey of the nature of ownership of family property In Farther India (part of South and South-East Asia) seeking out Its origins In the Hindu system.
Chapter 10 deals with the relevant comparable Institutions of the Chinese and Japanese systems In the context of our present study.
Chapter 11 discusses the corporate rights In ownership of property In African customary law, In comparison w lih the Mltaksara system.
Chapter 12 Is an attempt to explore the origin o f the concept of birthright In the pre-dharmasastra and dharmasastra literature.
Chapter 13 Is an examination of the treatment and development of the concept of birthright In early mediaeval Hindu commentatorlal literature.
Chapter 14 examines the juridical attitude of the late mediaeval commentators and also of the 17th century logicians towards Vljncne^vara's theory of birthright.
Chapter 15 Is a c ritic a l assessment of the concept of co-ownership between father and son In Vlvadarnava-setu (The Code of Gentoo Laws) and Vlvada-bhangarnava (Colebrooke^ Digest).
Chapter 16 Is an exploration of the meaning of co-ownership of father and son In the vyavastha (opinions of court pandits) literature. In this respect, the Chapter also Includes the juridical vyavastha works.
Chapter 17 deals with the extent of a father's power of disposition of family property. Four main areas are discussed: right of preemption, testa
mentary power, alienation of self-acquired Immovables and right of merger or blending.
Chapter 18 examines the rights of different kinds of sons relating to the concept of birthright. The rights of two types of son, namely, those of the Ille gitimate son (Including sudra's daslputra) and the adopted son, are dis
cussed In d e ta il.
Chapter 19 deals with the extent of birthright In Anglo-Hlndu law In different types of property, namely, joint fam ily property, self-acquired property and property Inherited from the maternal grandfather.
Chapter 20 deals with birthright and a son's right to demand partition of family property under various circumstances.
Chapter 21 examines the relevancy of birthright In the light of contemporary socio-economic developments. Although statistical material regarding the number of joint and nucbar families to be found In different regions In India has been quoted, the significance of this must not be overstressed;
such figures were Intended to act as Indicators and not as absolute guides.
The Chapter highlights the anomalies and uncertainties arising out of the relevant provisions o f the Hindu Succession A c t, 1956. Also discussed are the advantages and disadvantages of the joint fam ily system, and the findings Indicate that the sociological jo in t fam ily w ill not necessarily wither away with the abolition of the juridical joint fam ily. It Is pointed out that the shifting of values within the fam ilial organisation depends on multiple factors, v iz ., changes In social philosophy; profound transform
ation In the economic status of the family through statutory enactments, e .g . land reform, revenue laws, e tc .; modern scientific and medical developments which make birth control and fam ily planning possible;
and growing claims of the State on the fam ily, without, of course, assum
ing any visible or substantial responsibility towards the fam ily.
Chapter 22 deals with the peculiarities and gradual disintegration of the Malabar joint fam ily. The Chapter also discusses the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) A c t, 1975, A c t 30 of 1976.
Chapter 23: The last Cfnpter reminds us of and attempts to answer the problem posed at the beginning o f the Thesis. The Chapter concludes that the Mltaksara birthright should be abolished by Parliament and In that respect, and by way of recommendation, sets out a proposed b ill. Lastly, the Chapter goes Into the crux of the problem by pointing out the typical orthodox arguments of the religious groups against reform of personal laws, and emphasises the need for a rational and humane attitude towards reform of family laws for a modern nation committed to secularism and modernity.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My first responsibility (and, of course, this Is not my first opportunity) Is to thank Professor J. Duncan M . Derrett who supervised this thesis. His teach Ing and works on Hindu law and other legal systems helped me Immensely. His unfailing and patient guidance was of great encouragement to me and acquainted me thoroughly with many unfamiliar branches of legal science. Equally, I must thank Professor J .A .C . Thomas who was kind enough to give me many helpful references and to share his knowledge of Roman law, a subject vita l to any piece of comparative research. I am also grateful to the following for the help that they have rendered to me from time to time: Professor Mary Boyce, who was kind enough to read and comment on Chapter V III on Sasanlan law; Professor R.F.
W illetts who discussed some aspects of the Gortyn Code with me; Pandit J .V . Josh! who shared his opinions on some texts of the Mltaksara; Professor A .C . Mayer for putting som e of his valuable works on India at my disposal; and Professor J .C . W right for having made available to me the facilities of the India Department, S .O .A .S . My thanks are due to D r. Doreen Hlnchcllffe and Dr. H .F . Morris, my two tutors, for their pastoral concern and direction.
A special debt Is owed to Dr. Helen Kanltkar for having Introduced me to the field of social anthropology, for her valuable comments on my chapters and for translating the French materials which I used. I would like to express thanks to Dr. Margaret Derrett for her continued Interest In my work and for her encouragement.
If I were to thank my friends and colleagues at S .O .A .S . the list would be exceedingly long. But I must thank M r. L. Tucker, M r. S. Deshmukh and D r. Rajeev Dhavan, whose academic pursuits and friendship were always In
spiring. Then I must thank Miss Mora Corcoran for helping me In preparing the Tab le of Cases.
It remains for me to express thanks to the staff o f the S .O .A .S . library who made research such a pleasure. Acknowledgement must also be given to the officia ls, librarians and assistants of the following Institutions who were exceedingly helpful: Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, British Museum, India O ffice Library^ University of London Library Senate House, Institute of Historical Research, Institute of Classical Studies, Institute of Archaeology, Bodleian Library Oxford, Watson Library UC, Middle Temple,
University College of Law,Calcutta,and the Indian Law Institute, New D elhi.
I also thank Mrs. M .R. Baker for a particularly accurate and elegant typing of this Thesis.
Last, but not least, I must thank the members of my family who were always patient and did not mind too much having a studying, rather than earning member.
ABBREVIATIONS
AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research
A & N Assam and Naga land
ABAJ Amertcan Bar Association Journal
ABOR1 Annals of the Blandarkar Oriental Research Institute (Poona)
AC Appeal Cases
Adyar L ib . B u ll. Adyar Library Bulletin A t .A . or A l.A r . Attareya-aranyaka
A t.B r. Altareya-brahmana
AIR A ll India Reporter (Nagpur)
AL Drtver and M iles, Assyrian Laws
ALI Ancient Laws of Ireland
ALIW Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales
A ll. Allahabad
A l l. E.R. A ll England Reports Am • A n . or Am . American AnthropologTst
Anthropologist
A m .J . A rch. American Journal of Archaeology A m .J . of Comp.L. American Journal of Comparative Law
A n. W.R. Andhra Weekly Reporter
AOR Annals of Oriental Research (Madras)
A .P . Andhra Pradesh
Apastamba Apastamba-dharma-sutra
Arkansas L.R . Arkansas Law Revtew
A .R .P . Diary The Dtary of Ananda Rangam PTllaT
Arthas^ Arthasastra
A .S .S u . Apastamba Srautra Sutra
Ass. Assam
AV Atharva-veda
BASOR Bulletin of the Amertcan Schoobof O riental Research
BHCR Bombay High Court Reports
B .K . Baba Kama
BL Babylonian Laws
BLJ Benares Law Journal
BLIJ Burma Law Institute Journal
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (London)
Babyl. Babylonian
Bau.dh.su. Baudhayana-dharma -sutra
Beng.L.R. or BLR Bengal Law Reports
Bharucl Derrett, e d ., t r . , Bharucl*s Manu-sastra-vlvarana Bib I. Ind. Blbllotheca I ndlea Series
Bom • Bombay
Bom .L.R . Bombay Law Reporter
Br. Brhaspatl-smrtl
Br.su.
B r.U .
•
CH CLI C .Q . C .W .N . C a l.
C a ltf. L . Rev.
Camb. L .J . C ha.u.
C o I.L . Rev.
Crlttque
DJL
D . K ,S . or Da. Ka .S ari.
D .T . DVS Da.bha.
Da .m l.
Deut.
D h .K .
Brahma sutra
Brhadaranyaka-upantsad
Code of Hammurabt
R. Llngat, tr . Derrett, Classical Law of Indta Classtcal Quarterly
Calcutta Weekly Notes Ca Icutta
CalTfornta Law RevTew Cambrtdge Law Journal Chandogya Upantsad CoIumbTa Law Revtew
Derrett, A CrTttque of Modern HTndu Law.
Derrett, Dharmasastra and JurTdtcal Literature Dayakarma-sarlgraha
Dayatatta
S. Jhay Dharmasastrtya Vyavastha Sarigraha Dayabhaga
Dattaka-mTmamsa Deuteronomy
L.S . Josht's Dharmakosa, Vyavahara-kanda (3 vols. continuous pagination)
EH I H.S. Maine, Lectures on the Early History of Institutions
EHJFI G .D . Sonthelmer, Evolution of Hindu Joint Family as an Institution
ELC H .S. Maine, Dissertations on Early Law and Custom En.So.Sc. Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences
Eng .Rep. English Reports
B.C. or Ep. C a m . Epigraphia Carnatica
Er. Erubln
Ex. Exodus
F.B. Full Bench
FEQ Far Eastern Quarterly
GPHJ P .N . Sen, General Principles of Hindu Jurisprudence
Garuda Pu. Garuda Purana
Gautama Gautama-dharma-sutra
G e n . Genesis
G o .B r. Gopatha-brahmana
HAMA Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance A ct
Harv.L.Rev. Harvard Law Review
HD P .V . Kane, History of Dharmasastra
HISRL Jolowlcz, Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law
HLS G . Jha, Hindu Law In Its Sources
HMA Hindu Marriage Act
H .P . Himachal Pradesh
HSA Hindu Succession Act
I.A . Law Reports, Indian Appeals Series.
IAQR Imperial and Aslattc Quarterly Review
I.C . Indian Cases
ICLQ International and Comparative Law Quarterly
ID OS Indian Decisions Old Series
I IL L . Rev. Illinois Law Review
ILS Derrett, e d ., Introduction to Legal Systems IMHL Derrett, Introduction to Modern Hindu Law
I . O .L . India O ffice Library
J . or Jn l. Journal Section
J & K Jammu and Kashmir
JAL Journal of African Law
JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society
JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society
JAS Journal of Aslan Studies
JBRS Journal of the Burma Research Society
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies
JESHO Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient
JIH Journal of Indian History
JILI Journal of the Indian Law Institute
JIS Journal of Indo-European Studies
JKRCOI Journal of the K.R. Cama Oriental Institute
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JRAI Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
JSS Journal of the Slam Society or Journal of Semetlc Studies
Jal.B r. Jalmlnlya-brahmana
Jer • Jeremiah
KLT Kerala Law Times
Katy. Katyayana
Kau.Up. or K .U . Kausltakl Upanlsad
Ker. Kera la
K nt. Karnatak
Krtyakal Laksmldhara*s Krtyakalpataru
Kurma. Pu. Kurma Purana
«
L .Q . Rev. Law Quarterly Review
L .U . London University
Lev. Leviticus
Luck. Lucknow
M .Bh. Mahabharata
MHCR Madras HTgh Court Reports
M IA Mooreks Indian Appeals
MLJ Madras Law Journal
MNT Mlahanlrvana-tantra
M .P . Madana-parljata or Madhya Pradesh
MR1 or MRIHL K .L . Sarkar, Mlman sa Rules of Interpretation Applied to Hindu Law
M .R .P . Madana-ratna-pradlpa
M ad. Madras
Manu Manu-smrtl
M ark. Pu. Markandeya Purana
Medh. Medhatlthl
M ich. L.Rev. Michigan Law Review
M lta . Mltaksara
Mys. Mysore
Mys. L .J . Mysore Law Journal
NOC Notes of Cases
n.s. New Series
N .W .P . North Western Provinces
N ag. Nagpur
Nag. L.R . Nagpur Law Reports
Narada Narada-smrtl«
M u. Numbers
O .H . Our Herttage (Calcutta)
OHJ P. Vlnogradoff, Outlines of HTstortcal Jurisprudence
OL Orlentallstlsche Llteraturzeltung
O r. Orissa or Orlentalta
PC Privy Council
PCR Privy Council Reports
PLD A ll Pakistan Legal Decisions
P .M . Parasara-madhavtya
P.R. Punjab Record
Pan. Br. Pancavlmsa-brahmana• •
Para or Pr. Paragraph
Pat. Patna
Prov. Proverbs
Pu. Purana
Punj. Punjab
qu. quoted
Rabels Z Rabels Zeltschrlft, Formerly Zeltschrlft fdJr auslandlsches und lnternatlonles Prlvatrecht RAL Rubin and Cotran, ed. , Readings In African Law
R .K. Radhakrlshnan, Sarvapalll
rr
x tv .
RLSI Derrett, Re ITgTon, Law and the State Tn IndTa
R .T. RajatarhgTnT
R .V . Rg-veda
✓ / „
Sat.Br. Satapatha-brahmana
San.Br. Sarikhayana-brahmana
SBE Sacred Books of the East (Oxford)
SC Supreme Court or SmrtT-candrTka
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SCJ Supreme Court Journal
SCR Supreme Court Reports
SCWR Supreme Court Weekly Reporter
SDA Sadr DTwant Adalat (avaT)able Tn orTgTnal edTtTon or the IndTan DecTsTons (O .S .) Select Reports reprTnt)
Set .Rep. Select Reports
SmrtT c h . SmrtT-candrTka
Spec. Legg. PhTlo*s De SpecTalTbus LegTbus Suth. W.R. Sutherlandks Weekly Reporter
S .V . SarasvatT-vTlasa
Sva.ra. S/atva-rahasyam
Sva. vT. S vatva -vTcara
TaT.A. TaTttTrTya-aranyaka
TaT.Br. TaTttTrTya-brahmana
Tat .Sam. TaTtttrtya-samhtta
TASJ TransactTons o f the Astattc SocTety of Japan
T .C . Travancore-Cochtn
TLL Tagore Law Lectures
T tt. Tttle
T r. Translated by
Trav. L .R. Travancore Law Reports
UCR Untverstty of Ceylon Revtew
UNESCO Untted Nattons Educational, SctentTftc and Cultural Organtsatton
US Untted States Supreme Court Reports
U. of Ch.L.R ev. Untverstty of Chtcago Law Revtew U. of Penn.L.Rev. Untverstty of Pennsylvanta Law Revtew
v . Verse
V a r. Vartant readtng
VasTstha * • Vasts tha-dharma-sutra* •
V.bhjrig. Vtvadabhangarnava
V t .C a. V Tvada-candra
V t.C t. Vtvada-ctntamagt
V IJ Vtsvesvaranand Indological Journal
V tjn .
V t. M t. o r V .M . Vt.Ra . o r V . R . V .Setu
Vtsnu • • Vtsnu Pu.
V y . V y .C h t.
V y .M a . V y .N t.
W .R. see Suth. W.R.
Wts. L . Rev.
Y ajft.
Z .A . ZD MG
ZVR or Z .f.v e rg l.
Rechtsw.
Vtjnanesvara Vtramttrodaya Vtvada-ratnakara Vtvadarnava-setu V tsn u- dh arma- su t ra Vtsnu Purana
Vyavahara
Vyavahara-ctntamant Vyavahara-mayukha
Vara daraja%s Vyavahara-ntrnaya
Wtsconstn Law Revtew
Yajnavalkya
Zend Avesta
Zettschrtft der deutschen morgenIchdtschen Ges eflschaft Zettschrtft f(Jr vergletchende Rechtswtssenschaft
x v ll.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
V O L . 1: Page
ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS t - Ttt.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Tv - v .
NOTES O N ABBREVIATIONS vT - x v t.
CHAPTER 1: THE HISTORICAL AND COMPARATIVE BACKGROUND 1 - 19.
I: Introduction 1 - 3 .
II: The Htndus and the Indo-Europeans 3 - 7 .
Il l: Htndu Law: Case for compartson 7 - 1 3 .
IV: Our Theme: The Mttaksara BtrthrTght 1 3 - 1 6 .
V: Method and Scope of Our Study 16 - 19.
CHAPTER 2: ROMAN LAW 20 - 74
I: The Historical Setttng 20 - 21.
II: Reconstruction of the pre-Classtcal Roman Familial
Institutions 21 - 3 2 .
a. Non-legal matertals 22 - 24.
b . Juridical value of Plutarch's evidences 24 - 27.
c . Plutarch vis-a-vis the legal sources 27 - 29.
d • Compulsory heirship (heredes necessarll) 29 - 32.
Il l: Dtshertson (exheredatlo) and W ill 33 - 4 0 .
a. Acts of Testament 33 - 3 5 .
(t) testamentum calatls comltlls 33 - 3 4 .
!
x v ttt •
Page Nos.
(Tt) testamentum Tn proctnctu 34.
(TTT) testamentum per aes et llbram 34 - 35.
b . Texts on the concept of *Wt!l* Tn the
Twelve Tables 35 - 38.
c . DTsherTson of sons 3 9 - 4 0 .
IV: Indo-European FamTly and Roman FamTly 40 - 47,
a . The general pattern of Indo-European famTly 40.
b . ContrTbutTon of Henry MaTne 41 - 4 2 ,
c . Re-appraTsal of Maine's vTews 42 - 4 7 .
V . Pre-cIassTcal Roman FamTly 47 - 62.
a . The Indo-European hypothesTs 47 - 4 8 .
b. Crook's objections 48.
c . A revTew of Crook's objectTons 50 - 54.
d . ContTnuatTon of C rooks hypothesTs 54.
e . MacCormack's observations 54 - 55.
f . RevTew of the above two arguments 55 - 56.
g. MacCormack's study of Indo-European families 56.
h . RevTew of MacCormack's study of Indo-European
famTlTes 56 - 5 7 .
T. A general revTew of MacCormack's study 5 7 - 6 0 .
j . Gens 60 - 62.
x tx . Page Nos.
V I. Patrta potestas 62 - 7 3 .
a . Nature of the Institution 62 - 66.
b . Patrta potestas and famTly property 67 - 70.
c . Pecultum 71 - 7 3 .
V II: Concluston 73 - 74.
CHAPTER 3: GREEK, ALBANIAN AND SOUTH SLAVONIAN LAW 75 - 101.
(1) GREEK LAW 75 - 90.
I: Introductory Remark 75.
11: The Law of Athens 76 - 78.
a . Father and son relattonshtp 76 - 78.
Ill: Ownership of Famtly Property 78 - 80.
IV: Testmentary Power of the Father 81 - 82.
V : Son*s Position among the Natural Heirs 83 - 8 5 .
V I: Conclusion 85.
V II: The Gortyn Code 8 5 - 9 0 .
a . Family Organisation 86.
b. Proprietary relationship between father and son 86 - 88.
c . Position of the daughter 88 - 90.
V III: Conclusion 90.
<x.
(2) THE CUSTOMARY LAW OF THE ALBANIAN HIGHLANDS
1: Background
II: Soclometrlc and proprietary relationship III: Relationship of father and son
IV: Conclusion
THE ZADRUGA (COMMUNAL JOINT FAMILY) OF THE SOUTH SLAVS
1: Introductory remarks
II: Zadruga: Definition and Structure III: Head of the Family Community IV: Narrower Family Units (Inokostlna)
V : Respective Proprietary Rights of Ascendants and Descendants
V I: Conclusion
CHAPTER 4: CELTIC LAW
I: Introductory Remarks
II: The Ancient Laws of Ireland a . The soctal organisation b . Ownership of fam ily property c . Self-acquired property d . Conclusion
Page Nos.
91 - 96.
91.
91 - 9 3 . 93 - 9 5 . 96.
9 7 - 1 0 1 . 97.
97 - 9 8 . 99.
99.
100
.
101
.
102 - 117.
102
.
103 - 111.
104.
104 - 107.
107 - 109.
109 - 111.
x x l.
Page N o .
Il l: The Law of Wales 112-
a . The background 112.
b . The famTly organisation and ownership 112 ■ c . Proprietary relation of father and son 113 ■
d . Concluding comment 115-
IV: Celts of Scotland 116 ■
a . General features 116 ■
b . Conclusion 117.
CHAPTER 5: GERMANIC LAW 118-
I: Introductory Remarks 118 -
II: Social Organisation 121 -
a . Slppe (sib) 121 -
b . Household 122 -
c . Mundlum 124.
Il l : Father's Power In the Context of Ownership of
Property by Children 127 ■
IV: Son's Interest Tn Family Property 128 -
V : Alienation 129 -
V I: Entailed Estates 132 ■
V II: Testamentary Power of the Father 137 -
V III: Debts of the Father 139 -
116.
113.
115.
116.
117.
117.
160.
121
.
126.
122
.
124.
128.
129.
132.
137.
139.
142.
xxtt.
Page No>
IX: Ownership Tn Collective Hand (Elgentum zu
gesamter Hand) 142 ■
X : Preemption (Naherrechte) 144 •
X I: A Sonks Position In the Germanic Scheme of
Inheritance 147 •
a . Germania of Tacitus 147-
b . Lex Sallca 149.
c . Lex Rlbuarla 150.
d . Lex Angllorum et Wetnorm hoc est Thurlngorum 151.
e . Lex Burgundlorum e t c . 151 ■
f . Aiuglo-Saxon law 152 ■
X II: Conclusion 158 ■
CHAPTER 6: BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN LAWS 161 ■
I: Introduction 161 ■
II: Babylonian Law 163 ■
a . The Code of Eshnunna 165 ■
b . The Sumerian Codes 167 ■
c . The Code of Hammurabi 170 ■
d . Tablets from Slppar 175 ■
e . Conclusion 179.
Il l: Laws of the Amorltes of O ld Babylonian Marl 180 ■ 144.
147.
158.
149.
152.
158.
160.
197.
163.
181.
167.
170.
174.
179.
181.
x x ttt.
Page N o.
IV : Elam 181 - 185.
a . HTstorTcal background 181 - 182.
b . The Elamtte law o f success ton 182 - 185.
V : The H ttttte Law 185 - 188.
V I: Assyrian Law 189 - 197.
(1) The Old Assyrian Documents from N uzl: 189 - 196.
a . The Historical setting 1 8 9 - 190.
b . A son*s position In the system of Inheritance 191.
c . Sale adoption 191 - 194.
d . Disinherison 194.
e . Birthright 195 - 196.
(2) The Middle Assyrian Laws 196 - 197.
a . General feature of fam ily property 196 - 197.
b . Conclusion 197.
CHAPTER 7: JEWISH LAW 198 - 2 1 9 .
1: Introductory Remarks 198 - 201.
II: Social Organisation and a Fathers Power over his
Children 202 - 204.
III: Family Ownership of Land 204.
IV: Traces o f Joint Family 205 - 207.
V : Joint Property 208 - 209.
V I: Respective Positions of Sons and Daughters In the
heritable System 2 1 0 - 2 1 2 .
V II: Conclusion 213 - 2 1 9 .
X X tv . Page N o.
CHAPTER 8: THE SASANIAN LAW 220 - 232.
I: HtstortcaI Background 220-222,
II: Traces of Joint Famtly 223 - 227.
a . Proprtetary relationship of father and son 224.
b . Procedural law 224 - 227.
I l l : Testamentary Disposition 227 - 2 2 8 .
IV: A Son's Obligation to Pay the Debts of his Father 229.
V : Trust for Pious Purposes 230 - 231.
V I: Conclusion 232.
CHAPTER 9: FARTHER INDIA 233 - 276.
I: The Historical and Juridical Background 233 - 237.
II: Ceylon 237 - 243.
a . The Tesawalamal 238 - 2 3 9 .
b . Kandyan law 240 - 243.
Ill: Burma 244 - 252.
a . Cultural and juridical contact with India 244 - 248.
b . Social organisation and family property 248 - 252.
IV: Indonesia 253 - 260.
a . Htndutzatton 253 - 254.
b . The society depicted In the juridical works 254 - 255.
c . Inheritance and the position of a son 255 - 257.
d . the adat law of the Indonesians 257 •
X X V .
V : Malaysia
a„ Eth no-juridical background b . Adat perpateh
c . Adat temenggong V I: The Philippines
a . Introduction
b . The Ifugaos of Northern Luzon c . The Kallngas
V II: Summing Up
CHAPTER 10: CHINESE AND THE JAPANESE SYSTEMS (1) Chinese Law
I: Background
II: Chinese Family System
III: Relationship between Father and Son IV: Rights of Father and Son In Family Property
a . Father's power and fam ily property b. Two views
c . Conclusion (2) Japanese Law I : Background II: Family In Japan
111: Ancestor worship and Inheritance
Page N o .
260 - 264.
260 - 261.
262 - 2 6 3 . 264.
264 - 273.
264 - 265.
266 - 270.
270 - 273.
274 - 276.
277 - 307.
277 - 3 0 0 . 277 - 278.
279 - 286.
287 - 290.
291 - 3 0 0 . 291 - 2 9 2 . 292 - 298.
299 - 300.
300 - 307.
300 - 3 0 2 . 302 - 303.
303 - 304.
x x v t . Page N o .
IV: Inkyo or Retirement of the Househead V : Variant Customs
V I: Conclusion
CHAPTER 11: AFRICAN LAW I : Introduction
II: Corporate Rights In Land III: Alienation
IV: Testamentary Disposition V : Conclusion
CHAPTER 12: THE PRE-DH ARMAS ASTRA AND THE DH ARMAS ASTRA LITERATURE
I: Introduction
II: Categories of Property In the Dharmasastra and Birthright
a . General remarks b . Ancestral property
c . Self-acquired property of the father d . Movables and Immovables
III: The Father's Power of Alienation a . Introduction
b . Father's power of making an alienation (gift or sale)
304 - 306.
306 - 307.
307.
308 - 326.
308 - 3 1 4 . 314 - 3 1 8 . 318 - 3 2 0 . 320 - 322.
322 - 326.
327 - 455.
327 - 330.
330 - 346.
330.
331 - 3 3 3 . 333 - 339.
339 - 346.
346 - 364.
346 - 347.
347 - 355.
x x v tt.
Page N o .
c . The prohtbtttons on altenatton : an appratsal 356 - 363.
d . Conclusion 364.
IV: Partttton 364 - 3 8 5 .
a. Ttme of partttton 364 - 370.
b . Partttton durtng the lifetime of the father:
the pre-dharmasastra Itterature 370 - 379.
c. Partttton durtng the Itfettme of the father and hts power to regulate the quantum of the son's
share 379 - 385.
V : Vanaprasthya (faflier's retirement tnto the forest) and the RespectTve Rtghts tn Property between Father and
Son 385 - 4 0 2 .
a. Introduction 385 - 3 8 6 .
b. Traces o f the Order 386 - 388.
c . Ttme of entry tnto the order of Vanaprasthya 388.
d . Supertortty of the order of householder 388 - 399.
e . Jurtdtcal significance 399 - 401.
f . Conclusion 402.
V I: Acqutsttton of Ownershtp tn the Smrtt Texts 403 - 4 1 0 .
a. Introduction 403.
b . The smrtt Itterature 403 - 408.
c . Conclusion 408 - 4 1 0 .
VI I : Father and Son RelatTonshtp tn the pre-Dharmasastra
and Dharmasastra Works 4 1 0 - 4 1 9 .
VI I I: The Concept of Identtty of Father and Son 4 1 9 - 4 2 7 .
a. Son as the father reborn 419 - 4 2 0 .
X X V t t t .
Page N o.
b, Death bed transmission 420 -
c . Concluston 426 -
IX: The Juridical Position of the Son and hts Dependance
on the Father 427 ■
a . Introduction 427.
b . Manu, VI11.416 427 -
(I) Literal meaning o f the text 427 - (II) mlmamsa (exegetlcal) Interpretation 428 - (III) Texts Inconsistent with Manu, VI11,416 429 -
(Iv) Commentator la I remarks 431 -
(v) Light thrown by Hindu juridical concept
of property (svatva) 432 -
(vl) Disposition of property by non- Inde
pendent person 434 -
c . Father's power to sell or abandon their children 436 -
d . Concluding remarks 438 -
X : Litigation between Father and Son 440 -
a . Nature of litigation 440 -
b . Parties with special relationships 442 -
c . Father and son 445 -
d . Praklrnaka 450 -
e . Conclusion 454 -
425.
427.
■440.
435.
428.
429.
431.
432.
433.
435.
438.
440.
455.
442.
445.
450.
454.
455.
xx tx . Page N o.
CHAPTER 13: EARLY MEDIAEVAL COMMENTARIES 456 - 562.
I: The Btrthrtght and the Manubhasya of Medhatttht 456 - 469.
II: Son's B Trthrtght tn the Balakrtda of Vtsvarupa 470 - 477.
Ill: Apararka 477 - 487.
IV:
V :
Son's Rtght by Btrth tn the Mttaksara 488 - 529.
a. Introductton 488 -4 8 9 .
b . Btrthrtght: Vtjnanesvara's contrtbutton 490 - 491.
c . daya 491 -4 9 6 .
(t) Deftnttton 491 -4 9 2 .
(tt) Unobstructed (aprattbandha) and ob
structed (saprattbandha daya) 493 -4 9 6 . d . Vtjnanesvara's theory of property (svatva) 497 - 515.
e . Property (svatva) and partttton (vtbhaga) 515 -5 1 7 . f . Btrthrtght and dtfferent categortes of property 517 - 528.
g. Summtng up 529.
Jlmutavahana's Treatment of the Son's Rtght by Btrth
tn the Dayabhaga 529 - 562.
a. Introductton 529 - 530.
b . daya 531 -5 3 2 .
c . Dental of the btrthrtght 532 - 543.
(t) Texts of Manu and Devala 532 - 533.
(tt) Texts on the tdenttty of father and son 533.
X X X .
(ttt) Btrth: not a mode of acqutsttton of property
(tv) Ownershtp (svatva) does not pre-extst partttton
(v) Property: not a matter of popular recognttton
(vt) Interpretatton of Y a jn. 11.121 d . Partttton
e . father's Power of Altenatton f . Summtng up
V o l. II.
CHAPTER 14: THE LATE MEDIAEVAL COMMENTATORS I: The Son's Btrthrtght tn Varadaraja's Vyavahara-
ntrnaya
II: The Son's Btrthrtght tn Devanna-bhatta's Smrttcandrtka. I
III: Candesvara's Vtvada-ratnakara
IV: The Parasara-madhavTya of Madhavacarya V : S ayana
M1 * Madana-partjata
V II: Madhanaratna-pradtpa (Vyavaharavtvekoddyota) V III: Sarasvatt-vtlasa of Prataparudradeva
IX: Mttra Mtsra's Vtramttrodaya Vyavaharaprakasa
Page N o .
533 - 536.
536 - 538.
538.
539 - 543.
54^ _ 544
J * T w I f «
545 - 555.
555 - 562.
563 - 631.
563 - 565.
566 - 573.
573 -5 7 6 . 576 - 580.
580 - 583.
583 - 584.
584 - 589.
589 - 595.
595 - 608.
xxxt.
X : Vyavahara-mayukha
X I: The Btrthrtght tn Sulapant's DtpaItka/DtpakaItka X II: Raghunandana's Dayatattva
X III: Srtkrsna Tarkalankara *s Daya-karma-sangraha X IV : The navya-nyaya School and the Concept of Son's
Rtght by Btrth
CHAPTER 15: J URIDICAL COMPILATION UNDER THE PATRONAGE OF THE BRITISH
I: Treatment of Son's Rtght by Btrth tn the Vtvadarnava- setu (The Code of Gentoo Laws)
II: Jagannatha Tarkapancananaks Treatment of Son's Rtght by Btrth tn the Vtvada-bhangarnava
CHAPTER 16: THE BIRTHRIGHT IN THE VYAVASTHA SUB
LITERATURE I: Introductton
II: Father's Power of Altenatton and Partttton of Property III: Sastrtc vyavasthas Versus the Caste Customs
IV: Jurtdtcal vyavastha Ltterature V : Concluston
Page N o .
609 - 614.
6 1 4 -6 1 7 . 6 1 8 .-6 2 2 . 622 - 624.
624 - 631.
632 -6 4 4 .
632 - 635.
635 - 644.
645 - 687.
645 - 648.
648 - 675.
675 - 678.
678 - 686.
686 - 687.
CHAPTER 17: FATHER'S POWER OF DISPOSITION AND THE
BIRTHRIGHT OF SON 688 - 759.
X X X t t
Page N o.
I: A Son's Rtght by Btrth and the Concept of Pre-emptton 688 - 713.
a . Introductton 688 -6 8 9 .
II:
b . Nature of the rtght o f pre-emptton 689 - 690.
c . The rtght of pre-emptton tn dtfferent legal
systems 691 -6 9 3 .
d . Pre-emptton tn Htndu Jurtsprudence 694 -7 1 2 .
e . Concluston 7 1 2 -7 1 3 .
Son's Btrthrtght and Testamentary Power of a Father 713 -7 4 3 .
a . Introductton 713 -7 1 4 .
b . A comparattve appratsal 715 -7 2 0 .
c . Testaments tn Class teal Htndu Law 720 - 730.
d . Anglo-Htndu Law 730 -7 4 3 .
Father's Power of Altenattng Self-acqutred Immovables 743 - 747.
IV: Son's Btrthrtght and Blendtng or Merger of Self- acqutred Property wtth Jotnt Famtly Property by
the Father 747 - 759.
CHAPTER 18: DIFFERENT KINDS OF SONS AND THE BIRTHRIGHT 760 - 830.
I: Introductton 760.
II: Btrthrtght and the lllegtttmate Son 761 -7 7 4 . a. Rtghts of an tllegtttmate son 761 - 764.
b . Rtghts of a Sudra's dasfputra 764 - 770.
c . Concluston 770 - 774.
Ill: The Adopted Son and the Mttaksara Btrthrtght a . Introductton
b . Effects of adoptton
c. Status of an adopted son tn hts natural famtly d . Effects of adoptton tn the adopttve famtly e . Relatton back: Anglo-Htndu law stage f . Relatton back and dtvesttng of property g. Lawful altenatton and dtvesttng
h . Altenatton by a sole survtvtng coparcener:
the Bombay vtew
t . Extenston of a mtsconceptton
j . Approval of the mtsconceptton by the Supreme Court
k . Soctal engtneertng versus dtvesttng
I. Actual computatton o f shares tn Shrtpad's case m. Relatton back and the Htndu Adopttons and
Matntenance A c t, 1956
n. Relevant provtstons of the HAMA o . Interpretation of the provtstons p. Concluston
CHAPTER 19: TYPES OF PROPERTY AND THE CONCEPT OF RIGHT BY BIRTH
X X X t t t .
Page N o.
774 - 830.
774 -7 7 6 . 776 - 777.
777 - 780.
780 - 781.
781 -7 8 2 . 783 - 795.
795 - 798.
798 - 801.
801 - 802.
802 -8 0 6 . 806 - 811.
812 -8 1 5 .
8 1 5 -8 1 6 . 8 1 6 -8 1 7 . 817 -8 2 8 . 828 - 830.
831 -8 6 4 .
Introductton 831 -8 3 2 .
x x x tv . Page N o.
II: Nature of Famtly Property tn Classtcal Htndu Law III: Emergence of Self-acqutred Property: Anglo-
Htndu Law
IV: Property Inherited from the Maternal Grandfather V : Dtsqua lifted Coparcener
V I: Concluston
CHAPTER 20: BIRTHRIGHT AND PARTITION I: Introductory Remarks
II: The Notton of Partttton III: Ancestra I Movab les IV: Apa|t v . Ramachandra V : Concluston
CHAPTER 21: BIRTHRIGHT IN THE CONTEMPORARY SOCIO
ECONOMIC SETTING
I: Character and Inctdents of Coparcenary (Juridical Jotnt Famtly)
II: Famtly tn India
a . Tradtttonal pattern of famtly b . hrpact o f moderntsatton c . Programme of Industrialisation d . Change of values
e . Emptrtcal data
f . Evaluation of emptrtcal survey
832 - 840.
841 -8 5 1 . 852 - 861.
861 -8 6 3 . 864.
865 - 886.
865 - 866.
866 - 870.
870 - 872.
872 - 885.
885 - 886.
887 - 952.
887 -8 8 8 . 889 - 906.
889.
889 - 890.
890 - 892.
892 - 893.
894 - 906.
906 - 908.
X X X V .
Page N o.
Ill: Change Tn Famtly Structure ard Btrthrtght 909 - 911.
IV: Economtc Realities 912 - 916.
V : Government Poltcy 916 - 927.
a . Family planning 916.
b . Land reform 916 - 920.
c . Taxatton Laws: the undtvtded Htndu famtly 920 - 925.
d . Present position 925 - 927.
V I: Negation o f Individualism 928 - 933.
a . Past and present 928 - 929.
b . Legislative tntervdntton 929 - 930.
c . Judicial Intervention 930.
d . Involuntary (executton) sale 931.
e . Voluntary altenatton 932 - 933.
V II: Equaltty of the Sexes and Btrthrtght 934 - 935.
V II: The Htndu Succession A c t, 1956 935 - 949.
a . General tenor of the A ct 935 - 937.
b . Anomalies and uncertainties 938 - 942.
c . Ptous obltgatton and Htndu Succession A ct 942 - 945.
d . Section 30 o f the Htndu Succession A c t 945 - 949.
I X : Possible Advantages of the Joint Family System 950 - 952.
a . Moral and Spiritual factors 950.
X X X v t.
Page N o.
b . Mtnlature welfare state 950 >
c . Mental health 951
CHAPTER 22: JOINT FAMILY LAW IN KERALA 953 .
I : Significance of Kerala 953 ■
II: Types of Families 954 ■
III: Tarwad 955 •
IV: Karnavan 956 ■
V : Individuation of Tarwad Property 958 •
V I: Nambudlrl Joint Family (IHam) 965 ■
V II: Ezhavas 967.
V III: The Hindu Succession A ct of 1956 and the
Kerala Joint Families 967 ■
IX: Post-Independence Social Revolution and Kerala 969 ■ X : Summary of the Relevant Provisions of the A ct 971 ■
X I: Comment on the A ct 972 ■
X II: Effect of the Legislation on Joint Family System 973 ■
(I) Restriction on alienation 973 ■
(II) Right to partition 976.
CHAPTER 23: CONCLUSION 977 -
I: The Problem 977.
951.
952.
976.
954.
955.
956.
958.
965.
966.
968.
971.
972.
973.
976.
976.
1006.
x x x v lt.
Page N o.
II: Methodology 978 -9 8 3 .
Ill: Comparative Experience 983 - 991.
a . Towards Individualism and uniformity 983 - 985.
b . The French C iv il Code 985 - 986.
c . Franco-Hlndu law 987 - 989.
d . Luso-Htndu law 990 - 991.
IV: Recommendation (Proposed B ill) 991 -9 9 4 .
V : Eptlogue 995 - 1006.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 1007 - 1124
INDEX OF CASES 1125 - 1145
LIST OF VYAVASTHAS 1146 - 1148
INDEX OF STATUTES AND STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1149 - 1152
GOVERNMENT OF IN D IA AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS 1153.
NEWSPAPERS 1154.
APPENDIX I: A SIGNIFICANT INSCRIPTION THROWING LIGHT
O N A FATHER'S POWER OF ALIENATION 1155 - 1157
c h a p te r 1
THE HISTORICAL AND COMPARATIVE BACKGROUND
I . Introduction
The march o f mankind through stages of clvlllzatlon(s) coincides (not necessarily Tn terms of evolution) with modes of legal thinking, and even the be
havioural pattern o f primitive man, Tn a sense, bears the ascription of a juridical n o rm j The history of the early dwellers on this earth and, more so, their legal history, Is partly *hldden In an unrecorded past1, and that Is why to unravel the
1. P. Radln, The World o f Primitive Man, (New York, 1953), 223. Jerome Hall Illustrates that a ll societies are legal orgamsations - ubl socletas, ubl lus; on the other hand, legal norms are of primary significance Tn social action, J . H a ll, Comparative Law and Social Theory, (Louisiana State University Press, 1963), 112,
117. E .A . Hoebel, The Law of Primitive Man, (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), 5.
’'Law Is an Index o f civilizatio n which reflects the underlying value concepts In
herent within that c iv iliz a tio n 1, S .M . Paul, Studies In the Book o f the Covenant Tn the Light o f Cuneiform and Biblical Law, (Leiden, 1970), Intro d ., 1. Stanley Diamond, The Rule of Law Versus the Order of Custom*, Tn D . Black and M . MlleskT, e d ., The Social Organization of Law, (New York/London, 1973), 318—
341 at 323. * . . . law Is directly linked to the analysis of the social situation to which the law applies, . . . * , D .N . Schlff, *SocTo-Legal Theory: SocTal Structure and Law*, Modern Law Review, 39 (1976) 3: 287-310 at 287.
2 . A .S . Diamond, Primitive Law, Past and Present, (London, 1971), Introd., 3 . Also E. S. Hartland, Primitive Law, (London, 1924), Introd. 3 .
legal pattern of primitive society non-legal sciences such as ethnography, phllo-
2 3
logy and anthropology are complimentary. Indeed, In this respect, non-
4 5
legal works provide Information which Is Invaluable for the jurist studying the Interaction between ‘quid fact!* and ‘quid juris*.^ This generalisation Is basically
1 • One o f the most Important writings Tn this field Is by P. Koschaker, ‘Die Ehe- formen be! den Indogermanen*, lecture delivered In the section: Ethnologle ju rl- dlque, II International Congress for Comparative Law, The Hague, 1937.
Koschaker*s theory Is summarised by J . Renger, *Who are A ll These People?*, O rlentalla, 42 (1973), 259-273 at 260-1. Equally Illum inating are the works o f M ozzarella. On his theory, see Derrett, ‘Juridical Ethnology: The Life and Work of Giuseppe Mazzarella (1868 - 1958), ZVR 71 (1970), 1-44 at 14-28, especially at 23-4. On the method o f studying jural ethnography, see P.
Bohannan, *The Differing Realms of the Law*, In L . Nader, e d ., The Ethnogtaphy o f Law, American Anthropologist, 67 (1965) 6, p t.2 : 33-42 at 41-2; also
Ethnography and Comparison In Legal Anthropology*, In L . Nader, e d ., Law In Culture and Society, (Chicago, 1969), 401-418. Also J . KurczewskI, The Ethnographic Approach*, Tn A . Podgoreckl, e d ., Law and Society, (London/
Boston, 1974 ) , 66-82 at 66. On jurlst*s function and Importance In Inter
disciplinary study, see Derrett, *LuIz da Cunha Gonqalves (1875 - 1956):
Jurist, Comparative Lawyer and Orientalist*, ZVR 74 (1974), 137-162 at 139.
For an Interesting work In context o f Hindu law, see S. Singh, Evolution o f the Smrtl Law: A Study In the Factors Leading to the Origin and Development of Ancient Indian Legal Ideas, Bharatiya VIdya Prakasana, Varanasi, 1972), 125-
196 et seqT
2 . For a summary of the anthropological contribution to law, see L . Nader, The Anthropological Study of Law* , American Anthropologist, 67 (1965) 6, p t.2 : 3-32.
3 . J . Renger, *Who are A ll These People?*, O rlentalla, 42 (1973), 259-273 a t 260-1. E. Cotran and N . N . Rubin, e d ., Readings In African Law, (London, 1970), Introd. x v ll.
4 . Hermann Kantorowlcz points out that there are many subjects Including some of a non-legal nature which employ a concept o f law, H. Kantorowlcz, The D efini
tion of Law, (Cambridge University Press, 1958), 29,
5. A .N . A llo tt, The Methods o f Legal Research Into Customary Law*, Journal of African Administration, 5 (1953) 4: 172-77 at 172.
6. G . G urvltch, Sociology of Law, (London, 1947, rp t. 1974), Preface, x .
true of juridical research Tnto the norms and customs ^ o f any prellterate people,
2 3
and the case of the Hindus, a branch of the proto-lndo-Europeans, Is no ex
ception .
I I . Hindus and the Indo-Europeans
4 —
There Is now *falrly general agreement*" that the Aryan peoples had
1. Bohannan explains that ‘norm Is a rule, more or less overt*, which expresses
"ought" aspects of relationships between human beings. Custom Is a body of such norms - Including regular deviations and compromises with norms - that
Is actually followed In practice much of the time*, P, Bohannan, The D iffer
ing Realms of Law*, Tn D . Black and M . M lleskI, e d ., The Social Organization of Law, op. c lt . , 306-317 a t 308. Seagle, of course, does not consider cus
tom and law as ‘Interchangeable phenomena*. He says, *lf custom Is In the truest sense of the terms o f spontaneous and automatic, law Is the product of organized force. Reciprocity Is Tn force In c ivilize d communities, toa# but at least nobody confuses social with formal legal relationships*, W . Seagle, The History o f Law, (New York, 1946), 35. Seagle Is supported by S. Diamond,
The Rule of Law Versus the Order o f Custom*, Tn D . Black and M . M lleskI, e d ., Ib id ., 318-341 at 321-2.
2. On the role o f custom In Hindu law, see Derrett, Religion, Law and the State In India, (London, 1968), c h .6 .
3 . Infra
4 . J .G . Macqueen, The HIttltes and Their Contemporaries In Asia Minor (London, 1975) , 25. Earlier pointed out by W .K . Sullivan, Introduction to Eugene 0*Curry*s On the Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish, 3 vols. (London, 1873), I, Iv - v . M . D illo n , ‘C elt and Hindu*, VIshveshvaranand Indologlcal Journal, 1 (1963) 2 : 203-223 at 222.
a common root and common abode.^ Here linguistic evidences come to our a id ,
1. Scholars d iffe r on the location o f the original home (die Indogermanlsche Urhelmat) of the Aryans. Bal Gangadhar TTlak tried to establish that *the oldest home o f the Aryan people was somewhere In regions round about the North Pole*, The A rctic Home In the Vedas; Being also a Key to the Interpretation of many Vedlc Texts and Legends, (Poona, 1956), 18, also 384. Some of the scholars opine that central Asia was the original abode o f the Indo-Europeans. A .B . Keith pre
ferred this view, see *The Early History o f the lndo-Iran Tans*, In Commemorative Essays to R .G . Bhandarkar, (B .O .R .I., Poona, 1971), 81-92 a t 91. T . Burrow supports the view that South Russia was the original home of the Indo-Europeans, The Sanskrit Language, New and Revised, ed , (London, 1973) 1, II. Vlnogradoff doubted the Central Aslan hypothesis and held the view that the Aryans first Inhabit
ed Northern Europe, particularly the shores of the B altic, Outlines of Historical Jurisprudence, (O .U .P ., London, 1920), I, 216. P. Giles refutes Vlnogradoff*s supposition In E .J . Rapson, e d ., Cambridge History o f India, (Cambridge, 1922 ),
I, 68-69. For an admirable exposition of a ll the views, see V . G . C hllde, The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins, (London, 1926), c h .V -V Il, e t. seq.
Also H . Bruce Hannah, ‘Aryan Origins*, In Sir Asutosh Memorial Volume, (Patna, 1926-28), I, 104-119. Keith pointed out that without archaeological evidence, the common abode hypothesis based on linguistic evidence, ‘ pure and simple* was open to gravest doubt. He examined the available linguistic and archaeological evidences but could not come tc/deflnlte conclusion In localising the Indo-Euro
peans, A .B . Keith, The Home o f the Indo-Europeans*, Tn J .D .C . Parvy, e d ., Oriental Studies In Honour of Cursetjl Erachjl Parvy, (London, 1933), 189-199 at 189, 191, 194-6, 199. The Importance of archaeological evidence was also emphasised by Professor Kellogg, see Proceedings of the Middle West Branch of the American Oriental Society, Urbana, Illin o is, 1928, JAOS 48 (1928), 358.
D .S. Trlveda pointed out the fa llib ility o f phonetic laws but took the opportunity of claiming that the Aryans were first bom on the bank of river Devlka near M ultan, The O riginal Home o f the Aryans*, ABORI 20 (1938) 1: 49-68 a t 52,68.
Ganganatha Jha accepted the weakness of linguistic evidences. He also doubted the theory that the Aryans came to India from outside, but he Invited further re
search on the problem. B .K . Ghosh, of course, did not give any weight to Jha*s suggestion of Indian origin of the Aryans, The Aryan Problem*, In R.C.
Majumdar, e d ., The Bharatiya Itlhasa Samltl*s History and Culture of the Indian People, V o l.I, The Vedlc Age, (London, 1951)^ 201-217. P. Bosch-GImpera opines that the embryo of the Indo-Europeans lies Tn Mesolithic Europe but found that archaeological evidence was against the European theory of the Indo-Euro
pean homeland, see review of Bosch-GImpera*s Les Indo-Europeens, problems archaeologlques, (Paris, 1961), M . GTmbutas, The Indo-Europeans: Archaeo-
loglcaI Problems*, American Anthropologist, 65 (1963), 815-836 at 815, 833.
For recent doubts by jurists on the linguistic basis of the Indo-European concept, see, J .A . Crook, ‘Patrla Potestas*, Classical Quarterly, 17 (1967): 113-122 at
115. A ls o D . Daube, Studies In B ib lic a l Law, (Cambridge University Press, 1947, rp t., 1969), 201. GTmbutas consistently claims that Kurgan culture of the Eurasian steppe was the basis o f Indo-European culture. M . GImbutas,
Cont*d . on next page :
and, Tn this respect A d o lf KaegT states:
To comparative philology we owe the Indisputable proof o f the fact that the ancestors o f Indians and Iranians and Greeks, of Slavs and Lithuanians and Germans, of Italians and Celts, In far distant ages spoke one language, and as a single people held dwelling-places In common, wherever that home may have been situated; and further, that for a considerable period after their separation from their brothers living further to the west, the Indians and Iranians lived together, and distinguished them
selves from other tribes by the common name of ^ Aryan. A fter their separation from the Iranians,
Note 1; - p .4 - continued:
‘Proto-Indo-European Culture: The Kurgan Culture During the F ifth, Fourth and Third MUIenla B .C .*, In G . Cardona, H .M . Hoenlgswald, and A . Senn, e d ., Indo-European and Indo-Europeans, (Philadelphia, 1970), 155-197at 190;
also her *The Beginning of the Bronze Age In Europe and the Indo-Europeans:
3500-2500 B .C .*, Journal o f Indo-European Studies, 1 (1973), 163-214. But Goodenough doubts the Kurgan theory of GImbutas. He opines that archaeo
logical evidence Is entirely compatTblewith linguistic evidence In pointing to the North European plain as the most probable home o f the Proto-Into-Europeans, W .H . Goodenough, *The Evolution of Pastorallsm and Indo-European Origins*, In G . Cardonft, Ib id ., 253-265, at 257, 262. In effect, GImbutas Is supported by P. Friedrich, ‘ Proto-Indo-European Kinship*, Ethnology, 5 (1966) 1: 1-36 at 2 -3 . Also P. Harblson, The Coming of the Indo-Europeans to Ireland: An Archaeological Viewpoint*, JIS 3 (1975) 2: 101-119 at 101. The controversy on th e fo n s e to rlg o o f the Indo-Europeans has also been opened by P.L.Bhargava, The O riginal Home of the Aryans and Indo-lranlan Migrations*, ABORI, 48-9 (1968), Golden Jubilee Volume, 219-226. Some scholars doubt the hypothesis That, along with related languages the Indo-Europeans had a common origin . . . * , see Rosane Rocher, ‘Review of Cardona, Hoenlgswald and Senn*, JAOS 93 (1973), 615-617 a t 616. But the hypotheses of an original homeland and original Indo- European speech community are too w ell accepted to be overlooked, see T.Burrow^
The Early Aryans*, In A .L . Basham, e d ., ACuItural History of India , Oxford, (1975), 20-29 at 22.
1. See F .C . Davar, Iran and Its Culture, (Bombay, 1953), 151, B .K . Ghosh,
‘ Indo-lranlan Relations*, In k .C . Majumdar, e d ., The Vedlc Age, o p .c lt., 218-224 at 218.
the Eastern Aryans, the later Indians, wandered from the west Tnto the land afterwards called India, descending from the heights o f Iran, pro-.j bably over the western passes of the HTndukush.
That the common habitation and migratory course o f the Aryans are supported by comparative philology was specifically eirTphasTsed by Max MO Her Tn these words:
The evidence of language Is Irrefragable, and It Is the only evidence worth listening to with regard to ante-historical periods. It would have been next to Impossible to discover any traces of relationship between the swarthy natives of India and their conquerors whether Alexander or C live , but for the testimony borne by language. ^
Granted that the Romantic period fostered such views, and that language Is held In common by the conquered (for example) and their conquerors, the nature and extent of linguistic evidence points unmistakably to migrations and Is supported by ethnographic particulars - and archaeological artifacts.
Small wonder that hypotheses of common language and common abode would naturally Inspire a legal comparatlst to probe Into the possibility of an
1. A . Kaegl, The Rlgveda, tr. R. Arrowsmlth, (New D elhi, 1972), Introd., 11.
On the basis of linguistic evidence, Sir W illiam Jones also put forward the same view In 1786 In his famous address to the Asiatic Society of Bengal, see H . Pedersen, Linguistic Science In the Nineteenth Century, tr. J . Spargo, (Bloomington, 1931), 18: R.C. Majumdar, e d ., The Vedlc Age, loc. c lt . , 201; a ls o E .J . Raps on, e d ., The Cambridge History o f India, op. c lt . , 65.
2 . F. Max MiJlIer, The Vedas, (D elhi, 1961), 1. A IsoR . von Iherlng, Vorge- schlchte der lndo-Europder, tr. A . Drucker, sub. t i t . The Evolution of the Aryans, (London, 18£7), x l. On philological evidences, also see P. V ln o gradoff, Outline of the History of Jurisprudence, o p .c lt., I, 215-231.
unilinear development of legal Institutions among the Indo-Europeans.^ How
ever, to quite a number o f Romanists the adjective ‘L^e-European* applied to law
2 3
Is highly objectionable. Indeed, considering the ‘challenge* and ‘response*, to each c iv iliz a tio n , ‘ law and Institutions cannot be affilia ted to a common ancestor with anything like the same certainty as languages 4 . . . . * , nevertheless, despite these limitations, Leopold Wenger opines:5
Certain principles of law can be claimed as a common Indo-Germanlc Inheritance, which a ll or some Aryan daughter-peoples have retained from a common past In the course of their sepa
rate historical development as nations. ^
I I I . Hindu Law: case for comparison
It Is Indeed correct to say that ‘no one now seriously believes that there Is a pattern o f human social development through which every society must
1. The study was Initiated by Sir Henry Maine. On limitations of such studies, s e e G . G urvltch, Sociology of Law, (London, 1974), 79-80.
2 . D .A . Blnchy, ‘C eltic Suretyship, A Fossilized Indo-European Institution*, In G . Cardona, H .M . Hoenlgswald, and A . Senn, e d ., Indo-European and
Indo-Europeans, Papers presented at the Third I ^-E uropean Conference at the Univarsity of Pennsylvania, 1966, (Philadelphia, 1970), 355-367 at 355.
3 . A .J . Toynbee, Change and Habit, (London, 1966), 7, 151.
4 . D .A . Blnchy, lo c .c lt., 355.
5 . ‘Gewlsse Rechtssdtze lassen slch a Is Indogermanlsches gemelnsames Erbgut an- sprechen, das a lle oder elnlge arlsche Tochtervdlker aus elner gemelnsamen Vorzelt In Tnhre natlonale geschlchtllche Sonderentwlcklung mltgebracht haben*r L . Wenger, Die Quellen des rdmlschen Rechts, (Wien, 1953), 11.
6 . Translated forme by Derrett.
pass^ We cannot expect that the Hindus who came to India V ia Azerbaijan and Western Persia* 2woujd retain and show exactly Identical patterns of jegal
3
development with their European counterparts, but this possible diversity of social development does not Invalidate the case for comparison o f Hindu law with other systems; on the contrary, *the real Hindu law (let the courts do what they liked with such fragments as they toyed with) deserved comparison with the Roman and the Greek . . .*4
A Younger student o f comparative ancient law has very recently committed himself to the thesis that family law In the ancient Mediterranean and Middle East has common, Identifiable, recognisable and predictable feat
ures which, at a glance, distinguish the Greco-Roman cultural world at Its
widest (It bordered on Russia and Iran) from African and South-East Aslan customs, with their very different ecology and therefore, ethno-characterology.5
However, Gutterldge, the doyen of the discipline, seems to have believed that oriental and occidental fam ily laws were barely capable of fru itfu l
1. Derrett, Dharmasastra and Juridical Literature, (Wiesbaden, 1973), 6 . R.H.
Lowle, The History o f Ethnological Theory, iN e w York, 1937), 26-29.
2 . M . GImbutas, The Indo-Europeans: Archaeological Problems*, American Anthropologist, 65 (1963), 815-836 at 816.
3. See the warning o f Vlnogradoff, In fra ^l5 .
4 . Derrett, ‘Review o f Stembach: Juridical Studies In Ancient Indian Law, Pt. I*, JAOS 87 (1967), 103-4 at 103.
5. Wolfgang Wodke (Akademlschef Rat, Marbarg), ‘rom ,,Ungesch^^eb^nen,, zum v
J
"Geschrlebenen" Recht-Eln Beltrag zur rechtsgeschlchtlTchen Entwlchlung*, (cyclostyled lecture, Gdansk, June 1976). The reference was supplied to me by Derrett.
comparison. His view was that ‘fam ily law Is so largely moulded by racial or religious and p o litic a l considerations that comparison Is fraught with d iffic u lty and apt to be Inconclusive . . . ‘ ^ Although Gutterldge *s scepticism was understandable, the horizon o f a legal comparatlst could not Indefinitely be limited by racial, religious or ‘ p o litica l frontiers*.2
Since Gutterldge‘s days, the parameters of legal learning have
1. H .C . G utterldge, Comparative Law, An Introduction to the Comparative Method o f Legal Study & Research, (Cambridge, 1946), 32. But he did not say Tt was fu tile or Impossible, Ib id ., 32. For an answer to Gutterldge one may quote, ‘May we not say that one who knows only the laws of his own
jurisdiction knows not the law of that jurisdiction*, R. Pound, *What We May Expect from Comparative Law?*, ABAJ 22 (1936), 60. Jerome H all also neutralises Gutterldge*s argument, Comparative Law and Social Theory, (Louisiana State University Press, 1963), 95-7.
2 . H.E« Yntema, ‘Comparative Legal Research*, M ich. L.Rev. 54 (1956) 7:
899-928 a t 903. To Yntema the study of law Is sub specie unlversltatls, I . e . law Is essentially a comparative science, Ib id ., 924. Zoltan Petri also opines that to perfect one‘s own system, even countries having Ideologically opposing p o litic a l systems should have comparison of their laws, ‘Goals and Methods o f Legal Comparison*, Tn The Comparison of Laws, Selected Essays for the 9th International Congress of Comparative Law, (Budapest, 1974), 45-48 a t 46, 53. The same view was of Kazantsev, a Russian law teacher, "The Tasks o f S cientific Research-work In the Field of Law*, Bulletin o f the Academy of Sciences U .S .S .R ., Section of Economics and Law, 38 (1950), N o .1 , cited b y E .S . Rashba, 'Consecrated Ignorance of Foreign Law*, C a lif. L.Rev. 39 (1951), 355-368 at 358, n .7 .
considerably changed,^ and even long before Gutterldge, Pierre Lepaulle pointed out that comparative law was *a necessary step Tn a highly scientific study of law*. 2 So, whether It Is In the East or the West, the legal experl- ence of a nation ‘flows across cultural boundaries1, and as a concrete example3
of this we proffer Pound*s suggestion regarding the problem of modernising Chinese law. He emphasised that Republican China would have to develop skill In adapting alien Institutions and rules to local conditions and prevailing cultural values. 4 In the context of Indian family law, Derrett's exhaustive
5 6
and ‘synoptic* study of the law of succession shows that a comparative approach
1. O . Kahn-Freund, ‘Comparative Law as an Academic Subject*, L .Q . Rev. 82 (1966), 40-61 at 59. A t Gutterldge‘s time, the comparative method was on
‘tria l* and at an ‘experimental stage** H .C . Gutterldge, *The Province of Comparative Law*, In P. Sayre, e d ., Interpretations o f Modem Legal Phllo- sophles, Essays Tn Honor of Roscoe Pound, (New York, 1947), 303-312 at 310.
W riting Tn 1949, Gutterldge described comparative law as the Cinderella of the legal sciencest Comparative Law, (2 n d e d ., Cambridge, 1949), 22.
L . N eville Brown sums up the present position by saying: Today Clnderella*s coach has become something of a bandwaggon on which academics and practi
tioners scramble for seats, so much so that the older passengers may sometimes be surprised at the company In which they travel*, ‘Comparison, Inform, and the Family*, Annuarlo DT D lrltto Com para to E DT, Stud! Legislative 43 (1969), 123-140 at 125:
2 . P. Lepaulle, The Function of Comparative Law with a Critique of Sociological Jurisprudence*, H arv.L. Rev. 35 (1922), 838-858 at 855. The history of com
parative law goes back to Aristotle*s Constitution of Athens, J. H a ll, Compara
tive Law and Social Theory, o p .c lt., 15.
3 . A .T . von Mehren, ‘Roscoe Pound and Comparative Law, A m .J.C o m p .L . 13 (1964), 507-517 at 511.
4 . R. Pound, ‘Comparative Law and History as Basis for Chinese Law*, H arv.L.
Rev. 61 (1948), 749, 750.
5 . When a comparative study Is directed to more than one law, the method Is called ‘synoptic* as opposed to ‘monographic* which Is focussed upon one parti
cular foreign legal system, M . Rhelnsteln, Teaching Comparative Law*, U. of Ch.L.R ev. 5 (1938), 616.
6 . TLL, 1953, unpublished.
