Disputing and the Genesis of Legal Principles: Examples from Minangkabau

Abstract

The usual anthropological view of law is historically related to an equilibrium model in which cultures were conceptualized as integrated, societies were regarded as "organically" structured, culture and social structure were perceived as generally isomorphic, and law was thought to be a body of rules concerned with the maintenance of the major cultural norms of the society. As a specialized cultural subsystem, law was viewed as partaking of the unity and logical interrelatedness of the culture as a whole. Such a view of law, culture, and society provides scant help in understanding the Minangkabau use of legal principles stemming from three seemingly inconsistent legal codes--those of Islam, of the matrilineal customary law, and of the nation state Indonesia. This article suggests an alternative approach in which law is placed within a process-conflict model framework. Legal ideas are viewed as growing out of conflict and as primarily relevant to conflict situations. Legal thinking is seen as the rationalization of conflict. A people's use of legal ideas in disputing, as well as in settling disputes, may have little to do with norm maintenance and cultural equilibrium. But the rationalization of conflict serves an important social function; it makes civility possible in the midst of conflict and change.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.