Abstract
This essay evaluates and critiques the studies of Chinese imperial law in line with Edward Said’s proposition of ‘Orientalism’. It identifies three major stages: the classical legal Orientalism, emphasising the heterogeneity of Chinese and Western laws based on Western values; the ‘neo-legal Orientalism’, stressing the homogeneity of the two by taking Western culture also as the assessment standard; and Oriental legalism, seeking Chinese subjectivity with Chinese perspectives and resources. The changes of the paradigms in assessing the legal culture in pre-republican China are related to the general intellectual transformations in the contemporary world. This essay proposes the approach of ‘confluent legalism’ that features drawing on diverse cultural essences of various nations in the world.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
