Abstract
In this article the author considers the interpretive problems that arise when trying to read legal texts produced by aboriginal communities in mid-nineteenth colonial Canada. Using a code of laws enacted by the Credit River Mississaugas in 1830 as an example, he explores how written aboriginal laws from this time period appear to deviate from today’s judicial notion of aboriginal law as ancient, oral and customary in nature. The author suggests that aboriginal legal texts from the mid-nineteenth century may be read in four competing ways, which he labels as legal-historical, indigenist, ethnohistorical, and legal-constitutional. The author concludes that each of these methods of interpretation may offer valid insights into the role of law within aboriginal communities historically and today.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
