Cover not available

Article published In: Translation Spaces
Vol. 10:2 (2021) ► pp.260–277

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

When Qing Law Encountered British Anthropology

George Jamieson’s Translation of “Exogamy” and “Endogamy” in the Qing Code

ORCiD logo with link | Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications
Published online: 18 August 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.20028.liu
Abstract
This article conducts a textual and reception analysis of George Jamieson’s translation of Qing marriage law with the aim of probing a translational encounter between traditional Chinese law and British anthropology. Approaching a Qing clause against marriage between persons of the same family name as an object of anthropological study, Jamieson annotated his rendition with rich paratexts to orient it under the concept of exogamy. After reflecting upon predecessors’ theories, he advanced his own by restructuring existing anthropological constructs. Taking his translation as a knowledge source, Jamieson further highlighted the existence of an endogamous limit upon the exogamy rule; this observation was absorbed by Henry Maine to strengthen his argument that exogamy and endogamy were not oppositional in agnatic societies. As revealed in Jamieson’s interaction with British anthropologists, he proved himself more than a translator of Qing marriage law but also a contributor to nineteenth-century British anthropology.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • An examination of nineteenth-century anthropology
  • Testing existing anthropological theories with Chinese “exogamy”
  • Jamieson’s own theory on the origin of the clause
  • Jamieson’s influence on nineteenth-century anthropology
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (35)
References
Aberdeen Press & Journal. 1921. “Mr G. Jamieson, C. M. G.” 4 January 1921.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnard, Alan. 2000. History and Theory in Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cams, Mario. 2014. “Restituting Church Buildings and Negotiating Church Factions: Missionary Mapmakers and the Making of Local Networks (1712–1716).” Frontiers of History in China 9 (4): 489–505. Accessed December 6, 2020. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daqing lüli huiji bianlan 大清律例彙輯便覽 [A Collection of the Great Qing Code] 1877. Vol. 101. Beijing: Shan Cheng Tang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Entenmann, Robert. 2015. “The Problem of Chinese Rites in Eighteenth-Century Sichuan.” In China and Christianity: Burdened Past, Hopeful Future, edited by Stephen Uhalley, Jr., and Xiaoxin Wu, 127–136. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland, and Finn Sivert Nielsen. 2001. A History of Anthropology. London & Sterling: Pluto Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ford, Rosaline Judith. 1985. Matteo Ricci, S. J. in China, 1583–1610: A Case Study of a Precursor in Educational Anthropology. Doctoral Thesis, The University of Connecticut.
Hsia, Ronnie Po-chia. 2018. “Chinese Voices in the Rites Controversy: From China to Rome.” In The Rites Controversies in the Early Modern World, edited by Ines G. Županov, and Pierre Antoine Fabre, 29–49. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jamieson, George. 1881. “Translations from the General Code of Laws of the Chinese Empire: VII Marriage Laws.” The China Review 10 (2): 77–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jin, Mei 金眉. 2007. “Lun qingdai hunyin jiating falü de tezhi” 論清代婚姻家庭法律的特質 [The Characteristics of Qing Marriage and Family Laws]. Faxue 法學 [Legal Science] (10): 67–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kubuya, Paulin Batairwa. 2018. Meaning and Controversy within Chinese Ancestor Religion. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuklick, Henrika. 2011. “Personal Equations: Reflections on the History of Fieldwork, with Special Reference to Sociocultural Anthropology.” Isis 102 (1): 1–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Yu. 2020. “Behind the Façade of the Rites Controversy: The Intriguing Contrast of Chinese and European Theism.” Journal of Religious History 44 (1): 3–26. Accessed December 6, 2020. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lubbock, John. (1870) 2014. The Origin of Civilization and the Primitive Condition of Men. Reprint, Cambridge: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luttio, Mark D. 1994. “The Chinese Rites Controversy (1603–1742): A Diachronic and Synchronic Approach.” Worship 68 (4): 290–313.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maine, Henry. 1883. Dissertations on Early Law and Custom. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malagrinò, Dylan Oliver. 2014. “Change: A Constant Variably Defined – Law and Anthropology Perspectives on Historical Changes to the Rule of Law.” Northern Kentucky Law Review 41 (1): 93–118.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McLennan, John Ferguson. (1865) 1998. Primitive Marriage: An Inquiry into the Origin of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies. Reprint, New York: Routledge/Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1869a. “Tree and Serpent Worship.” Cornhill Magazine 191: 626–640.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1869b. “The Worship of Animals and Plants, Part I.” The Fortnightly Review 61 (October): 407–427.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1869c. “The Worship of Animals and Plants, Part II.” The Fortnightly Review 61 (November): 562–582.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1870. “The Worship of Animals and Plants, Part III.” The Fortnightly Review 71 (February): 194–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mungello, D. E. 2018. The Chinese Rites Controversy: Its History and Meaning. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Qiu, Tang 邱唐. 2016. “Qi min buhun? Qingdai zuqun tonghun de falü guifan shijian yu yishi” 旗民不婚？－ 清代族群通婚的法律規範、實踐與意識 [No Marriage Between the Manchus and the Hans – The Legal Rules, Practice and Consciousness of Qing Intertribal Marriage]. Qinghua faxue 清華法學 [Tsinghua University Law Journal] (1): 190–207.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sera-Shriar, Efram. 2014. “What is Armchair Anthropology? Observational Practices in 19th- Century British Human Sciences.” History of the Human Sciences 27 (2): 26–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer, Herbert. (1876) 1885. Principles of Sociology. Vol. 11. Reprint, London & Edinburgh: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
St. André, James. 2004. “‘But Do They Have a Notion of Justice?’ Staunton’s 1810 Translation of the Great Qing Code.” The Translator 10 (1): 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Standaert, Nicolas. 2018. “Chinese Voices in the Rites Controversy: The Role of Christian Communities.” In The Rites Controversies in the Early Modern World, edited by Ines G. Županov, and Pierre Antoine Fabre, 50–67. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tedlock, Barbara. 1991. “From Participant Observation to Observation of Participation: The Emergence of Narrative Ethnography.” Journal of Anthropological Research 47 (1): 69–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
The London and China Telegraph. 1921. “Obituary – Mr. Geo. Jamieson (1843–1920).” 3 January 1921.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tylor, Edward Burnett. 1871 (1970). Religion in Primitive Culture. Vol 21. Reprint, Gloucester: Peter Smith.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Voget, Fred W. 1975. A History of Ethnology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xiang, Lanxin. 2020. The Quest for Legitimacy in Chinese Politics. A New Interpretation. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yeh, Alice. 2019. “The Hermeneutics of Silk: China and the Fabric of Christendom according to Martino Martini and the Early Modern Jesuit ‘Accommodationists.’” Comparative Studies in Society and History 61(2): 419–446. Accessed December 6, 2020. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, Guanzi 張冠梓. 2003. “Fa renleixue de lilun fangfa jiqi liubian” 法人類學的理論、方法及其流變 [Theory, Methods and Mutations of Legal Anthropology]. Guowai shehui kexue 國外社會科學 [Social Sciences Abroad] (5): 23–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue