このアイテムのアクセス数: 37

このアイテムのファイル:
ファイル 記述 サイズフォーマット 
JOR_80_3_548.pdf1.53 MBAdobe PDF見る/開く
タイトル: ロシア帝󠄁政期南東コーカサスの離婚裁判󠄁 --2度結婚した後に2度離婚した未婚女性の事例--
その他のタイトル: A Divorce Trial in the Southeast Caucasus during the Era of the Russian Empire : the Case of an Unmarried Woman Who Married Twice and Divorced Twice
著者: 塩野﨑, 信也  KAKEN_name
著者名の別形: SHIONOZAKI, Shinya
(盬野﨑, 信也)
キーワード: 婚姻制度
裁判
ロシア帝国
アゼルバイジャン
シャリーア法廷
発行日: 30-Dec-2021
出版者: 東洋史硏究會
誌名: 東洋史研究
巻: 80
号: 3
開始ページ: 548
終了ページ: 513
抄録: This article uses court documents to reconstruct a divorce trial conducted in the Southeast Caucasus (the present-day Republic of Azerbaijan) during the era of the Russian Empire and to analyse the reality of institutions, social conditions and changes in the lives and minds of people at that time. The trial lasted for nearly two years and resulted in a divorce settlement between the husband, ʻAliqulu Bey, and his wife, Khanim. The facts that were revealed through the process of the trial, however, were very strange. Khanim married ʻAliqulu Bey twice, and she then divorced him twice, although she was in fact an “unmarried woman.” In addition, the couple had never had sexual intercourse during the marriage, which lasted about a year and a half, so she had retained her virginity. The court, ultimately, granted the divorced, although they knew that she was “unmarried.” Behind the result of the trial was the essential nature of the Islamic, or “Sharīʻa” court, which had jurisdiction over such trials. The court’s goal was not to discover “the truth, ” but to find a point on which both parties could compromise, and which conformed to legal precedent and did not contravene Islamic law. Such a compromise was confirmed in public through the trial. Trials in the court were a kind of “play” in which the judges, the plaintiff and the defendant were actors, and the finale was a prearranged conclusion. To reach such a compromise, even fallacious testimony and unjust action were allowed by the court. On the other hand, determining the compromise was a very delicate balancing act, and if they failed to reach a compromise, any unjust deed might be denounced. Besides, in a society where people were bound very tightly to one another, it was thought that court trials should be avoided as much as possible and resolution by reconciliation was favored. Even if a resolution could not be reached by prior conciliation and a dispute eventually went to court, reaching a settlement was considered better than obtaining a judgement.
著作権等: 許諾条件により本文は2025-01-01に公開
DOI: 10.14989/291310
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/291310
出現コレクション:80巻3号

アイテムの詳細レコードを表示する

Export to RefWorks


出力フォーマット 


このリポジトリに保管されているアイテムはすべて著作権により保護されています。