Remembering the work of
the late Professor Andrew Huxley
It is with sadness I heard this week of the passing of Professor Andrew
Huxley of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) London. I had never
met Professor Huxley, but I did have email correspondence with him in relation
to his recent contribution ‘Is Burmese Law Buddhist?’.[1]
He was also kind enough to read and comment on some of my own work via
email, even though he had never met me. I was extremely grateful for his generous
comments and feedback. I want to use this post to reflect back on some of his
publications that have made a significant contribution to the study of law in
Myanmar/Burma.
Professor Huxley
spent part of his academic career expanding our understanding of Burmese
Buddhist law and locating it in the context of the literature on Buddhist law
in Southeast Asia.[2] For readers looking for a
concise overview of the literature on Burmese Buddhist law published from the
1980s to 2001, his review offers an excellent introduction.[3]
Professor
Huxley
highlighted the way in which the dhammathats
are evidence of the important role that law played under the kings, and that it
was not the British who first introduced the rule of law in Burma.[4]
He argued that Burmese Buddhist law is relevant and needs to be understood by
historians, Pali scholars and lawyers, because it remains the source of
personal law for most Buddhists in Myanmar. His work has advocated for the view that the legal system that existed
in Burma prior to colonialism was well-developed.
Professor
Huxley addressed the works of
prominent colonial figures, such as John Jardine (1844–1919) who held the position of Judicial
Commissioner of British Burma and is well-known for his Notes
on Buddhist Law (1882–83); and Em Forchhammer
(1851–90), a Government
Archaeologist of British Burma who wrote The
Jardine Prize: An Essay 1885. For example, on Forchhammer, Professor Huxley questioned his argument that the dhammathat literature of 1880s was
derived from a single Mon work, and suggests instead that Mon influence varied
depending on place and overtime.[5]
Professor
Huxley provided an insightful
overview of government policies towards religion and towards the sangha in particular,[6]
which is accessible to readers from a common law background with its
comparative approach to the conceptualization of religion and the state in
England and Burma. He identified three shared concerns: who can oversee
religious organisations, which texts are recognised as authoritative, and how
the state deals with non-conformists. He highlighted the way in which Buddhist
ecclesiastical law was applied in the courts from annexation up until 1918, but
after that time declined as judges demonstrated a preference for dhammathat over vinaya. Overall, he demonstrated the way in which the position of
the sangha has
changed dramatically since independence when the sangha and the vinaya were
encouraged and recognised, to the other extreme of excessive legislative
control over the sangha.
Professor
Huxley often wrote as a comparative
law scholar, as evident in his comparison of sixteenth-century Burmese legalism
with Western European approaches to law and kingship.[7]
Professor
Huxley’s most recent
chapter was written at the time of his retirement and constitutes a reflection on the broader
socio-political and legal changes that took place after independence and are
now taking place at the sixty-fifth anniversary of the country, combined with
detailed discussion of the dhammathats.[8] He argued that prior to 1885, Burmese law was
distinctly Buddhist; however this year marked not only the end of Burmese rule
and the beginning of colonialism across the country, but also the replacement
of codified Burmese law with case law. A unique feature of Professor Huxley’s
work is the way in which he deftly speaks across legal cultures and families,
drawing parallels and contrasts with common and civil law contexts, as well as
both Western and Asian legal traditions.
Here is a link to a list
of Professor Huxley’s work, which he sent to me several months ago. His work
will remain a legacy for scholars of Burmese Buddhist law and Myanmar legal
studies generally.
This article
is taken from a broader literature review of Myanmar law that can be accessed here.
This article was first posted at New Mandala, 8 December 2014.
[1] Andrew Huxley
(2014) ‘Is Burmese Law Buddhist?’ in Melissa Crouch and Tim Lindsey (eds) Law, Society and Transition in Myanmar.
Hart Publishing.
[2] For his guide to legal
literature on Buddhist law in Southeast Asia, see Andrew Huxley (1997) Studying Theravada Legal Literature, 20 J. Int’l Ass’n Buddhist Stud. 63.
[3] Andrew Huxley (2001), Pre-Colonial Burmese Law: Conical Hat and Shoulder Bag, 25 Int’l Inst. Asian Stud. Online News. available at
http://www.iias.nl/iiasn/25/theme/25T7.html.
[4] Andrew
Huxley (1997) The Importance of the
Dhammathats in Burmese Law and Culture, 1 J.
Burma Stud. 1, 15.
[5] Andrew Huxley, Thai, Mon & Burmese Dhammathats: Who Influenced Whom?, in Andrew
Huxley (1996) Thai Law: Buddhist Law
Essays on the Legal History of Thailand, Laos and Burma 81, 105-09.
[6] Andrew
Huxley (2001) Positivists and Buddhists:
The Rise and Fall of Anglo-Burmese Ecclesiastical Law, 143 L. Soc. Inquiry 113.
[7] Andrew Huxley (2012) Lord Kyaw Thu’s Precedent: A
Sixteenth-Century Burmese Law Report, in
Paul Dresch & Hannah Skoda (ed) Legalism,
Anthropology and History 309-10.
[8] Andrew Huxley (2014) ‘Is Burmese Law Buddhist?’ in
Melissa Crouch and Tim Lindsey (eds) Law,
Society and Transition in Myanmar. Hart Publishing.
