Customs in Common: Marriage, Law and the Making of Difference in Colonial Natal.
Marriage was at the heart of the administration of colonial subjects in Natal, a British colony which would become part of the Union of South Africa in 1910. In contrast to colonial spaces in which authorities attempted to bring English-style ‘civility’ to native practices of marriage, the codificat...
| Publicado en: | Gender & History Vol. 29; no. 3; pp. 589 - 605 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Nov2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=125690626&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 125690626 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 09535233 BPJ jtl: Gender & History issn: 09535233 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Nov2017 vid: 29 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 125690626 10.1111/1468-0424.12321 ppf: 589 ppct: 16 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 167KB tig: atl: Customs in Common: Marriage, Law and the Making of Difference in Colonial Natal. aug: au: Essop Sheik, Nafisa su: History of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa British colonies Sororate Marriage customs & rites Customary law Apartheid Segregation Sex discrimination History Colonial Africa South Africa sug: subj: South Africa History of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa British colonies Sororate Marriage customs & rites Customary law Apartheid Segregation Sex discrimination History Colonial Africa ab: Marriage was at the heart of the administration of colonial subjects in Natal, a British colony which would become part of the Union of South Africa in 1910. In contrast to colonial spaces in which authorities attempted to bring English-style ‘civility’ to native practices of marriage, the codification of Native customary marriage in Natal sought the preservation of ‘non-Christian’ forms of cultural practice as firstly an explicit denial of liberal reform in the mid-nineteenth century, and then from the middle of the twentieth century, as a demonstration of the commitment of a segregationist state to the supposed cultural and ethnic integrity of ‘non-white’ inhabitants of apartheid South Africa. This article attends to gender in order to deconstruct and demystify the making of the colonial common law. The marriage practices of European settler citizens that were being incorporated into the common law challenged the very idea of Christian propriety that was the rationalisation for excluding the marriage practices of native subjects. The lines of difference between ‘civilised’ and ‘Christian’ common law and ‘barbaric’ and unassimilable Native law were in fact created out of common and simultaneous assertions of domestic patriarchy, something that has been made invisible by the understanding of the colonial state and the civil codes through which it governed as being without a cultural specificity of their own. Between pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Gender & History is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Gender & History holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2017 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|