性别与司法:奥斯曼法庭中的妇女地位

IF 1.4 1区 历史学 Q3 ECONOMICS Economic History Review Pub Date : 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1111/ehr.13310
Metin M. Coşgel, Hamdi Genç, Emre Özer, Sadullah Yıldırım
{"title":"性别与司法:奥斯曼法庭中的妇女地位","authors":"Metin M. Coşgel,&nbsp;Hamdi Genç,&nbsp;Emre Özer,&nbsp;Sadullah Yıldırım","doi":"10.1111/ehr.13310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper studies legal disparities between men and women in a patriarchal framework. Throughout history, women have confronted discrimination in matters of inheritance, property ownership, and various other legal rights. We examine the consequences of legal discrimination for women's differential engagement and success within legal conflicts, using data from Ottoman courts in the early nineteenth century. The results show that women were parties to approximately 30 per cent of cases, with a modest gender gap of around eight to ten percentage points in terms of plaintiff win rates. The gap varied across courts and types of cases, consistent with gender disparities in legal knowledge and trial stakes in patriarchal societies. Notably, when litigating against male defendants, the disparity was more pronounced in provincial courts (Konya and Kütahya), as opposed to courts in the capital city (Galata and Üsküdar). Similarly, while the gender gap was greater in property and probate cases than those involving personal crimes and commercial exchange, the gap was reversed in family matters. The analysis suggests that a significant portion of the gender gap in litigation success can be attributed to disparities in evidence presentation (witness testimonies, written documents and legal opinions).</p>","PeriodicalId":47868,"journal":{"name":"Economic History Review","volume":"77 4","pages":"1251-1281"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender and justice: The status of women in Ottoman courts\",\"authors\":\"Metin M. Coşgel,&nbsp;Hamdi Genç,&nbsp;Emre Özer,&nbsp;Sadullah Yıldırım\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ehr.13310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper studies legal disparities between men and women in a patriarchal framework. Throughout history, women have confronted discrimination in matters of inheritance, property ownership, and various other legal rights. We examine the consequences of legal discrimination for women's differential engagement and success within legal conflicts, using data from Ottoman courts in the early nineteenth century. The results show that women were parties to approximately 30 per cent of cases, with a modest gender gap of around eight to ten percentage points in terms of plaintiff win rates. The gap varied across courts and types of cases, consistent with gender disparities in legal knowledge and trial stakes in patriarchal societies. Notably, when litigating against male defendants, the disparity was more pronounced in provincial courts (Konya and Kütahya), as opposed to courts in the capital city (Galata and Üsküdar). Similarly, while the gender gap was greater in property and probate cases than those involving personal crimes and commercial exchange, the gap was reversed in family matters. The analysis suggests that a significant portion of the gender gap in litigation success can be attributed to disparities in evidence presentation (witness testimonies, written documents and legal opinions).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic History Review\",\"volume\":\"77 4\",\"pages\":\"1251-1281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ehr.13310\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic History Review","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ehr.13310","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究父权制框架下男女之间的法律差异。纵观历史,妇女在继承、财产所有权和其他各种法律权利方面一直面临歧视。我们利用十九世纪初奥斯曼帝国法院的数据,研究了法律歧视对妇女在法律冲突中的不同参与度和成功率的影响。结果表明,约有 30% 的案件的当事人是女性,在原告胜诉率方面,性别差距不大,约为 8 到 10 个百分点。这种差距因法院和案件类型而异,这与父权制社会中法律知识和审判风险方面的性别差异是一致的。值得注意的是,在对男性被告提起诉讼时,省法院(科尼亚和库塔希亚)与首都法院(加拉太和于斯库达尔)的差距更为明显。同样,与涉及个人犯罪和商业交换的案件相比,财产和遗嘱继承案件中的性别差距更大,但在家事案 件中,性别差距却发生了逆转。分析表明,诉讼成功率方面的性别差距很大一部分可归因于证据提交(证人证词、书面文件和法律意 见)方面的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Gender and justice: The status of women in Ottoman courts

This paper studies legal disparities between men and women in a patriarchal framework. Throughout history, women have confronted discrimination in matters of inheritance, property ownership, and various other legal rights. We examine the consequences of legal discrimination for women's differential engagement and success within legal conflicts, using data from Ottoman courts in the early nineteenth century. The results show that women were parties to approximately 30 per cent of cases, with a modest gender gap of around eight to ten percentage points in terms of plaintiff win rates. The gap varied across courts and types of cases, consistent with gender disparities in legal knowledge and trial stakes in patriarchal societies. Notably, when litigating against male defendants, the disparity was more pronounced in provincial courts (Konya and Kütahya), as opposed to courts in the capital city (Galata and Üsküdar). Similarly, while the gender gap was greater in property and probate cases than those involving personal crimes and commercial exchange, the gap was reversed in family matters. The analysis suggests that a significant portion of the gender gap in litigation success can be attributed to disparities in evidence presentation (witness testimonies, written documents and legal opinions).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
27.30%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: The Economic History Review is published quarterly and each volume contains over 800 pages. It is an invaluable source of information and is available free to members of the Economic History Society. Publishing reviews of books, periodicals and information technology, The Review will keep anyone interested in economic and social history abreast of current developments in the subject. It aims at broad coverage of themes of economic and social change, including the intellectual, political and cultural implications of these changes.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Silas Burroughs, the man who made Wellcome: American ambition and global enterprise. Julia Sheppard, (Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press, 2022, pp. 344. 35 images. ISBN: 9780718895990, Pbk. £20) Cellular: An economic and business history of the international mobile-phone industry. Daniel D. Garcia-Swartz and Martin Campbell-Kelly, (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2022. pp. 400. 75 figs. ISBN 9780262543927, Pbk $45) Correction to “Early inventory management practices in the foreign exchange market: Insights from sixteenth-century Lyon” Virtue capitalists: The rise and fall of the professional class in the Anglophone world, 1870–2008 Hannah Forsyth, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2023. pp. 317. 12 figs. ISBN: 9781009206488, Hbk $110)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1