Sharīʿa in the Russian Empire: The Reach and Limits of Islamic Law in Central Eurasia, 1550–1917 Edited by Paolo Sartori and Danielle Ross

2021

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1093/jis/etab061
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This is an essential collection of high-quality essays by an international and gender-diverse group of capable scholars ranging from post-doctoral to senior. Each of the chapters significantly advances the study of Islamic history—particularly the history of Islamic law and related Muslim identities—within the Tsarist Russian Empire (1550–1917). The volume certainly contributes ‘towards integrating the Muslims of the Russian Empire into the global history of Islamic law under colonial rule’, and though debatably ‘a first step’, nonetheless a giant one in that direction (p. 4). Perhaps the volume best succeeds—in appreciable measure—at adding further nuance to and/or complicating a number of over-simplified dichotomies which have gained a degree of traction within Central Eurasian Islamic and colonial (legal) historiography, most notably those regarding the alleged lack of agency and continuity among the colonized in contrast to the control and influence of the colonizer, the historical and religio-political relation of taqlīd and ijtihād as well as ʿādat and sharīʿa, the relation of Muslim jurist to political ruler, and supposed advances by modernist Jadīd reformers to issues of gender, among others. Although the ‘Introduction’ tends at points to over-state the degree to which the volume, both in whole and its various parts, represents an alleged watershed achievement in Central Eurasian Islamic historiography, it is nonetheless a substantial one.