Legal Anthropology, also called the legal anthropology of laws, is an important sub-field of anthropology that studies “the complex interaction of human beings within legal systems”. The main questions that Legal Anthropology investigators seek to answer focus on how to do legal systems across cultures differ? How does legal behavior vary across cultures? And what can we learn from other cultures? These are some of the fundamental questions that Legal anthropologists try to answer in their work.
Legal anthropology is different from many other sections of anthropology simply because its focus is not on the physical attributes of people as they exist in the natural environment. Rather, Legal Anthropology scholars want to analyze how social norms and legal rules vary across cultural boundaries, and how such variations affect particular individuals and groups in various settings. Legal anthropologists also try to understand cultural diversity through comparative research. For instance, researchers may compare two cultures using only quantitative methods, such as statistics, to determine similarities and differences.
Unlike quantitative studies, however, qualitative methods are used in legal anthropology. Qualitative methods draw on everyday life experiences to explore topics such as gender discrimination, freedom of expression, attitudes towards the legal system, and the role of the media in society. Within qualitative research, it is also important to distinguish between theoretical and practical conclusions. The conclusions of a theory can be generalizations about contemporary society, while a practical application could go further in suggesting ways that could be made practical in everyday life. For instance, one study by legal anthropologist Lee Baucom discussed the widespread belief that women are economically disadvantaged compared to men.
Legal anthropologists use many different tools to analyze legal issues, such as research, documentation, field research, personal interviews, and social analysis. The aim of each step is to discover the meanings behind legal statements and actions. It is important to remember that legal anthropology is not an exact science, which means that it is possible for there to be a lot of variations and interpretations when it comes to legal problems. This makes it very hard to generalize legal problems and to apply certain techniques and norms to a wide variety of cases.
Legal anthropology has some limitations compared to other scientific disciplines, such as evolutionary biology. Unlike in biology, there are no external constraints to the evolution of legal institutions or codes. As a result, legal anthropology has a rather loose approach to statistical methods. Some scholars have criticized this looseness of methodology, saying that it leads to invalidation of legal scholarship. Yet, other scholars dispute this, arguing that it leads to a more creative understanding of legal problems.
Comparisons between legal anthropology and political anthropology are somewhat difficult, because the two are usually viewed as separate fields. Legal scholarship generally tends to focus on how legal institutions are formed, while political anthropologists tend to look at how political institutions are maintained. Still, both humanities and social science scholars have applied some of their statistical methods to analyzing legal and social problems.
Comparisons also become more difficult when one takes into account the different perspectives of legal anthropology. While legal scholars typically focus on legal systems within a nation state, political anthropologists look at different polities or national assemblies at different times. Legal scholars typically only look at how legal systems function within a nation-state, ignoring how these systems are organized at the national or international level. Political anthropologists who specialize in studying international law may make criticisms of legal practices at the national level, but they too tend to focus more on how local actors organize political power. For example, they may question the legitimacy of a national legitimacy claim based on how the constitution is written or how the majority rule politically or otherwise distorts the separation of powers at the national level.
Legal anthropologists have made great contributions to social science and law as well as to education. In addition, legal anthropology has served as a useful vehicle for bringing Methodists and other Social Science scholars together with those involved in anthropology and the social sciences. For example, comparative legal anthropology has made great contributions to understanding legal systems in India, Mexico, Nigeria, and South America. As this genre of anthropology continues to develop and gain recognition, it will undoubtedly continue to contribute to knowledge about complex social systems and legal practices at every level.