Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T07:55:54.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two puzzles of judicial wagers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2021

Harald Wiese Open the ORCID record for Harald Wiese [Opens in a new window]
Harald Wiese*
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig, Postfach 920, D-04009 Leipzig, Germany Email: wiese@wifa.uni-leipzig.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is about an Old Indian judicial institution called paṇa (“wager”). Within a court proceeding, a judicial wager is a certain sum of money that a conflicting party offers to pay if he ends up losing his case. This paper explains the rationale of judicial wagers by showing that they may signal truthfulness.

Keywords

judicial wagerevidenceordealspooling equilibriumseparating equilibrium
Type
Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 73 - 85
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Asiatic Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Publication bibliography

Brick, D. (2015) Brahmanical Theories of the Gift. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbons, R. (1992) A primer in game theory. New York, NY, Harlow: Harvester Wheatsheaf; Prentice Hall Financial Times.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J.C., Selten, R. (1988) A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kangle, R.P. (1969) The Kauṭilya Arthaśāstra. Part I: Sanskrit Text with a Glossary, 2nd ed., Bombay: Bombay University.Google Scholar
Lariviere, R.W. (1981a) The Divyatattva of Raghunandana Bhaṭṭācārya. Ordeals in classical Hindu law. New Delhi: Manohar.Google Scholar
Lariviere, R.W. (1981b) The judicial wager in hindu law. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 62, 135–145.Google Scholar
Leeson, P.T. (2011) Trials by Battle. Journal of Legal Analysis 3, 341–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeson, P.T. (2012) Ordeals The Journal of Law and Economics 55, 691–714. DOI: 10.1086/664010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthiass, B. (1888) Die Entwicklung des römischen Schiedsgerichts. Rostock: Commissions-Verlag der Stiller'schen Hof- u. Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Matthiass, B. (1912) Partial extract of Matthiass (1888) in English. The American Journal of International Law 6, 341–347.Google Scholar
Olivelle, P. (2005) Manu's code of law. A critical edition and translation of the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra (South Asia research).Google Scholar
Olivelle, P. (2013) King, governance, and law in ancient India. Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Olivelle, P. (2019) Yajnavalkya: a Treatise on Dharma. Cambridge (MA): Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rasmusen, E. (2009) Games and information. An introduction to game theory. 4th ed., Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wiese, H. (2016a) An economic vindication of Ancient Indian ‘Nonsense’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 79, 513–534.Google Scholar
Wiese, H. (2016b) Indian principal-agent theory, or, how Varuṇa helps the king to be just. Asiatische Studien – Études Asiatiques 70, 571–589.Google Scholar