organize the diversirv of discourses around different (cultural) forms and counter the tendenev of the mind toward unif'ormization. (Comparison must grasji legal cultures diacntically. Accordingly, the comparatist must emphaticallv rehut any attempt at the axiomatization of similarit\', especially when the institutionalization of sameness hecomes so extrayagant as to suggest that a finding of difference should lead her to start her research afresh! I'o c]Uote Ciiinter IVankenherg, '|a]nalogies and the presumption of similarit\ have to he abandoned for a rigorous experience of distance and difference.' I argue that comparison must imoKe 'the primary and fundamental iinestigation of difference.' I he priority of alterity must act as a got erning postulate for the comparatist. To }->riyilege alterity at all times is the only way in which the comparatist can guard against the dece]>tion otherw ise suggested hy the similarity of .st)lution.s to gi\en .socio-legal problems across legal cultures: the fact that the same solution (say, '6') can he reached hy multiplying two numbers (say, '.V and '2') or by adding twai numbers (say, '.s' and '!') does not entail the same operands or cognitive operations. It is the case, of coinse, that the success of this comparative project must depend upon an initial receptivity to the otherness of the other. 1 confess I do nor see any substance in this, or in what follttws. In no wav do I comprehend fromit how understanding of law is increased, whether w ith regard to its development or w ith the relation-ship of law and society. 1 wonder w ho would den\' that the comparatist must be aware of differences.^ But he must also be aware of the similarities and their causes. Among the most important causes of similarities is borrowing or transplanting; and here, as 1 ha\ e often stressed, the differences are also enlightening."’ For me the \ alue of comparati\e law lies fundamentalh' in its capacit\' to e.vplain legal changes and the relationship of law to society; and at this stage of its dewelopment-comparative law is in its infanc\ -the simplest wa\' to e\- ploit comparatixe law is bv examining, and accounting for both similarities and differences in systems that have a historical relativinship. l or me comparativ e law as an academic discipline is fundamentally a historical exercise. 10 For example, now see Watson, Society, pp. i^off. 105
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=