Analytical school of Jurisprudence is based on the legal maxim, 'Ubi civitas ibi lex' which signifies 'where there is State, there will not be anarchy' and therefore, the underlying principle of this school is the relation of law with that of a State. The essential concept of the Analytical school of jurisprudence is to deal with the law as it already exists. Law, according to the Analytical school, is the sovereign's direction. As a result, analytical schools are also known as imperative schools[1].

In the nineteenth century, the analytical school rose to prominence. It claims that morals are not objective but the law must be objective. If morals are included in the concept of law, the law will no longer be objective. The analytical school takes a 'positive' perspective on societal legal issues. The positivists' main concern is the law that is actually found (positum), rather than the ideal law. Put simply, ideal law is the perfect law for a society or a circumstance whereas law which is actually found concerns logical and welfare thinking in the legislation.

Legislations, court precedents, and customary laws are the most important legal sources. This school, which is the most popular in England, establishes the fundamental elements that make up the fabric of law, such as state sovereignty and the administration of justice. While Bentham, Holland, Austin and Salmond are major proponents of this school, Austin is considered as a father of the Analytical school. The present article reflects on the essential aspects related to the Analytical school of jurisprudence.

Different positivists had the same objective and perspective in their thoughts where few basic assumptions are followed by them which include:

• Sovereign or Grundnorm - As the law created by the authority.
• Relied on the 'law as it is' not on 'the law ought to be' - ignored morality and natural law.
• Determined and encouraged the concept of sanction - sanction which was substantive before the enforcement of laws[2].

History of Analytical School of Jurisprudence
Natural Law refers to the rules and principles which are supposed to have originated from some supreme source. Natural law is simply discovered by human beings; therefore, it must not be regarded as man made. Natural Law is considered to be eternal and is believed to have existed from the commencement of the creation of the world. Since the Natural School of Jurisprudence was prominent till the beginning of the 18th century, some writers believed that the principles of natural law should be held supreme and could override man made laws. Analytical school is considered to be a reaction against Natural school of jurisprudence[3].

Features of Analytical School of Jurisprudence
Concerned with strictly so called i.e. what law is, not what it ought to be?.
Law is not based upon idea of good or bad, it is based upon power of superior

There is no moral law.

Law and justice differs:
This school is reaction against natural law theories, which are based upon rationalization or nature confined law or God and gave importance to ethical and moral issues[4].
Purpose of Analytical School

The purpose of Analytical jurisprudence is to examine the foundational principles of law without regard to their historical origins, evolution, ethical importance or validity. According to Salmond, a book of analytical jurisprudence will deal with an analysis of the concept of law, an examination of the relationship between civil law and other forms of law, an analysis of the various constituent ideas of which the complex idea of law is made up, such as State, sovereignty, and administration of justice, an account of legal sources from which law proceeds, as well as an investigation of the theory of legislation, and so on[5].

Function of the Analytical school of jurisprudence
The Analytical school's fundamental objective is to provide legal principles in a clear and methodical manner that is relevant to a larger and more developed legal system. It begins with the real facts of law as they exist now. It tries to define those words, explains their meanings, and illustrates how they are related to one another. One of the goals of the Analytical school is to have a thorough knowledge of the underlying notions that underpin all legal thinking.

Founders And Advocate OF Analytical School
Jeremy Bentham(1742-1832)
Bentham is considered to be the founder of 'positivism' in the modern sense of the term. He preferred to divide jurisprudence into 'expository' and 'censorial' jurisprudence. Expository or analytical jurisprudence is concerned with law, it is without any regard to its moral or immoral character. On the other hand censorial jurisprudence is concerned with 'science of legislation' that is what the law ought to be.

Bentham in his book 'limits of jurisprudence defined' said that its duty of state to provide maximum happiness and maximum liberty. In other words he means to test every laws and keep a check whether they are providing maximum happiness and liberty, leading to principle of utility i.e. 'Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number of People'.

Bentham had defined law with the help of two important aspects such as:
Law is "Happiness is the Greatest Good": According to Bentham, the laws framed must promote pleasure and decrease any kind of pain to human beings.
Law is the command of the sovereign: The concept of sovereignty came into existence by Bentham before Austin would compose it. Bentham says the law is the command given by the sovereign[6].
Bentham's Philosophy of Individualism

The legal philosophy of Bentham is called "Individualism" because he was an individualist and propounded that the law is to be made for the emancipation of the individuals and restraining on their freedom.

The task of government according to Bentham, was to promote happiness of society by furthering enjoyment of pleasure and affording security against pain. He was convinced that if individuals comprising society were convinced that if individuals comprising society were happy and contended, the whole body politic would enjoy happiness and prosperity[7].

Laissez Faire:
He believed that, we must remove the hurdles between human beings and freedom. Because when every individual will enjoy his freedom, he himself will start about his own welfare. In other words he meant 'let the men free' leading to minimum interference of the state in economic activities of individuals.

Criticism:

• His theory ignores balancing the interest of the individual with the community's interest.
• His principle of utilitarianism says about pain and pleasure are the final and ultimate test of the adequacy of law, but they cannot be defined as the final test.
• His theory was in the form of Laissez-Faire policy which harms individuals in society, particularly the poor.
• Sole importance given to pleasure, which is quantified, is not a proper decision.

Principle Of Utility: According to him, the consequences of good and evil are respectively 'pleasure' and 'pain.' In simple words, the basic thing which comes under the principle of utility is pleasure and pain. The principle of utility recognizes the role of pleasure and pain in human life.

• Pleasure = 'everything that is good'
• Pain = 'everything that is bad or evil'

Therefore, keeping the consequences of good and bad in human life, the principle approves or disapproves actions on the basis of pleasure and pain. He believed that happiness of social order is to be understood in the objective sense and it broadly includes satisfaction of certain needs, such as the need to be fed, clothed, housed, etc. According to him, happiness changes its significance in the same way as the meaning also undergoes changes with the changes in societal norms. He desired to ensure the happiness of the community by attending to four major goals, namely:

• Subsistence
• Abundance
• Equality
• Security for the citizens

Therefore, the function of law must be to meet these ends in order to provide subsistence, abundance, equality, and maintain security. In order to measure pain, they advise a calculator known as the 'utilitarian calculus,' which gives seven factors to calculate pain:

• Intensity
• Duration
• Certainty
• Nearness
• Fecundity
• Purity
• Extent

John Austin (1790-1859)
John Austin is the founder of the Analytical school and father of the English Jurisprudence. He was born in 1790. He was elected to the chair of Jurisprudence at the University if London in 1826. His lectures delivered in the London University were published in 1832 under the title 'the Province of Jurisprudence Determined'.

Austin defined law as 'a rule laid down for the guidance of intelligent being by an intelligent being having power over him'.

Austin's Definition of Law
"Law is a command of the sovereign backed by a sanction."

LAW = COMMAND + SOVEREIGN + SANCTION

His notion was that where there is no sovereign, there is no independent political society and vice versa is also applicable. For him, Law, was a set of rules established by men as politically superior, or sovereign, to men as politically subject.

The fundamentals of his theory are: Command, Sovereign and Sanction.

Command: Commands are the rules or expressions of imposed by a superior authority (by force or compulsion) on the Inferiors. The former is the sovereign which authorize the rules of conduct of the latter, the general public.

• General Command = issued for the guidance of a whole community, or
• Particular Command = issued for the guidance of a particular community/Individual.

Austin emphasizes that only General Commands form laws and they must be lawful and continuous.

• Sovereign: Sovereign is a source of law and every rule emerges from a sovereign. A sovereign may be any individual or body of individuals, whom the politically influenced mass of people habitually follow. However, he himself does not obey an individual or body of individuals.
• Sanction: To ensure and administer justice the state applies physical force as a sanction. Therefore, it is the sole crux of Positive Law. It instils fear of punishment in case one disobeys the laws. Sanction is related to duty shaped by the command of a sovereign authority and sanction becomes an absolute necessity for enforcement of law.

Classification of Law by Austin:
(Austin theory of Imperative Law)
Austin separated law as improperly so-called and law properly so-called. He encourages positive law only because he is a positivist.

He recognized that law can be set by both God (divine law) or by men to men, where law set by God is regarded as ambiguous and misleading according to him and on the other hand laws set by men to men is of three types:

• Laws set by political superiors to their inferiors - law properly so-called.
• Laws set by men who are not political superiors - positive morality.

Criticism:
Australians theory has been criticized by a number of jurist points of the criticism against Austin theory of law which are as follows:

Custom ignored:
As per the Australian theory we founded that law is the command of the sovereign. Austin mainly focuses on the commands that are given by the sovereign are the laws. But in the earlier times, not the command of any superior but custom regulates the conduct of the people. Continue to regulate the conduct of the people, even after coming of the state into existence. Some jurists are in favour of the customs as laws and they say that laws are not the command of the sovereign but the custom followed by the people for a long time. But Austin in his theory of law emphasized only the law as the command of the sovereign and ignored the custom as a law.

Judge made law:- Austin in his theory has not provided any place for judge-made law. In the course of their duty judges make law by applying precedents and interpreting the law. Though an Austinan would say that judges act under the powers delegated to them by the sovereign, therefore, their acts are the commands of the sovereign body, in modern times, will deny that judge perform a creative function and Austin's definition of law does not include it.

As against the command:- Austin believes that the determination of human superiority is the only law-maker and its commands are laws. But with other historic jurists, Sir Henry Main criticized Austen's theory of sovereignty and condemned it. Sir Henry Men believes that sovereignty does not exist in the determination of human superiority. According to him, "a large population of influences, which we can call for a lesser ethic, which permanently shapes, limits or prohibits the real direction of forces by its sovereign".

This theory makes the sovereign completely absolute:- This theory makes the sovereign completely absolute, but in practice, it is not possible to be completely absolute. In the ancient and medieval era, there were absolute monarchs. But the monarchs could not remain completely absolute in his actions and behavior. They were subject to ethics theory, code of conduct, and investigation of religion. If he tried to violate established moral, ethical, and religious canons, he was in danger of facing rebellion.

This theory is not even applicable to Europe:- Austin has claimed that the King-in-Parliament is sovereign in England. But legally, this claim is not right because neither the king nor the parliament can go to the extent of becoming completely absolute. Always have to pay attention to the wishes of the public. The reality is that the public is the ultimate source of power. It is public which empowers Parliament. This is the reason why elections are held every five years after the House of Commons. And in the absence of the House of Lords, the House of Lords is quite ineffective[9].
Holland (1835-1928)

Holland is a follower of Austin. He followed the concept of the analytical approach of the study of law which is thoughts of Austin and the same was carried further by him. He rejected Austin's thoughts on 'Particular Jurisprudence' by stressing that if the jurisprudence is science then it is always general and universal but not particular.

His famous book is "The Elements of Jurisprudence".
According to Holland, Jurisprudence is:

"the formal science of that relation of mankind which is generally recognized as having legal consequences - the formal science of positive law".

The important terms to be remembered here are:

• Formal: The jurisprudence concerns the human relation which is governed by the rules of law.
• Positive Law: Holland deals with the law as it is or existing law and does not concern with the law ought to be, which is the same as the concept of Austin.

Holland's Criticism:

• Buckland criticized the concept of distinction of the word 'particular' and 'general' in the particular jurisprudence concept of Austin by saying it is not a correct separation.
• Buckland also said that law is not a mechanical structure like geological deposits but the law is development or growth and its true analogy is with biology.
• Salmond, Jethrow, Brown, and Gray also criticized Holland for his rejection of 'particular jurisprudence' and agreed with Austin on this concept.
• Dias and Hughes observed Holland's jurisprudence with geology is erroneous because according to them, law is a social institution which differs in its structure based on its objectives, traditions, and environment.

Salmond (1862 - 1924)
Salmond is a legal positivist and belongs to an analytical school. He says jurisprudence is a science as same in the eyes of Austin and Holland. He has defined law in a unique way which is different when it is compared to Austin.

Salmond's famous book is "Jurisprudence or Theory of the law".

Salmond's Contribution to the Analytical school of jurisprudence

• According to Salmond, the law is "the body of principles recognized and applied by the state in the administration of justice". It means the law is rules which are acted by the courts of justice. The final and true test of the adequacy of law is defined by the enforceability of law in the courts of justice.
• According to Salmond, Jurisprudence is "the science of first principles of the civil law". The civil law here is the law that is applied by the administration in the court of justice and it is the first principle and the final test of the adequacy of law.
• Salmond's definition of law has brought a drastic change in the thoughts of analytical positivists.
• Inspired by him, many realist jurists have considered law as it is and not law which ought to be.

Salmond's Criticism:

• Vinogradoff criticized Salmond's definition of law, according to him law is to be formulated precisely by applying it in a court of justice.
• Critiques also said that the definition is itself defective because, in their thoughts, law is logically subsequent to the justice of administration.
• The definition of law is vitiated because when the rule has existed for the purpose of applying it in the court of justice.
• The purpose of the law is not only justice but it also must be accepted universally.
• He has also narrowed the field of law according to the critiques.

Hans Kelsen (1881 - 1973):
Kelsen has contributed the pure theory of law to the analytical school of jurisprudence. He also accepted the concept of law as normative in nature and not a natural science.

Hans Kelson was an Austrian jurist, legal philosopher, and political Philosopher belonging to a legal positivism school of thought. Roscoe Pound was appreciated as Kelson's "undoubtedly the leading jurist of time."

His famous book is "The Pure Theory of Law"[10].

Pure Theory of Law or Vienna School
Kelsen defines law as:
"the body of norms which stipulates sanction".

Here, the norm is a pattern or model, the definition says that a kind of directive by which a certain act is permitted or authorized or commanded. His theory says to be pure because he eliminates alien elements which make the structure of the legal system improper. According to him, the law must be positive law.

According to Kelsen, Jurisprudence is "the study of a hierarchy of norms, the validity of each norm depending on that of a superior norm 'Grund Norm'.

For example: Constitution is our Grundnorm, all the other laws like IPC, CrPC, CPC, and other laws check their validity from the Grundnorm which is Constitution. If in IPC any such law made which is against the Grundnorm then they will become invalid.

His definition executes the relationship between the Grund norm and all other norms. For him norm is a 'rule of conduct' and grund norm is the superior norm. The grund norm delegates authority to inferior norms which derives their validity from the norms superior to themselves.

The validity of other inferior norms can be defined by testing against grund norm.

Key Features of Kelsen's Pure Theory:

• Law as Science: Kelsen tried to present a theory that could be attempted to change Law in science, a theory that could be understood through logic.
• As a positive law: In the first paragraph of the pure theory of law, Kelsen introduces his theory as a theory of positive law. This principle of positive law is then presented by Kelsen as a hierarchy of laws that begins with one basic norm, i.e., Grundnorm, where all other norms are related to each other either being inferior norms.
• Law "As it is": Kelsen emphasized that analysis should focus on the law 'as it is' in fact laid down, not as 'it ought to be'.
• Law and morality: Kelsen's strict separation of law and morality is an integral part of his pure theory of law.
• The theory of law should be uniform: According to Kelsen, the theory of law should be applied at all times and in all places.
• Static Aspect of Law: Kelsen distinguished the static theory of law from the dynamic theory of law. The static theory of law represented the law as a hierarchy of laws where individual laws were related to each other either being inferior, one to another, or superior with respect to each other.

Kelsen's Criticism:

• The concept of Grundnorm is vague and creates confusion.
• His theory did not give importance to its practicality.
• He directly ignored morality and natural law.
• While he says his theory is pure and excludes improper elements, critiques argue that it is not possible to maintain such purity.

Conclusion
When the analytical positivism of English legal system was examined in light of ancient Indian Jurisprudence would uproot certain contradictory facts. Where in Austin's theory sovereign is given the utmost power higher than the law, on other hand contrary to it , In ancient Indian legal system , Law is given the higher place by which both the state and subjects are bound to. So the Dharma occupied a highest place in Indian legal system and sovereign was bound to rule according to dharma.

In Indian legal system dharma consist in observance of truth , non-violence and rightful code of moral conduct which holds or sustains men together in harmony and establishes social solidarity. Dharma in Indian context is consist of achara (rules of daily routine), Vyavahara (rule or decree or commands of the king) and prayaschitta (penance).

The king was bound to enforce law according Shastras . The element of Sanction found expression in the ancient Indian legal system by way of danda (punishment) and so the great ancient law-giver Manu says it is the fear of danda which makes people to follow dharma. The glimpses of positivism in laws framed after the independence differs from Austinian conception of analytical positivism in way that the former seeks to establish harmonious relationship between is and ought that is, it do not ignore the element of justice or morality from the law, whereas , there is no place for there elements in the latter.

End Notes:

1. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-5691-analytical-school-of-jurisprudence.html
2. https://lawcorner.in/analytical-school-of-jurisprudence/
3. https://lawcorner.in/analytical-school-of-jurisprudence/
4. https://legalvidhiya.com/analytical-school-of-jurisprudence/
5. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-5691-analytical-school-of-jurisprudence.html
6. https://legalstixlawschool.com/blog/Analytical-School-of-Jurisprudence:-Understanding-Law-s-Nature-and-Function
7. https://www.toppr.com/guides/legal-aptitude/jurisprudence/schools-of-jurisprudence-analytical-positivism/
8. https://blog.ipleaders.in/critical-appraisal-various-schools-jurisprudence/
9. https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/concept-waqf-muslim-law/
10. https://lawcorner.in/analytical-school-of-jurisprudence/
11. https://legalvidhiya.com/analytical-school-of-jurisprudence/