No abstract

Both Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben draw on the ancient Greek concept of nomos as an important element underpinning their legal theories. Aiming to restore that concept to its pre-sophistic meaning, they grant central weight to a piece of poetry in which Pindar famously proclaims that 'law (nomos) is king of all', guiding both mortals and immortals while 'justifying the utmost violence with a powerful hand'. For Schmitt as for Agamben, this means that the Pindaric fragment exposes the violent origins of law that normativist jurisprudence typically shields from view. For one thing, I will explain in this article why Schmitt's and Agamben's use of the fragment is at odds with any acceptable interpretation of it in its wider literary and historical context. More importantly, perhaps, my aim is ultimately to reconstruct a Pindaric jurisprudence as it should actually be preferred to that of both Schmitt and Agamben.

No abstract

This article aims to demonstrate that works of art and literature can provide important insights in law and justice that are hard to grasp by one-sidedly rationalist methods of academic analysis. It takes Sophocles' Antigoneperhaps the most classical text of law and literature's familiar catalogue -as a case in point, drawing attention to some important aspects of that play's legal epistemic relevance that are still largely overlooked. Arguing that the widespread view on the confrontation between Antigone and Creon as a clash between 'divine' and 'human' law is mistaken, the article builds on Hegel's view that the positions of both protagonists are likewise incomplete, denying elements of law and justice that are equally essential, the one being no less divine than the other. However, it departs from Hegel's analysis in maintaining that the play does not entail the promise of 'ethical life' (Sittlichkeit) as some synthesis that recognizes the specific value of both Antigone's and Creon's stances on law and justice but takes away their incompatibility. Instead, it is argued that the play teaches us that such harmonization is unattainable -a no less valuable lesson indeed.

Perhaps, this is particularly true for a German philosophical tradition that stretches from Schelling, Hegel and Hölderlin via Nietzsche and Heidegger to Adorno, Strauss, Arendt and many others. In all their differences, these thinkers all share the idea that the problems of modernity should somehow be confronted by reconsidering the ancient Greek tradition and rethinking our relation to it.