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.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 198-222 |
Number of pages | 25 |
Journal | Law and Humanities |
Volume | 13 |
Issue number | 2 |
Early online date | 2019 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 3 Jul 2019 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2019, © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Keywords
- Nomos
- fragment 169
- legal philosophy
- rule of law
- violence