Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T17:03:13.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Battle for Legal Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Gnavius Flavius

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A new movement has come to legal science. It strikes self-awareness into the minds of all jurists who falsely believe their deeds fully consistent with their ideals. It pierces and destroys these delusions and undertakes now, in light of new, less modest ideals, to justify our constant activity to ourselves: the creation of law. Yet, no matter how audibly our movement is simultaneously heralded in various fields, it still lacks unity and awareness of its power. Therefore, we venture an attempt here to summon all its best forces into unity: an attempt that deliberately ignores everything that separates discrete writers from one another, a unity that does not expect itself to be the system of any one person, nor the program of all of them, and therefore acts on its own responsibility.

Type
Translation
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 12 , Issue 11: Special section - The Hartz IV Case and the German Sozialstaat , 01 November 2011 , pp. 2005 - 2030
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Kirchmann, Julius von (1802–1884) was a German jurist and philosopher. Kantorowicz mentions him in reference to his breakthrough work Die Wertlosigkeit der Jurisprudenz als Wissenschaft (1848).Google Scholar

2 Jhering, Rudolf von (1818–1892) was a German jurist and sociologist of law. The title of Kantorowicz's manifesto is likely to have been taken from Jhering's influential work, Der Kampf ums Recht (1872).Google Scholar

3 Kohler, Josef (1849–1919) was a German jurist who wrote extensively on comparative law, civil law, and the philosophy of law; Oskar Bülow (1837–1907) was a German jurist and legal scientist; Gustav von Rümelin (1848–1907) was a German legal scientist who taught Roman law at Universität Freiburg.Google Scholar

4 Stammler, Rudolf (1856–1938) was a German philosopher of law who was critical to the promotion of pedagogical reform in the instruction of law around the turn of the twentieth century.Google Scholar

5 Ehrlich, Eugen (1862–1922) was an Austrian jurist and sociologist of law who departed from Hans Kelsen's views by emphasizing the plurality of social, cultural, and political forces constituting legal authority.Google Scholar

6 Zitelmann, Ernst (1852–1923) was a German jurist and professor at Universität Bonn who wrote on matters concerning the fallible juridical subject (see Die juristische Willenserklärung (1878) and Irrtum und Rechtsgeschäft (1879)) as well as the German Civil Code.Google Scholar

7 Gierke, Otto von (1841–1921) was a German historian who specialized in the history of German law. He wrote on such subjects as natural law in Germany (see Naturrrecht und Deutsches Recht (1883)) and the concept of the Rechtsstaat (the legal state).Google Scholar

8 Landsberg, Ernst (1860–1927) was a German jurist and professor at Universität Bonn who specialized in the history of German legal science and constitutional law.Google Scholar

9 Mayer, Max Ernst (1875–1923) was a penologist and philosopher of law who, with Gustav Radbruch (one of Kantorowicz's most intimate friends—see Frank Kantorowicz Carter, Gustav Radbruch and Hermann Kantorowicz: Two friends and a book – Reflections on Gnaeus Flavius's Der Kampf um die Rechtswissenschaft, 7 German Law Journal, 7 (2006)), established the neo-Kantian school of legal philosophy in southwest Germany.Google Scholar

10 Wurzel, Karl Georg (1875–1931) was an Austrian sociologist of law whose work in legal reasoning was well received by American legal realists at the beginning of the twentieth century. Ehrlich was considerably influenced by Wurzel, although later in his career Wurzel thought Ehrlich too preoccupied with establishing a normative system of legal reasoning.Google Scholar

11 Stampe, Ernst (1856–1942) was a university professor at Greifswald who specialized in civil law.Google Scholar

12 Pufendorf, Samuel von (1632–1694) was a German jurist and philosopher of natural law; Christian Wolff (1679–1754) was a renowned natural philosopher who was deeply influenced by Leibniz. Wolff considered the logical law of contradiction to be the most fundamental to philosophy—Kantorowicz criticizes this position later in the manifesto.Google Scholar

13 Merkel, Paul (1872–1943) was a German legal scientist and a teacher of criminal law who had connections with both Radbruch and Kantorowicz.Google Scholar

14 This is a reference to Hippolyte Bernheim's advocated method of hypnotism, “suggestion” as a form of psychological therapy.Google Scholar

15 Sternberg, Theodor Hermann (1878–1950) was a German jurist and philosopher of law who primarily taught at Japanese universities. He is considered to be an important figure in the free law movement.Google Scholar

16 Thöl, Johann Heinrich (1807–1884) was a German professor of law whose work in commercial law and the commercial code greatly influenced Germany's present commercial code; Joseph Unger (1828–1913) was an Austrian jurist and professor of jurisprudence at the University of Vienna. Because of his comparative work in Austrian civil law and German legal science, he is considered the founder of Austrian legal science.Google Scholar

17 This is referring to Georges Cuvier's principle of the correlation of parts, comparative anatomy as able to determine genus from a single bone. Kantorowicz's reference to him in contrast to the view being expounded was likely done in error.Google Scholar

18 Dernburg, Heinrich (1829–1907) was a German jurist who promoted Pandectism, the study of Roman law under the Justinian Pandects as a model of Konstruktionsjurisprudenz (conceptual jurisprudence).Google Scholar

19 Liszt, Franz von (1898–1917) was a professor of criminal law at Universität Berlin whose theory of punishment called for a utilitarian evaluation of a crime's severity and the imposition of punishment for the sake of protecting basic social norms. His theory thus stood in stark contrast to that of Karl Binding (1841–1920), who figured punishment solely a means of reinforcing state authority.Google Scholar

20 “schlank und leicht wie aus dem Nichts gesprungen” (Das Reich der Schatten, Schiller, 1795)Google Scholar

21 Jellinek, Georg (1851–1911) was an Austrian public lawyer who was closely associated with Hans Kelsen and the Austrian logical positivist movement in law.Google Scholar

22 Taken from Archimedes's line, δος μοι που στω και κινω την γην: Give me a place where I may stand, and I shall move the earth.Google Scholar

23 Literally meaning “rules of law,” the phrase is used by Kantorowicz to compare the tools of formalist jurisprudence with the Church's regulae juris, the set of axioms found in the Corpus Juris, the Church's body of laws.Google Scholar

24 Criminal court comprising three professional and two lay judges that decides most serious crimes.Google Scholar