About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2 Critical Analysis L. 1 (2015)

handle is hein.journals/cclaysolw2 and id is 1 raw text is: New Historical Jurisprudence: Legal History as Critical Analysis of Law Markus D. Dubber* Abstract This modest manifesto-or minfesto-portrays legal history as a mode of critical analysis of law, using the historical analysis of American penality as an illustration and the full- fledged manifestos by Piketty and Guldi & Armitage as points of reference. Historical analysis of law, in this light, appears as one mode of critical analysis among others, in- cluding, notably, comparative analysis of law, along with economic, philosophical, sociological, or ethical analysis of law, and so on. Historical analysis of law, in other words, is itself a mode of legal scholarship, not a subspecies of law or history. It is a comprehensive view of law from a particular critical vantage point: a way of doing law, rather than of doing things with law. Historical analysis of law in this sense is less law and history than law as history, less legal history than historical jurisprudence. Ours is an age of manifestos. I don't mean political manifestos, though there certainly are plenty of those around as well. I mean academic manifestos, and, within this genre, the sub- genre of historical manifestos. There is, for starters, the conveniently named The History Manifesto by Jo Guldi and David Armitage,' previewed by its authors in a provocative, even rousing, article that calls for the revival of historiography in the longue dure (and provides an entertaining tour of the various recent turns in historical scholarship, each of which pre- sumably came with its own manifesto, if not in name and perhaps only expost).2 Then there is Thomas Piketty's academic blockbuster, Capitalin the Twenty-First Centuy (2014), a work of history as much as of economics that-though less conveniently titled-is, in its introduc- tion, no less explicit in its manifest ambitions. Both of these exciting and important projects, particularly-and again, explicitly-the former, can be seen as belonging at least partly to another, broader, genre of manifesto, the digital humanities manifesto.3 * University of Toronto, Faculty of Law. Many thanks to Simon Stern for comments and for conversations over the years on this topic, and on many others besides. 1 Available both in print (Jo Guldi & David Armitage, The History Manifesto (2014)) and online (http: / /historvmanifesto.cambridge.org/). 2 David Armitage & Jo Guldi, The Return of the Longue Durie- An Anglo-Saxon Perspective (http://scholar.harvard.edu/files /armitage/files /rld annales reply.pdf) (forthcoming in 70 Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales (2015) (in French)). 3lncluding the Digital Humanities Manifesto itself, available in several versions, helpfully and appropriatelynumbered 1.0 and 2.0 (by last count). A Digital Humanities Manifesto (v. 1.0) (http: / /manifesto.humaniies.ucla.edu); The Digital Humanities Manifesto 2.0 (http: //manifesto.humaniies.ucla.edu/2009/05/29/the-digital-humanities-manifesto-20/). ISSN 2291-9732

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most