The Green Bag
194
either attempting to bridge the gulf between two distinct sciences, and fail ing to secure the unity at which they aim, or else confining themselves to the
theoretical, analytical side either of gen eral or of special jurisprudence. The notion of an encyclopedic science of law therefore breaks down, because it at tempts to bring an artificial unity out of a necessary diversity. The term "encyclopedia” is thus not available as an equivalent for General Jurisprudence, but Korkunov’s term,
General Theory of Law, though it may not be desirable to adopt, is meant to
be synonymous. This is evident from the definition found in his comment on Miiller's System der Rechtsgrtinde‘: — The general theory of law verifies everywhere the positive law from the technical and logical
estimate it is necessary to notice the plan on which the treatise is con structed and the manner in which it fulfills the purposes of legal encyclo pedia.
The real, if not the professed aim of the treatise is twofold: (1) to develop a theory of fundamental principles of legal science, and (2) to arrange and classify the main heads of German law in accord ance with an application and develop ment of that theory. The first part of the book, comprising somewhat less than half of its contents, is concerned with theory, the second and greater part with analysis of the underlying prin ciples of German private law in detail. This plan doubtless answers to the notion of “encyclopedia," and as "encyclo pedia" the work is perhaps open to Korkunov’s objection that it is "more
point of view, shows the internal connection, the
essence of the social organism, and refers it to the general principles of human activity in society and the state. It is thus the keystone of jurisprudence. It binds into a whole the separate parts and their diverse contents. To attain this object it ought to observe rigorously the objective method, and avoid all subjective construction.
The foregoing considerations will per haps make it easier to assign Prof. Gareis's “Introduction to the Science of Law" its proper place in the literature
like a simple review of special juridical
matters, for its general part is less developed.”0 Or, if the second part, like the first, employs the method of general jurisprudence, the work is not
an encyclopedia. vey,
Certainly Legal Sur
translator’s
equivalent
for
“encyclopedia," is not to be confounded with the general theory of law. Were the theory of law fully developed as a separate science, it would be un
The real title, therefore, is
necessary, as Korkunov intimates,7 for a writer to preface an analysis of a sys tem of existing law, which this primarily is, with a discussion of general principles. There would be something even incon gruous in the juxtaposition of treatises on two distinct subjects. But in the absence of a generally accepted scien tific theory of law, which can serve as the basis of any compendious exposi
“Encyclopedia of Jurisprudence." The translator has wisely rejected the word "Encyclopedia” as misleading to Ameri
tions of this kind, such an introductory portion prepares the way for an analy tical presentation of legal principles with
of General Jurisprudence.
The full title
of this work, which was first published in 1887, is, “Enzyklopddie und Metho dologie der Rechtswissenschaft (Einlei
tung in die Rechtswissenschaft)” The section on Methodology, which is wholly concerned with methods of legal study, occupies only a few pages at the end of the book.
can readers, but in seeking any sound ‘Theory of Law, p. 37.
0Theory of Law. p. 19. "Theory of Law. p. 37.
