Even a superficial analysis of ErnstViktor Nordling’s writings on this topic indicates that a shift has taken place in the doctrine of legal sources since the late 19th century.The general character of legal argumentation has gravitated away from the organic and contextual, towards a more formal and hierarchical understanding of law.This tendency is particularly apparent in the way in which legal scholars relate a particular source of law to other legal sources or to the notion of Swedish law as a system of legal norms.The bone of contention is whether legal sources ought to be presented in a strictly hierarchical order or according to an understanding of law as a whole. Since we tend to view history as the continuous development towards perfection, an obvious conclusion would be that Nordling’s views are out-dated and have been superseded by improved,modern doctrines.This inference might, however, be precipitate. There is every indication that Nordling’s prescriptive doctrine corresponds almost exactly with the statistics. The conclusion in the report on the studies, that a “non-hierarchical application of the doctrine of legal sources, that focuses on the totality, corresponds with the method that seem to be customary in Sweden“31, might just as well have been referring to Nordling’s doctrine as to the statistics. There is, however, an even more striking correspondence between the statistics of the late 20th century and scholarly writing from the late 19th century, and it concerns the eternal underdog among legal sources, viz legal doctrine. Legal doctrine is, according to Nordling, the “Odd Man Out” among the sources of law.The reason for this seemingly harsh judgement is the fact that doctrine is the only source of law to routinely incorporate other legal sources. Legal doctrine is, in a sense, a curiously intangible source of law, devoid of character. Doctrinal writing seems to be suffering from the same affliction as Leonard Zelig, the fictional character in the 1993filmZelig. He is a non-descript and unremarkable man, who in an instant is able to emulate all the characteristics of his surroundings, thus earning him the nickname “the human chameleon”. His curious ability is first observed by F Scott Fitzgerald at a party. mar i e sand st röm 303 sanwalt von Kirchmann gehaltenenVortrag: DieWerthlosigkeit der Jurisprudenz alsWissenschaft, Berlin 1848. 31 Sandgren, ibidem, Part I, p 873. The cat among the pigeons
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=