New authority: Hamlet’s politics with (and against) Carl Schmitt

References

• Alexander, C. M. S. (2005). Shakespeare and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Agamben, G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. ( D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arendt, H. (1968). What is authority. In Between past and future (pp. 91–142). New York, NY: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Balakrishnan, G. (2000). The enemy: An intellectual portrait of Carl Schmitt. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Benhabib, S. (1996). Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benjamin, W. (1985). The origin of German tragic drama. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Shai, R. (2009). Schmitt or Hamlet: The Unsovereign Event. Telos, 147, 77–98.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, H. (2003). Hamlet: Poem unlimited. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
   Google Scholar
• Caldwell, P. (2005). Controversies over Carl Schmitt: A review of recent literature. The Journal of Modern History, 77, 357–387.10.1086/431819
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobson, M. (2009). Deutschland Ist Hamlet. London review of books., 31, 22.
   Google Scholar
• Dyzenhaus, D. (2002). Leviathan in the 1930’s: The reception of Hobbes in the Third Reich. In J. McCormick (Ed.), Confronting mass democracy and industrial technology: political and social theory from Nietzsche to Habermas (pp. 163–191). Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Euben, J. P. (1990). The tragedy of political theory: The road not taken. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Everett, B. (1989). Young Hamlet: Essays on Shakespeare's tragedies. Oxford: Claredon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Faber, R. (2001). Lateinischer Faschismus: Über Carl Schmitt den Römer und Katholiken [Latin fascism: on Carl Schmitt the Roman and Catholic]. Berlin: Philo.
   Google Scholar
• Fatovic, C. (2005). The Anti-Catholic roots of liberal and republican conceptions of freedom in English political thought. Journal of the History of Ideas, 66, 37–58.10.1353/jhi.2005.0024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galli, C. (1996). Genealogia della politica: Carl Schmitt e la crisi del pensiero politico moderno [Genealogy of the political: Carl Schmitt and the crisis of modern political thought]. Bologna: Il Mulino.
   Google Scholar
• Gadamer, H.-G. (1989). Truth and method. (J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans.). New York, NY: Crossroad.
   Google Scholar
• Gay, P. (1968). Weimar culture. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grady, H. (1999). Renewing modernity: Changing contexts and contents of a nearly invisible concept. Shakespeare Quarterly, 50, 268–284.10.2307/2902359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grady, H. (Ed.). (2000). Shakespeare and modernity: Early modern to millennium. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Greenblatt, S. (2001). Hamlet in purgatory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greenblatt, S. (1985). Renaissance self-fashioning: From more to Shakespeare: New essays in cultural materialism. J. Dollimore & A. Sinfield (Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, V. (2003). Hamlet or Hecuba: Carl Schmitt’s decision. Representations, 83, 7–96.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1989). The horrors of autonomy: Carl Schmitt in English. In S. W. Nicholson (Ed./Trans.). The new conservatism: Cultural criticism and historical debate (pp. 128–139). Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hortmann, W. (1998). Shakespeare on the German stage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Isaac, J. (1998). Democracy in dark times. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, V. (2009). Political Theology and Fiction in The King's Two Bodies. Representations, 106, 118–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyvas, A. (2008). Democracy and the politics of the extraordinary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511755842
   Google Scholar
• Kateb, G. (2000). Aestheticism and morality: Their cooperation and hostility. Political Theory, 28, 5–37.10.1177/0090591700028001002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keenan, A. (2003). Democracy in question: Democratic Openness in a time of political closure. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, D. (2004). Carl Schmitt’s political theory of representation. Journal of the History of Ideas, 65, 113–134.10.1353/jhi.2004.0015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leaska, M. A. (1964). The voice of tragedy. New York, NY: R. Speller.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, E. (2002). ‘In our circumstance and course of thought’: The problematics of conceptual scheme in ‘Hamlet’. Modern Language Studies, 32, 91–108.10.2307/3252044
   Google Scholar
• Löwith, K. (1995). The occasional decisionism of Carl Schmitt. In R. Wolin (Ed.), (G. Steiner, Trans.). Martin Heidegger and European Nihilism (pp. 137–169). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lupton, J. R. (2005). Citizen-saints: Shakespeare and political theology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Luther, M. (1974). Luther's works. Vol. 10. H. C. Oswald (Ed.). St. Louis, MO: Concordia.
   Google Scholar
• McCormick, J. P. (1994). Fear, technology, and the state: Carl Schmitt, Leo Strauss, and the Revival of Hobbes in Weimar and National Socialist Germany. Political Theory, 22, 619–652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCormick, J. (2007). Irrational choice and mortal combat as political destiny: The essential Carl Schmitt. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 315–339.10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.081105.185034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehring, R. (1989). Pathetisches Denken: Carl Schmitts Denkweg am Leitfaden Hegels [Pathetic thinking: Carl Schmitt's way of thinking following Hegel's path]. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.10.3790/978-3-428-06731-2
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. (1999). The challenge of Carl Schmitt. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. (1992). Dimensions of radical democracy: Pluralism, citizenship, community. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Muller, H. J. (1956). The spirit of tragedy. New York, NY: Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, J. (1999). Carl Schmitt's method: Between ideology, demonology and myth. Journal of Political Ideologies, 4, 61–85.10.1080/13569319908420789
   Google Scholar
• Norris, A. (2005). Review essay: A mine that explodes silently: Carl Schmitt in Weimar and after. Political Theory, 33, 887–898.10.1177/0090591704272727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmelee, L. (1994). Printers, patrons, readers, and spies: Importation of French propaganda in Late Elizabethan England. Sixteenth Century Journal, 25, 853–872.10.2307/2542259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pippin, R. (2003). Modernity as a philosophical problem. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pye, C. (1984). The sovereign, the theatre, and the kingdome of darknesse: Hobbes and the spectacle of power. Representations, 84–106.10.2307/2928559
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sangiovanni, A. (2007). Justice and the priority of politics to morality. Journal of Political Philosophy, 16, 137–164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheuerman, B. (1995). Is parliamentarism in crisis? A response to Carl Schmitt. Theory and Society, 24, 135–158.10.1007/BF00993325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheuerman, B. (1993). Modernist anti-modernism: Carl Schmitt's concept of the political. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 19, 79–95.10.1177/019145379301900201
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1996a). The concept of the political. (G. Schwab, Trans.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1985a). The crisis of parliamentary democracy. (E. Kennedy, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1956). Hamlet oder Hekuba: Der Einbruch der Zeit in das Spiel [Hamlet or Hecuba: the intrusion of time in the play]. Düsseldorf-Köln: Eugen Diderichs Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1938/1996b). The Leviathan in the state theory of Thomas Hobbes: Meaning and failure of a political symbol. G. Schwab & E. Hilfstein, Trans.). New York, NY: Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1986). Political romanticism. ( G. Oakes, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1985b). Political theology: Four chapters on the concept of sovereignty. ( G. Schwab, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, C. (1996c). Roman Catholicism and political form and “the visibility of the Church. ( G. L. Ulmen, Trans.). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schreiner, S. E. (2003). Appearances and reality in Luther, Montaigne, and Shakespeare. The Journal of Religion, 83, 345–380.10.1086/491338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwindt, J. (1985). Luther’s Paradoxes and Shakespeare’s God: The emergence of the Absurd in Sixteenth-Century Literature. Modern Language Studies, 15, 6–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shugar, D. (1990). Habits of thought in the English Renaissance: Religion, politics, and dominant culture. Berkeley: UC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skinner, Q. (2002). Hobbes and the purely artificial person of the state. In Vision and politics. Vol. III, (pp. 177–208). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smither, J. R. (1991). The St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre and Images of Kingship in France: 1572-1574. Sixteenth Century Journal, 22, 27–46.10.2307/2542014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirk, S. D. (1937). A Note on Gerhart Hauptmann's "Hamlet in Wittenberg". The Modern Language Review, 32, 595–597.10.2307/3715264
   Google Scholar
• Strong, T. (1996). Forward. In The concept of the political. ( G. Schwab, Trans.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Strong, T. (2006). Seeing the sovereign: Theatricality and representation in Hobbes. In S. Schneck (Ed.), Letting Be: Festschrift for Fred Dallmyer. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taubes, J. (1987). Ad Carl Schmitt: Gegenstrebige Fügung [To Carl Schmitt: letters and reflections]. Berlin: Merve Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Tillyard, E. M. W. (1944). The Elizabethan world picture. New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Tuck, R. (1993). Philosophy and government: 1572–1651. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, G. (2004). The longing for myth in Germany: Religion and aesthetic culture from romanticism to nietzsche. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weir, A. (2001). Henry Viii: The king and his court. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
   Google Scholar
• Wolin, S. (1996). Fugitive democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and the boundaries of the political (pp. 31–45). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar