Abstract

Istraživanje demonstriranja »pravde« u Homerovoj Odiseji od strane kraljeva ili sudaca u stvarnim situacijama toga doba, pokazalo je da je riječ o postupcima u partikularnoj formi, a ne o apstraktno pojmljenim principima. Ovi su postupci rješavali uvijek konkretne i specifične ad hoc situacije, a nisu primjenjivali depersonalizirane i općevažeće zakone, te se njihova uloga iscrpljivala u pregovaračkom postupku i nagodbi rivalskih strana. Namjera im je bila da nanovo uspostave destabiliziranu ustaljenost življenja običajnosne zajednice, pa se može reći da je spomenuta procedura de facto predstavljala »pravdu« koja se primjenjivala u danom kontekstu. Zaključak autora jest da ovako shvaćena »pravda« nije bila ništa drugo do odgovarajuća metodologija, tj. pravilo konzerviranja postojećih običaja, ili naprosto korekcija narušenog modusa egzistiranja u nekom polisu.Research of demonstration of “justice” in Homer’s Odyssey by kings or magistrates in actu­al situations of the time, showed that these were particular procedures rather than abstractconcepts, always applied to resolve concrete and specific ad hoc situations and never to thedepersonalized and general laws, so their role was being exhausted in the course of negotiati­ons and settlement of rival parties. Their intention was to reestablish destabilized continuity ofmorality-based community, therefore it can be said that the mentioned procedure de facto repre­sented “justice” applied to a given context. The author concludes that the concept of “justice”in this sense was merely a suitable methodology, i.e. the rule of conservation of existing mores,or simply a correction of a violated mode of existence in a certain polis.