Throughout "Homo Sacer," Agamben makes several references to Foucault's "History of Sexuality." I just finished reading Foucualt's "Madness and Civilization" as well as "Discipline and Punish" for my final paper and their themes are equally resonant in Agamben's arguments. The continuous link between law and violence is an underlying force in both of Foucault's works. In order to implement a society defined by morals and organization, violence must be used on citizens. Anyone who strays from societal "norms" must be punished and in many instances, this entails banning. This is especially appicable in the handling of madmen. For me, Agamben's wolf-man is Foucault's madman. In "Madness and Civilization," Foucault describes how in pre-modern times, cities tried to abolish the impovershed and insane. They were sent out of the city limits and not allowed to return. Agamben writes, "The transformation into a werewolf corresponds perfectly to the state of exception, during which time the city is dissolved and men enter into a zone in which they are no longer distinct from beasts" (107). Madmen were considered to have beast-like qualities because they do not define their lives by reason. Reason is what stands between the human and the animal. The madman chooses to live a life without reason; thus he is an animal and must be treated as such. The madman’s refusal to adapt to the standards of bourgeois society made him a threat to the “normal” citizens and his confinement became essential. Foucault writes that, “Unchained animality could be mastered only by discipline and brutalizing.” There was no sympathy for the madman and physical punishment was deemed necessary. Agamben writes how in Ancient Germany, anyone could kill the wolf-man or "man without peace" and it would not be considered homicide. He did not warrant the treatment of a true human. Maybe I have been too immersed in Foucault over the past few days but I could not help but notice the similarities.