Constitution-making by elected assemblies in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century

Q2 Arts and Humanities
K. Chrysogonos
{"title":"Constitution-making by elected assemblies in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century","authors":"K. Chrysogonos","doi":"10.1080/02606755.2022.2084295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to examine whether the specific method of constitution-making in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century, and in particular the entanglement of an elected assembly with it, played any role in its outcome. The conclusion, based on a country-by-country report, is that the methods of constitution-making oscillated between royal concession, co-operation between the monarch and an elected assembly, and enactment of a fundamental law by an assembly alone. The participation of an elected assembly would frequently result in a document somewhat more liberal and more democratic than in the case of fundamental laws conceded by the monarch. However, the differences were not huge. Constitutions made by an assembly seem furthermore to have fared on average somewhat better than conceded constitutions, as far as their endurance is concerned. Concession and contract were however gradually falling into disuse as methods of constitution-making, ceding their place to (constituent) assemblies on a Pan-European scale. Since consent is obviously inscribed in the genome of constitutionalism as the fundamental organizational principle of society, it is to be expected that the symbolic foundation of a political community will be laid through the institutionalized consent of the members of this community.","PeriodicalId":53586,"journal":{"name":"Parliaments, Estates and Representation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parliaments, Estates and Representation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02606755.2022.2084295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The aim of this article is to examine whether the specific method of constitution-making in Southern Europe during the nineteenth century, and in particular the entanglement of an elected assembly with it, played any role in its outcome. The conclusion, based on a country-by-country report, is that the methods of constitution-making oscillated between royal concession, co-operation between the monarch and an elected assembly, and enactment of a fundamental law by an assembly alone. The participation of an elected assembly would frequently result in a document somewhat more liberal and more democratic than in the case of fundamental laws conceded by the monarch. However, the differences were not huge. Constitutions made by an assembly seem furthermore to have fared on average somewhat better than conceded constitutions, as far as their endurance is concerned. Concession and contract were however gradually falling into disuse as methods of constitution-making, ceding their place to (constituent) assemblies on a Pan-European scale. Since consent is obviously inscribed in the genome of constitutionalism as the fundamental organizational principle of society, it is to be expected that the symbolic foundation of a political community will be laid through the institutionalized consent of the members of this community.
十九世纪南欧由选举产生的议会制定的宪法
摘要本文旨在探讨19世纪南欧的制宪方法,特别是选举议会的纠缠,是否在制宪结果中发挥了作用。根据一份各国报告得出的结论是,制宪方法在王室让步、君主与选举产生的议会合作以及议会单独制定基本法律之间摇摆不定。选举产生的议会的参与通常会产生一份文件,比君主承认的基本法律更自由,更民主。然而,差异并不大。此外,就其持久性而言,由议会制定的宪法似乎比被承认的宪法平均要好一些。然而,作为制宪方法的租界和契约逐渐被废弃,让位给泛欧洲范围内的(制宪)议会。既然同意作为社会的基本组织原则,显然铭刻在宪政的基因组中,那么可以预期,一个政治共同体的象征基础将通过这个共同体成员的制度化同意来奠定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Parliaments, Estates and Representation
Parliaments, Estates and Representation Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信