The Philosophy of History, Vol. 1 of 2Schlegel, Friedrich von
Philosophy
The Philosophy of History, Vol. 1 of 2
Schlegel, Friedrich von
History; History -- Philosophy
The Christian state is that which best secures and preserves to those
essential corporations, and all their subordinate institutions, their
due sphere of action. Hence our author shows that, under certain
circumstances, and in certain countries, the Republic, whether
democratic or aristocratic, may answer that end as well or even better
than monarchy; and that it is only because, in great empires, monarchy
is best calculated to maintain the free developement and organic
co-operation of corporations, that it may be called, par excellence, the
Christian state. But what form of monarchy is best adapted for this end?
The absolute monarchy[15] is certainly the least: there then remain only
the representative system, and the constitution of the three estates, or
as the Germans call that mode of government, Stände-verfassung. Schlegel
proceeds to examine the respective characteristics of those two forms of
government, and to show the points in which they agree, and in which
they differ. The constitution of estates is the old, legitimate
constitution of the European states, whether republican or monarchical;
but, in too many countries, this noble institution has been undermined
by despotism, or destroyed by revolution. On the other hand, the
representative system is comparatively modern, and, on the continent,
has, amid the great convulsions produced by the French revolution,
sprung out of a defective and superficial imitation of the British
constitution. It is therefore to the latter constitution the author,
when he has occasion to treat of the representative system, principally
directs the attention of his readers.
As to the points of resemblance between this system, and the
states-constitution, both have legislative assemblies--in both,
petitions and remonstrances are addressed to the throne, and in both,
the grant of subsidies rests chiefly with the commons; while to the
enactment of every law, the concurrence of the different branches of the
legislature is essentially requisite. But, in many important
points, these two forms of government totally differ. In the
states-constitution, the crown is invested with more power and dignity.
With more dignity, because to the crown landed estates are annexed; and
the sovereign, instead of being a pensioner on the bounty of his
parliament, is the first independent proprietor:--with more power,
because in the representative system, the King, with the single
exception of choosing an administration, can perform no act without the
sanction of his ministers. Thus in this political system, according to
the author's remark, the substantial power of royalty is vested in the
hands of the ministry.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account