Suchergebnisse

The authors of this text consider the third form of representation developed in the medieval doctrine of corporation, the so-called identity or pars pro toto representation. It concerns a relationship in which a part of the corporation -- council, assembly, or some members -- is considered identical to the whole body of the corporation in terms of its activity. The main purpose of identity representation is to mediate the idea of legal unity of corporation with the multitude of its members or parts of which it consists: by the act of representation different parts of the corporation form its legal unity at the moment of reaching decisions. Unlike in agency representation, the position of the representative is thus not the consequence of authorisation or of the transfer of power of action by those represented: the representative and the represented are not two separate legal entities; rather, it is considered that with the action of its "elevated" part, the corporation acts by itself. The text presents three fundamental subtypes of identity representation: Marsilius of Padua's valentior pars, rendering majority decisions on issues concerning the corporation as a whole, and a permanent representative body. Special attention is given to the Conciliar Movement in which identity representation played an important part, and to the first association of representation through identity with the idea of authorisation in the thought of Nicholas of Cues. The text looks into estate assemblies of German Lander (provinces) in the period prior to the French Revolution as an example of historic institutionalisation of identity representation. Adapted from the source document.

In this text, the authors' starting point is that the modern conception of representation, decisively connected with the state as modern type of political order, not only represents a radical cut with regard to pre-modern forms of representation, but is also the result of evolution through which many key elements of the antique and medieval perception of representation were built into the modern perception. This is confirmed by two eminently modern theories of representation: the theory of Hobbes and the theory of Hegel. In both cases, the theories prove to be largely based on the antique and medieval legal-political heritage. With Hobbes, the basis consists primarily of the idea of legal representation, and with Hegel, of the idea of identity representation. Both ideas are gradually developed in civil law and canon law. This part of the text focuses on the part of history of representation which culminated in the perception of representation according to the model of legal representation. For this purpose, the authors first discuss the definition of representation in the Roman period and in early Christianity, and then they investigate how the antique heritage was reinterpreted in medieval civil law and canon law. Adapted from the source document.