THE POLYMORPHY OF SOVEREIGNTY – A SEARCH FOR THE HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONALISM (THE EARLY MODERN ERA)

Abstract

The polymorphism of the meanings of the category of sovereignty and its influence on the process of constitutionalism in early modernity is explored. It appears that the category of sovereignty in pre-early modernity was formed not as a purely legal construct, but as a rich world political-theological concept, as an element of the natural-legal order, which was transferred to positive law and acted as a substitute its legitimation, representing the transformation of moral and theological manifestations of the great order into political and power structures. And since the natural order in the early modern Duma was understood differently, sovereignty could not take away a clear semantic form. Various misunderstandings of the nature of God, the providential order, the nature of man, the ultimate good, the role of the people, the corporation and the monarch in the molding of the political body, then, the sovereignty of the polymorphic category and gave rise to different forms. Therefore, the polymorphic nature of the category of sovereignty does not mean it is inconsistent. This is a historical pattern, which resulted from the ongoing crisis of middle-century universalism and the emergence of many ways to undermine the natural order and the freedom of individuals in the political and legal Duma. early modern. It is possible to identify the current forms of weakening of sovereignty in this field: a) theological sovereignty (papal plenitudo potestatis), which represents the will of God and forms sacred jurisprudence (canonical law, which is superior to positive law); b) Protestant moral-disciplinary sovereignty, which legitimized the religious-ethical corporation of “the faithful” for the formation of the hidden good and the salvation of the “underdeveloped”; c) desacralization of the sovereignty of the real volodars (a version of machiavellism), which gives greater right to be a free representative of the new political reality and the author of the “real truth”, which has been legalized historically korisny order of the zagal good; d) sovereignty of the people, which, as an instrument of the will of God, means the legitimacy of any ruler; d) providential sovereignty of the monarchy, which deems the ruler to be the sole bearer of the providential order, the creator and guarantor of the unity of the political body, the founder of positive norms and moral values. Thus, sovereignty did not become a category in the early modern tradition; It is a multiple way of political and legal representation of the natural order. In order to organize its polyphonic meanings, the intellectual stakes of modernity tried to dissect the principles and definitions of the forms of sovereignty, which lay ambushes for constitutionalism. Thus, the polymorphism of sovereignty implied the need to change cultural and historical changes and forms of the constitution.