The State in Retrospect
Brian R. Nelson
Abstract
Brian R. Nelson
Abstract
One of the more revealing statements in the history of political consciousness, made by the emerging territorial monarchs toward the end of the thirteenth century, is “the king is emperor in his own kingdom.” This was a claim that attempted to legitimate the new form of rulership by appeal to an incipient concept of sovereignty inherent in the existing model of supreme authority within Christendom, a concept that reached back to the ancient Roman imperium itself. As a political stratagem, it worked well enough. As an accurate reflection of political reality, it was woefully inadequate. Although the king was now clearly something more than a feudal noble first among equals, he was hardly an emperor. And even if he could have claimed authority equivalent to the emperor’s, it was of a nature not only entirely different, but also destructive ultimately of the pretensions of the emperor to universal rule within the ancient Christian Republic. It was, in fact, the first stirrings of a concept of state sovereignty. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
One of the more revealing statements in the history of political consciousness, made by the emerging territorial monarchs toward the end of the thirteenth century, is “the king is emperor in his own kingdom.” This was a claim that attempted to legitimate the new form of rulership by appeal to an incipient concept of sovereignty inherent in the existing model of supreme authority within Christendom, a concept that reached back to the ancient Roman imperium itself. As a political stratagem, it worked well enough. As an accurate reflection of political reality, it was woefully inadequate. Although the king was now clearly something more than a feudal noble first among equals, he was hardly an emperor. And even if he could have claimed authority equivalent to the emperor’s, it was of a nature not only entirely different, but also destructive ultimately of the pretensions of the emperor to universal rule within the ancient Christian Republic. It was, in fact, the first stirrings of a concept of state sovereignty. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Key concepts: Emperor, Feudalism, Sovereignty, Politics, State (computer science), Appeal, Political authority, Law