Organs of Representation by Tierney

764 Words4 Pages
4.1. ORGANS OF REPRESENTATION 1. What does Tierney mean by ‘representation’? In Magna Carta, all noblemen and clergy were summoned to show their consent, so it was some form of a direct democracy. But this wasn’t feasible, so they used a system of representation. These men were summoned by the king, not chosen by the people. 2. Thesis: Entrusting plena potestas or plena auctoritas to members of parliament (Tierney, 406) means that the highest power in the country lies with parliament, not with the king. Is this thesis true or false? Why? It is true to the extent that the parliament was able to overrule the king, but in practice, the king made the decisions, while the parliament could only judge whether these measures were acceptable or not. Therefore, in the end, the majority of the power was still with the king, while the parliament was only able to control the king's decisions. 3. Which French institution resembles the English parliament most: the Parlement of Paris or the Estates General? Why? Take into account both the composition of the different colleges and their competences. According to McKay, the Parliament of Paris was mainly a court rather than a political organization. It might be called a parliament, but in reality, it was just the royal court where people could appeal against the decisions of a lower judge. The Estates General on the other hand, was a political body which had influence on the king's decisions. A couple of centuries later, Montesquieu argued that the French monarchy was a free society because of the constant conflict between the aristocracy and the monarch, and this very clearly seen with the Estates General. It was the aristocracy having a voice against the monarch (although officially all estates were represented, in the beginning the nobility and clergy were dominant). The same is the case with the
Open Document