GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

The classic absolute regime as described in the previous chapter, also known as high absolutism (Hochabsolutismus), was no more than a passing phase in the development of public law. Unfettered personal rule was eventually contested everywhere, but with varying results. In some cases the monarchy itself disappeared and was replaced by a republican regime, in others it was preserved but underwent a profound transformation: sooner or later perestroika – to use the parlance of our own time – arrived everywhere. In constitutional and parliamentary kingdoms the monarchy formally continued, but assumed a role that was rather symbolic, abandoning political decisions to parliaments and to governments supported by parliamentary majorities. In the lands of enlightened absolutism the monarch kept the reins of power firmly in his own hand, without being accountable to the nation or parliament, but instead of acting in his dynastic interests or the defence of the Church he wanted to implement the ideas of the Enlightenment, promote the happiness of his subjects and establish a humane society. The following pages will be devoted to three models of modern constitutional law.

In the first the monarchy was maintained, but divested of its autocratic aspects. England is the classic example, at least after the dramatic events of the seventeenth century put an end to Stuart absolutism and a constitutional and parliamentary regime was established: here an oligarchy of nobility, gentry and affluent bourgeoisie captained the ship of state and created the appropriate legal framework for a flourishing market economy.