Disputatio:Maiestas (ius constitutionale)

Suverenitas : a new instance of a ringum-like word ?[fontem recensere]

The article Suverenitas, for its only attested source, cites page 144 of the pdf of Morgan's lexicon, but that page is devoted to terms for mail, and no attestation of this "suverenitas" is jumping out at me there. Am I missing it? or what? And if it's there, is its source reliable & respectable? ¶ The etymology given in the article derives the term from a French noun supposedly derived from a French adjective supposedly derived from the Latin adjective superanus. Wouldn't that make the expected Latin back-formation superanitas instead? IacobusAmor 12:13, 4 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, suverenitas is a bad word, and one might think Morgan would have reached the same conclusion. I have a feeling someone tried to insert this word in Vicipaedia once before ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:22, 4 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it does occur in that glossary (with a warning asterisk, and some alternatives) on p. 114, so that was just a typo in the reference. Here's the entry:

.gvt sovereign / superanus+ | sovereignty summa (rerum) potestas; summum imperium; suprematia* [Latham]; suverenitas* [s.18] (HELF.)

Whether we choose this word is now up to us, however. I'll copy this discussion to Disputatio:Suverenitas: please continue there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:27, 4 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One supposes that people who want to sound all faddish & weirdlike might enjoy using it, but summa (rerum) potestas and summum imperium—plus Cassell's's summa rerum, summa imperii, imperium, dominatio, dominatus, regnum, and (for arbitrary or despotic sovereignty) tyrannis—sound much more like what native speakers have given us in writing. IacobusAmor 12:35, 4 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth (probably you know this, but others reading mightn't), the asterisks don't appear to be supposed to be warnings per se, but indications of modern inventions ('modern' apparently being flexible, but glossed as 'after 1400' in the legend on his adumbratio file). Though I suppose for our preferences it comes to much the same thing. —Mucius Tever 23:27, 6 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Long or short?[fontem recensere]

In case any neolatinist is daring enough to try the word in verse, will 87.218.94.227 indicate whether its first vowel is short or long. ;) IacobusAmor 12:35, 4 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Du Cange et disputatio Neolatina[fontem recensere]

Supremitas Du Cange
Michael Stolleis: Geschichte des öffentlichen Rechts in Deutschland, Vol. 1, p. 177 (Monaci 1988): Disputatio de "souveraineté" secundum BODIN (circiter 1600): Bodin majestatem ponit pro souveraineté. Disputatio sequens haec verba adhibet: summa potestas, summum imperium, superioritas, supremitas, potestas absoluta, plenitudo potestatis, jus majestatis, jura imperii, sacra imperii, summa majestas, suprema iurisdictio, πολιτευμα, regalia (majora)
ibidem p. 185: superioritas territorialis
Zedler Universal-Lexicon (1743), Bd. 38 Sp. 1040: Souveränität, Latein. Supremitas, oder Imperium summum, vel absoluta auctoritatis, Frantz. Souveraineté--Utilo 17:44, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, "supremitas" praefero ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:32, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably better than a supposed word /suwerenitas/ (presumably pronounced [su:ere:nita:s]), but in view of an array of genuine classical native-speaker-produced examples, why are people making up or defending a new one? IacobusAmor 18:52, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point - if these examples hit the word "sovereignty" exactly. But maybe "supremitas" is a kind of terminus technicus forged in constitutional law (by Bodin and others) after 1600? I would like to hear the argument of somebody, who is a "peritus" in law-history, if there is one in this forum.--Utilo 19:41, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Utilo expresses my feeling too -- "summum imperium" and "summa potestas" are good and useful phrases but I don't quite know if they equate exactly to sovereignty. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:08, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just found a scientific book about the term "sovereignty": Der Souveränetätsbegriff von Bodin bis zu Friedrich dem Grossen (1897). First the German text concerning our question:

Bodin braucht in seiner Definition des Souveränitätsbegriffes in der lateinischen Ausgabe seines Werks de republica das Wort "majestas", in der französischen den Ausdruck "souverainete". Erstere Bezeichnung haben von ihm die meisten Staatsrechtsschriftsteller der folgenden Zeit übernommen, wie dies sein deutscher Kritiker Paurmeister ausdrücklich erklärt, "quam vulgo Bodinum secuti Majestatem appellant". Am gebräuchlichsten sind die Ausdrücke "majestas", "summa potestas", "Majestät" und "höchste Gewalt". Von "Souverainete" und "Souverain" sprechen nur Wenige, indem sie erklärend beifügen, dass dies der französische Name für "Majestät" sei, oder sie erblicken in der "Independenz und Unabhängigkeit oder Souveränetät eine Haupteigenschaft, ohne welche man sich das Wesen der höchsten Gewalt nicht vorstellen könne". Ferner finden sich die Worte "summum imperium", "plenitudo potestatis", "suprematus" und "supremitas", während "superioritas" weniger die Souveränetät bezeichnet, als vielmehr als "superioritas terrilorialis" die Landeshoheit der deutschen Fürsten. Sehr selten trifft man "potestas eminens" und "imperium politicum."

In short the essential content: Bodin uses "maiestas" for "souveraineté", and so do most of his followers ("quam vulgo Bodinum secuti Majestatem appellant"). Other often used words are: summa potestas, summum imperium, plenitudo potestatis, suprematus and supremitas, whereas superioritas is "superioritas territorialis" (governmental power in a statehood of the German imperial state). "Potestas eminens" and "imperium politicum" is used very seldom. - So, as it seems, suprematus or supremitas are only terms among others - and not even the the most frequently used ones.--Utilo 21:43, 5 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of Bodin, his Latin is online; if this is where he starts talking about souveraineté in French, the Latin is here. Several books in Google books attribute the word 'suverenitas' itself to Bodin, but given ipsius liber, it might be a misunderstanding based on languages that use suverenitas (or transparent localizations thereof) as a translation of souveraineté. —Mucius Tever 23:34, 6 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maiestas (Ius constitutionale)[fontem recensere]

What about moving "Suverenitas" (according to Bodin) to "Maiestas (Ius constitutionale)"? - Some important classical expressions could easily be integrated: maiestas regia (sive ducis), maiestas populi, maiestatem minuere, crimen / perduellio maiestatis etc.--Utilo 13:31, 7 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a technical term in constitutional law, that should be a good idea. Cassell's includes among the glosses of maiestas both 'sovereignty' and 'treason': maiestatem minuere = 'to offend against the sovereignty of the people' (Cicero), crimen maiestatis = 'treason' (Cicero), and just plain maiestas = 'treason' (Tacitus). IacobusAmor 13:41, 7 Octobris 2010 (UTC)[reply]