Michail Sotiropoulos European Jurisprudence And
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Queen Mary, University of London Michail Sotiropoulos European jurisprudence and the intellectual origins of the Greek state: the Greek jurists and liberal reforms (ca 1830‐1880) PhD thesis submitted for the partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2 Statement of originality I, Michail Sotiropoulos, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged below and my contribution indicated. Previously published material is also acknowledged below. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the College has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. Signature: Date: 3 Abstract This thesis builds on, and contributes to recent scholarship on the history of nineteenth‐century liberalism by exploring Greek legal thought and its political implications during the first decades after independence from the Ottomans (ca.1830‐1880). Protagonists of this work of intellectual history are the Greek jurists—a small group of very influential legal scholars—most of whom flocked to the Greek kingdom right after its establishment. By focusing on their theoretical contributions and public action, the thesis has two major contentions. First, it shows that the legal, political and economic thought of the jurists was not only conversant with Continental liberal currents of the Restoration, but, due to the particular local context, made original contributions to liberalism. Indeed, Greek liberals shared a lot with their counterparts in France, Italy and Germany, not least the belief that liberty originated in law and the state and not against them. Another shared feature was the distinction between the elitist liberal variant of the ‘Romanist’ civil lawyers such as Pavlos Kalligas, and the more ‘radical moderate’ version of Ioannis Soutsos and Nikolaos Saripolos. At the same time, the Greek liberals, seeking not to terminate but to institutionalize the Greek revolution, tuned to the radical language of natural rights (of persons and states) and national sovereignty. This language, which sought to control the rulers, put more contestation in power and expand political participation gained wide currency during the crisis of the 1850s, which exposed also the precarious place of Greece in the geography of European civilization. The second contention of the thesis is that this ‘transformation of thought’, informed the ‘long revolution’ of the 1860s and the new system of power this latter established. By so doing, it shows that liberal jurisprudence provided the intellectual foundations upon which the modern Greek state was build. 4 Contents Acknowledgements 7 Note on transliteration 10 Calendar 10 Footnotes citations 11 List of abbreviations 11 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 12 Explaining nineteenth‐century political transformation: The ‘Age of Revolutions’, ‘failed’ liberalism, and the traditional elites 15 Some notes on method and the research agenda 20 Greek liberalism in nineteenth‐century historical and comparative contexts 24 Who were the jurists? 30 1. Bridging the Legal Gap (1832‐1844): Legal modernization, the role of the Law School and the limits of translation.............................................................................................................. 33 Introduction 33 Translating the European Legal Ideal 39 ‘Enlightened reforms’, the Polizeistaat and the limits of translation 44 Challenging universalism through history 52 Introducing the Historical School of Law: Europe by way of Rome 58 Intellectual and political implications of legal discourse 61 Conclusion 63 2. Law as science and as political ideology: Roman Law and the formation of the Greek state (ca 1840s ‐ 1870s) ...................................................................................................................... 66 Introduction 66 Romanist jurisprudence in the first half of the 19th century 77 The Greek jurists and the introduction of the legal scientific method in the 1840s 83 Roman law and the Greek state: the legal‐political agenda 89 Roman law and the Greek state: the political/social agenda 93 5 Legal and political consequences of Romanist jurisprudence 106 Conclusion 109 3. ‘Industrial’ Political Economy and its limits in Restoration Europe: Ioannis Soutsos and Political Economy as a science of the government in Greece (ca 1830–ca 1860)................... 111 Introduction 111 Political economy after Adam Smith 119 Political economy, civilisation and manners in South‐eastern Europe 124 Public economy, ‘industrial’ virtues and the ‘police state’ 131 Ioannis Soutsos and the limits of ‘industrial’ political economy 134 Soutsos, the state and economics as the social and political science of ‘civil society’ 137 Conclusion 147 4. Public Law as the science of individual liberty and national sovereignty: Nikolaos Saripolos and the language of statehood in Greece, 1844‐1875.......................................................... 150 Introduction 150 Early Greek constitutionalism between revolution and absolutism (ca 1830 – 1844) 161 Public law as the science of individual liberty in a constitutional nation‐state 171 Constitutional law, individual liberty and national sovereignty: Nikolaos Saripolos and the domestic primacy of the state 175 The law of nations and the sovereignty of nation‐states: Nikolaos Saripolos and the international autonomy of the Greek state 187 Conclusion 197 5. Ideas into practice: the ‘lawful’ revolution and the building of a new constitutional order (1862‐1875)........................................................................................................................ 201 Introduction 201 The ‘Lawful’ Revolution of 1862: Crisis, failure of reforms and the rise of political opposition 210 The Constituent Assembly of 1862‐64 (I): National sovereignty, the King and individual rights 224 The Constituent Assembly of 1862‐64 (II): Balancing and mixing the powers 238 The ‘lawful’ rearrangement: The political crisis of 1874‐75 and the consolidation of parliamentarism 244 6 Conclusion 247 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 251 Biographical Appendix 261 Key dates 281 Bibliography 286 PRIMARY SOURCES 286 PUBLISHED SECONDARY SOURCES 300 7 Acknowledgements In the course of writing this thesis I have incurred many debts. The first and the most important for the completion of the thesis is to my two supervisors, Georgios Varouxakis and Maurizio Isabella. No matter what I write here, it is difficult to do justice to the many different ways with which they have helped me these last three and a half years. The most important was how they managed to push my arguments further by provoking me to be clearer, more insightful, by, in a way pushing me to ask more from myself. Although I think that it is going to be difficult for me to return this debt, I hope that I have, at least, managed to fulfill some of their expectations. Along with Giorgos and Maurizio, there was always a third person in that ‘room of academic guidance’. Once Maurizio asked me whether during my academic adventure, there was an authoritative figure who has formed my thinking. I said no. Yet, just for a moment, I blinked. The reason was my ‘old professor’: Georges B. Dertilis. Professor Dertilis did not just teach me how to transform research into words. What I owe him most is the way he showed and proved to me the value of that most democratic of political qualities: the art of conversation and of persuasion. This, I think, is the greatest and probably unacknowledged legacy he will leave to his many students. So, I think he would be glad with my reply to Maurizio. At the same time, I do think he would be secretly satisfied with my hesitation. In addition, I need to thank two institutions, which have complemented enormously the completion of this thesis. The first is Queen Mary, University of London, and in particular the School of History for providing a stimulating and thought‐provoking environment. In addition, the PGR Fund granted by the School allowed me to pursue research in Greece at a crucial moment of the thesis. I would also like to thank the members of staff of the School’s Administration for their help during these years. The second institution is the Bakalas Brothers Foundation. Without its generous financial support, it would have been impossible to start the research project and follow it without major interruptions for the first two years. As is usually the case, a great number of people have given me help and advice in writing this thesis and it is a pleasure to call them to mind. In particular, I wish to thank, Richard Bourke, Miri Rubin, Gareth Steadman Jones for commenting on my work and for kindly answering my questions