What do you think?
Rate this book
英格兰宪政史
这是剑桥大学梅特兰教授向学生讲授英格兰宪政史的课堂讲义的译著。原著作者将英格兰公法发展阶段划分为五个阶段，并对每个阶段立法的总体特征、王权、议会、中央及地方政府、司法等方面的宪政运作状况予以了总结介绍，并进行了深入细致的分析。清晰完美地梳理了英格兰法律发展和宪政运作脉络。本书虽非梅特兰精雕细琢之成熟作品，但并非简单的历史资料的堆砌，而是着眼于对法律运行过程的审视和探讨，背景资料翔实，分析细致入微并涵盖了大量的原创性观点，为我们学习和研究英格兰宪政史提供了很好的引领。其独特的阶段划分方法也为我们研究英国宪政史提供了不同寻常的观测点，对既有历史著述做出了重要补充。本书系统全面，条理清晰，翻译流畅，完全符合中国读者的阅读习惯。是广大比较法研究者、法学研究者以及法学爱好者、英国宪政史、法律发展史研究者以及英国政治爱好者不可多得的一本出色的著作。
369 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1908
8 people are currently reading
101 people want to read
About the author
Frederic William Maitland
201 books8 followersFrederic William Maitland, FBA was an English historian and lawyer who is generally regarded as the modern father of English legal history.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
November 19, 2017
An overview of English Constitutional history from the Middle Ages forward. The book was assembled posthumously by his students from his lecture notes, but even so his distinctive style and diction appears. The medieval chapter is notably redundant with his History of English Law to the reign of Edward I.
Maitland's approach is to survey the "state of the constitution" at various points. He chose: the death of Edward I, the death of Henry VII, the death of James I, the death of William III, and the 1880s. You will notice that none of those correspond to major disruptions in the government or conventional break-points. This is by design and Maitland remarks on this. His goal is to show the constitution at the times where it is more or less well-defined; there was no clarity about the constitution when Henry took the throne in 1485 or in 1660 at the restoration.
He is anxious to push back against common myths, some of which are still circulating:
There is one term against which I wish to warn you, and that term is 'the crown.' You will certainly read that the crown does this and the crown does that. As a matter of fact we know that the crown does nothing but lie in the Tower of London to be gazed at by sight-seers. No, the crown is a convenient cover for ignorance: it saves us from asking difficult questions, questions which can only be answered by study of the statute book.
I do not deny that it is a convenient term, and you may have to use it ; but I do say that you should never be content with it. If you are told that the crown has this power or that power, do not be content until you know who legally has the power — is it the king, is it one of his secretaries: is this power a prerogative power or is it the outcome of statute?
[In contrast] We must not think, even now-a-days, of 'the seals of office' as mere ceremonial symbols like the crown and the sceptre; they are real instruments of government. Without a great seal, England could not be governed. Every corporation, this University for instance, has as perhaps you know a common seal, and a great many things can only be done by the use of the common seal. It is somewhat the same with the seals of office: courts of law take notice of these seals, and insist that they must be affixed.
There's a scanned copy available online: https://archive.org/stream/constituti...
The .txt ebook text is corrupted but still more or less readable and I've been reading that.
Maitland's approach is to survey the "state of the constitution" at various points. He chose: the death of Edward I, the death of Henry VII, the death of James I, the death of William III, and the 1880s. You will notice that none of those correspond to major disruptions in the government or conventional break-points. This is by design and Maitland remarks on this. His goal is to show the constitution at the times where it is more or less well-defined; there was no clarity about the constitution when Henry took the throne in 1485 or in 1660 at the restoration.
He is anxious to push back against common myths, some of which are still circulating:
There is one term against which I wish to warn you, and that term is 'the crown.' You will certainly read that the crown does this and the crown does that. As a matter of fact we know that the crown does nothing but lie in the Tower of London to be gazed at by sight-seers. No, the crown is a convenient cover for ignorance: it saves us from asking difficult questions, questions which can only be answered by study of the statute book.
I do not deny that it is a convenient term, and you may have to use it ; but I do say that you should never be content with it. If you are told that the crown has this power or that power, do not be content until you know who legally has the power — is it the king, is it one of his secretaries: is this power a prerogative power or is it the outcome of statute?
[In contrast] We must not think, even now-a-days, of 'the seals of office' as mere ceremonial symbols like the crown and the sceptre; they are real instruments of government. Without a great seal, England could not be governed. Every corporation, this University for instance, has as perhaps you know a common seal, and a great many things can only be done by the use of the common seal. It is somewhat the same with the seals of office: courts of law take notice of these seals, and insist that they must be affixed.
There's a scanned copy available online: https://archive.org/stream/constituti...
The .txt ebook text is corrupted but still more or less readable and I've been reading that.
December 29, 2025
Pretty dense and extremely impressive. The last chapter, on the 'contemporary constitution' is dated, but, having been written around 1880, this is unsurprising
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews