本杰明.常数Constant, Benjamin

本杰明.常数Constant, Benjamin（1767年10月25日—1830年12月8日），法国画家。

中文名本杰明.常数
外文名Constant, Benjamin
性别男
国籍法国
出生地瑞士
出生日期1767年10月25日
逝世日期1830年12月8日
职业画家

传记

出生在Henri-Benjamin常数洛桑的后裔胡格诺派教徒逃离的新教徒阿图瓦期间到瑞士胡格诺派的战争在16世纪。他的父亲,朱尔斯恒德Rebecque担任的高级军官荷兰国家军队他的祖父一样,他的叔叔和他的表弟让维克多Rebecque de常数。常数的母亲去世时他出生后不久,他的祖母照顾他。在布鲁塞尔私人家教教育他在荷兰(1779)和(1780),和新教埃朗根大学(1783),在那里他获得任命的法院公爵夫人索菲Brunswick-Wolfenbuttel卡罗琳·玛丽。他不得不离开后和一个女孩,并搬到爱丁堡大学。他住在家里安德鲁·邓肯的长者并成为朋友詹姆斯·麦金托什和马尔科姆·莱恩.当他离开这个城市他承诺偿还赌债。

1787年,他回来的时候,在英格兰和苏格兰骑马旅行。在那些年里欧洲贵族和他们的特权承受了巨大的攻击那些受到卢梭的论不平等,常数的家人批评他当他离开了他的姓氏的一部分。在巴黎,Jean-Baptiste-Antoine Suard他变得熟悉伊莎贝尔·德·查理尔荷兰,26年老女人和作家,后来帮助出版卢梭的作品《忏悔录》谁知道他的叔叔David-Louis恒德Rebecque非常好函授了15年。当他呆在家里Colombier瑞士,他们写了一书信体小说在一起。她作为一个母亲,直到法院常数的任命查尔斯·威廉·费迪南德,布伦斯维克公爵等人的照片需要他去北移动。他离开法庭时战争的第一个联合政府开始(1792)。

在布伦瑞克威廉敏娜·冯·Cramm结婚,但是在1793年,他同她离了婚。1794年9月他遇到了著名的和丰富的(但结婚)安妮·路易斯杰曼de Stael小时候,长大在卢梭的原则。他们都很钦佩吉恩·兰伯特Tallien和塔列朗。他们的知识1795年和1811年之间的合作使他们最有名的知识夫妇的时间。

巴黎

后恐怖统治在法国(1793 - 1794),不断的为了一名后卫两院制和英国的议会。在法国革命的政治思想导致的链第三年的宪法,五百年委员会和古人理事会。1799年,在雾月18不断被任命为拿破仑·波拿巴到Tribunat,但1802年皇帝迫使他收回,因为他的演讲和de Stael联系的居里夫人。

不断成为熟悉朱莉旧式大披肩,的妻子Francois-Joseph旧式大披肩引人注目的人类关心的,他给他写了很多信。

1800年,圣尼凯斯街的阴谋,一个恐怖行为,失败了。1803年,在英国和法国在和平、琼加布里埃尔·珀尔帖效应认为,拿破仑应该被杀死。詹姆斯·麦金托什为法国难民与辩护诽谤西装拿破仑——然后煽动的第一执政法国的。演讲被广泛发表在英语也在欧洲德Stael女士的法语翻译。她被迫离开巴黎。

在法国De Stael失望理性主义变得感趣德国浪漫主义。常数与她和他们的两个孩子搬到了魏玛.公爵夫人安娜Brunswick-Wolfenbuttel阿玛莉亚他们第二天的到来表示欢迎。在魏玛相遇弗里德里希·冯·席勒;歌德一开始犹豫了。^[8]在柏林会见了8月威廉•施莱格尔,和他的兄弟弗里德里希•施莱格尔。然后用杰曼在不断变得无聊Coppet因为她经常需要注意。1806年,他住在鲁昂和Meulan他的小说开始工作阿道夫·。1809年,他秘密结婚卡罗琳·冯·Hardenberg已经离婚两次的女人,(她是相关的诺瓦利斯和卡尔·冯·Hardenberg 8月)。他1814年搬回巴黎,在那里法国的路易十八已经成为国王。的一员国务委员会;常数进行了辩护君主立宪制。他成为了朋友雷夫人并认为杰女儿艾伯丁结婚时偿还他的债务维克多德布罗意。在几百天拿破仑,他变得更加自由,常数逃到买受人,但当他被邀请几次返回杜伊勒里宫为了设置变化宪章》1815.

后滑铁卢战役(1815年6月18日)不断移居伦敦,而不是公司的雷女士,谁去南方,但和他的妻子。1817年,在巴黎,他坐在商会代表,较低的立法Restoration-era政府的房子。它的一个最动人的演说家,他成为议会领袖块首先被称为独立“自由主义者”。他成为了一个对手的查尔斯·X(法国在恢复^[9]在1815年和1830年之间。

1830年,王路易-菲力浦我给恒一大笔钱来偿还他的债务,并任命他的政变委员会.

政治哲学

伊莎贝尔·德·查理尔

第一个思想家的自由,不断向英国而不是古罗马对于一个实际模型的自由在一个大的商业社会。他画了一个区分“古代人的自由”和“现代人的自由”。^[10]古人是参与式的自由,共和党人自由,公民有权通过直接影响政治辩论和投票在公众集会。为了支持这种程度的参与,公民身份是一个繁重的道德义务需要大量时间和精力的投入。一般来说,这需要一个成人社会的奴隶的富有成效的工作,让公民自由故意在公共事务。古老的自由也局限于相对较小的和同质的社会,人们可以方便的聚集在一个地方办理公共事务。

幅玛格丽特的杰拉德,居里夫人de Stael et sa少女(约1805)

夏洛特·冯·Hardenberg

雷夫人(1777 - 1849)Alexandre-Evariste弗拉格

相比之下,现代人的自由是基于占有公民自由、法治和自由从过度的政府干预。直接的参与将是有限的:一个必要的现代国家的大小的结果,同时也创造了一个商业社会的必然结果,没有奴隶,但几乎所有人都必须通过工作来谋生。相反,选民将选举代表,谁会故意在议会代表人民,拯救市民的日常政治参与的必要性。

他批评了几方面的法国大革命和失败在社会和政治动荡。他说法国试图如何应用现代国家古代共和国的自由。不断意识到自由意味着绘画之间的边境地区的一个人的私人生活和公共权威。他敬佩的高尚精神的再生状态;然而,他表示,这是天真的,作者认为,二千年没有造成一些人性格和需求的变化。动态的状态改变了:古州的人口的惨状相比,现代国家。他甚至认为,人口多的人没有参与政府不管其形式或类型。不断强调古代国家是如何找到更满意的公共生活和私人的少。然而,现代人民的满意度发生在他们的私人生活。

不断的反复谴责专制遍布他的法国政治哲学家的批判让-雅克·卢梭和阿贝德摘要马布利。这些作家,有影响力的法国大革命,根据常数,误以为权威为自由和批准任何手段扩大权力的行动。改革者用古代公共力量和组织的模型最绝对专制的名义共和国。他继续谴责专制,以自由的悖论源自求助于专制,而缺乏物质的意识形态。

此外,他指出的有害特性恐怖统治,令人费解的精神错乱。在弗朗索瓦Furet的话说,不变的“整个政治思想”围绕这个问题,即解释恐怖主义的问题。不断了解革命者的灾难性的过度投资的政治。法国革命者等无套裤汉而言在街道上的主要力量。他们提倡不断的警惕和公众人物。常数指出最模糊的生活,最安静的存在,最不为人知的名字,在恐怖统治没有提供保护。他还表示,每个添加到号码,数量,吓了一跳,他帮助增加。这暴徒的心态阻止许多并帮助迎来新的独裁者如拿破仑。

此外,恒认为,在现代世界,商务是优于战争。他攻击拿破仑的军事需求,理由是这是狭隘的,不再适合现代商业社会组织。古代自由往往是好战的,而国家对现代自由的原则组织将与所有和平国家和平相处。

恒认为,如果自由从革命的后果,然后空想的古代自由必须与现代自由实用和可行的。英格兰,因为1688年光荣革命然后英国1707年之后,证明了现代自由的实用性和英国是一个君主立宪制。常数比共和主义认为,君主立宪制是适合现代自由的维护。他是在1815年起草的“Acte额外”,拿破仑的恢复规则转变成一个现代的君主立宪制。这是只持续了“一百天”拿破仑战败,然而不变的工作提供了一个协调君主制与自由的手段。的确,1830年法国宪法(或特许)可以被视为常数的许多的实际实现的想法:一个世袭君主制现有与当选众议院和参议员商会同行,与行政权力赋予部长负责。因此,尽管在法国经常被忽略因为他的盎格鲁-撒克逊的同情,不断作出了深刻的(尽管间接)贡献法国宪法的传统。

其次,不断开发出一种新理论的君主立宪制,王权的目的是一个中立的力量,保护,平衡和抑制过度的,(行政、立法机构和活跃的权力司法)。这是一个进步在英语世界主流的理论,遵循的传统智慧威廉·黑石,18世纪的英语法学家,估计王主管行政部门。在不断的计划,行政权力委托给一位部长理事会(或内阁),虽然由国王任命,议会最终负责。在这清晰的理论国王的权力(之间的区别国家元首)和部长(行政)常数是应对政治现实已经明显在英国一个多世纪以来:部长,而不是国王,有责任,因此,国王“统治但不规则”。这是重要的议会政府在法国和其他地方的发展。然而,值得注意的是,国王并不是无能为力的密在不断的计划:他会有很多权力,包括权力司法任命,解散室和调用新的选举,任命的同行,解雇部长——但他将无法管理,制定政策,或直接管理,因为这将是负责任部长的任务。这个理论被应用于葡萄牙(1822)和巴西(1824),国王或皇帝是明确给出“缓和大国”而不是行政权力。其他地方(例如,1848年的“Statuto albertino”的撒丁王国后来的基础意大利从1861年宪法)行政权力是名义上属于国王,但可运用的仅由部长负责。

常数的其他问题包括“新类型的联邦制”:一个严重试图分散法国政府通过权力下放权力市政议会选举产生。这个提议在1831年达到实现,当选举市政局(尽管是在一个狭窄的特许经营已创建)。

常数的著作的重要性在古人的自由主宰的理解他的工作。他的广泛的文学和文化作品(最重要的是宗教的中篇小说阿道夫和他丰富的历史)强调的重要性自我牺牲和温暖的人类情感为基础的社会生活。因此,虽然他恳求个人自由作为个人道德发展和适合现代化至关重要,他觉得利己主义和利己主不足作为一个真正的个人自由的定义的一部分。情感的真实性和同情是至关重要的。在这方面,他的道德和宗教思想的强烈影响了道德的著作让-雅克·卢梭和德国等思想家伊曼努尔康德他在准备他的宗教历史。

English Introduction

Biography

Henri-Benjamin Constant was born in Lausanne to descendants of Huguenot Protestants who had fled from Artois to Switzerland during the Huguenot Wars in the 16th century. His father, Jules Constant de Rebecque, served as a high-ranking officer in the Dutch States Army, like his grandfather, his uncle and his cousin Jean Victor de Constant Rebecque. When Constant's mother died soon after his birth, both his grandmothers took care of him. Private tutors educated him in Brussels (1779) and in the Netherlands (1780), and at the Protestant University of Erlangen (1783), where he gained appointment to the court of Duchess Sophie Caroline Marie of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel. He had to leave after an affair with a girl, and moved to theUniversity of Edinburgh. There he lived at the home of Andrew Duncan, the elder and became friends with James Mackintosh and Malcolm Laing.^[3] When he left the city he promised to pay back his gambling debts.

In 1787 he returned, traveling on horseback through England and Scotland. In those years the European nobility with theirprerogatives had come under heavy attack by those who were influenced by Rousseau's Discourse on Inequality; Constant's family criticized him when he left out part of his last name.In Paris, at Jean-Baptiste-Antoine Suard he became acquainted with Isabelle de Charriere, a 26-year older Dutch woman and writer, who later helped publishing the work of Rousseau Confessions and who knew his uncle David-Louis Constant de Rebecque extremely well by correspondence for 15 years. When he stayed at her home in Colombier Switzerland they wrote an epistolary novel together. She acted as a mother to him until Constant's appointment to the court of Charles William Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel that required him to move north. He left the court when the War of the First Coalition began (1792).

In Brunswick he had married Wilhelmina von Cramm, but he divorced her in 1793. In September 1794 he met the famous and rich (but married) Anne Louise Germaine de Staël, as a child brought up on the principles of Rousseau. They both admired Jean Lambert Tallien and Talleyrand. Their intellectual collaboration between 1795 and 1811 made them one of the most celebrated intellectual couples of their time.

Paris

After the Reign of Terror in France (1793–1794), Constant became a defender of bicameralism and of the Parliament of Great Britain. In revolutionary France this strand of political thought resulted in the Constitution of the Year III, the Council of Five Hundred and the Council of Ancients. In 1799, after 18 Brumaire Constant was appointed by Napoleon Bonaparte to theTribunat, but in 1802 the Emperor forced him to withdraw because of his speeches and of his connections with Mme de Staël.

Constant became acquainted with Julie Talma, the wife of François-Joseph Talma, who wrote him many letters of compelling human interest.

In 1800 the Plot of the rue Saint-Nicaise, an act of terror, failed. In 1803, at a time when Britain and France were at peace, Jean Gabriel Peltier argued that Napoleon should be killed.James Mackintosh defended the French refugee against alibel suit instigated by Napoleon – then First Consul of France. The speech was widely published in English and also across Europe in a French translation by Madame de Staël. She was forced to leave Paris.

De Staël, disappointed in French Rationalism, became interested in German Romanticism. Constant moved with her and their two children to Weimar. Duchess Anna Amalia of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel welcomed them the day after their arrival. In Weimar they met Friedrich von Schiller; Johann Wolfgang Goethe at first hesitated.^[8] In Berlin they met with August Wilhelm Schlegel, and his brother Friedrich Schlegel. Then Constant became bored with Germaine in Coppet because of her constant need for attention. In 1806 he lived in Rouen and Meulan and started to work on his novel Adolphe. In 1809 he secretly married Caroline von Hardenberg, a woman who had been divorced twice, (she was related to Novalis and to Karl August von Hardenberg). He moved back to Paris in 1814, where Louis XVIII of France had become king. As a member of the Council of State; Constant defended the constitutional monarchy. He became friends with Madame Récamier and argued with Germaine, who had asked him to pay his debts when their daughter Albertine married Victor de Broglie. During the Hundred Days of Napoleon, who had become more liberal, Constant fled to the Vendée, but returned when he was invited several times at the Tuileries in order to set up changes for the Charter of 1815.

After the Battle of Waterloo (18 June 1815) Constant moved to London - not in the company of Madame Récamier, who went south, but with his wife. In 1817, back in Paris, he sat in the Chamber of Deputies, the lower legislative house of the Restoration-era government. One of its most eloquent orators, he became a leader of the parliamentary block first known as theIndependants and then^{[by whom?]} as "liberals". He became an opponent of Charles X of France during the Restoration^[9] between 1815 and 1830.

In 1830 King Louis Philippe I gave Constant a large sum of money to pay off his debts, and appointed him to the Conseil d'Etat.

Political philosophy

One of the first thinkers to go by the name of Liberal, Constant looked to Britain rather than to ancient Rome for a practical model of freedom in a large, commercial society. He drew a distinction between the "Liberty of the Ancients" and the "Liberty of the Moderns".^[10] The Liberty of the Ancients was a participatory, republican liberty, which gave the citizens the right to directly influence politics through debates and votes in the public assembly.^[10] In order to support this degree of participation, citizenship was a burdensome moral obligation requiring a considerable investment of time and energy. Generally, this required a sub-society of slaves to do much of the productive work, leaving the citizens free to deliberate on public affairs. Ancient Liberty was also limited to relatively small and homogenous societies, in which the people could be conveniently gathered together in one place to transact public affairs.

The Liberty of the Moderns, in contrast, was based on the possession of civil liberties, the rule of law, and freedom from excessive state interference. Direct participation would be limited: a necessary consequence of the size of modern states, and also the inevitable result of having created a commercial society in which there are no slaves but almost everybody must earn a living through work. Instead, the voters would elect representatives, who would deliberate in Parliament on behalf of the people and would save citizens from the necessity of daily political involvement.

He chastised several of the aspects of the French Revolution and the failures within the social and political upheaval. He stated how the French attempted to apply ancient republic liberties to the modern state. Constant realized that freedom meant drawing a frontier between the area of a person's private life and that of public authority.^[11] He admired the noble spirit of regeneration of the state; however, he stated that it was naïve that writers believed that two thousand years had not wrought some changes in disposition and needs of people. The dynamics of the state had changed: the ancient states' population paled in comparison to that of the modern countries. He even argued that with a large population man had no role in government regardless of its form or type. Constant emphasized how the ancient state found more satisfaction in their public existence and less in their private. However, the satisfaction of modern peoples occur in their private existence.

Constant's repeated denunciation of despotism pervaded his critique of French political philosophers Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Abbé de Mably. These writers, influential to the French Revolution, according to Constant, mistook authority for liberty and approved any means of extending the action of authority. Reformers used the model of ancient states of public force and organized the most absolute despotism under the name of Republic. He continued to condemn despotism, citing the paradox of liberty derived from recourse to despotism, and the lack of substance in this ideology.

Furthermore, he pointed out the detrimental nature of the Reign of Terror; the inexplicable delirium. In François Furet's words, Constant's "entire political thought" revolved around this question, namely the problem of explaining the Terror. Constant understood the revolutionaries' disastrous over-investment in the political.The French revolutionaries such as the Sans-culottes were the primary forces in the streets. They promoted constant vigilance and a public person. Constant pointed out how the most obscure life, the quietest existence, the most unknown name, offered no protection during the Reign of Terror. He also stated that each individual added to the number, and took fright in the number that he had helped increase. This mob mentalitydeterred many and helped to usher in new despots such as Napoleon.

Moreover, Constant believed that in the modern world, commerce was superior to war. He attacked Napoleon's martial appetite on the grounds that it was illiberal and no longer suited to modern commercial social organization. Ancient Liberty tended to be warlike, whereas a state organized on the principles of Modern Liberty would be at peace with all peaceful nations.

Constant believed that if liberty were to be salvaged from the aftermath of the Revolution, then chimerical Ancient Liberty had to be reconciled with the practical and achievable Modern Liberty. England, since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, and then the United Kingdom after 1707, had demonstrated the practicality of Modern Liberty and Britain was a constitutional monarchy. Constant concluded that constitutional monarchy was better suited than republicanism to maintaining Modern Liberty. He was instrumental in drafting the "Acte Additional" of 1815, which transformed Napoleon's restored rule into a modern constitutional monarchy.^[13] This was only to last for "One Hundred Days" before Napoleon was defeated, but Constant's work nevertheless provided a means of reconciling monarchy with liberty. Indeed, the French Constitution (or Charter) of 1830 could be seen as a practical implementation of many of Constant's ideas: a hereditary monarchy existing alongside an elected Chamber of Deputies and a senatorial Chamber of Peers, with the executive power vested in responsible ministers. Thus, although often ignored in France because of his Anglo-Saxon sympathies, Constant made a profound (albeit indirect) contribution to French constitutional traditions.

Secondly, Constant developed a new theory of constitutional monarchy, in which royal power was intended to be a neutral power, protecting, balancing and restraining the excesses of the other, active powers (the executive, legislature, andjudiciary). This was an advance on the prevailing theory in the English-speaking world, which, following the conventional wisdom of William Blackstone, the 18th-century English jurist, had reckoned the King to be head of the executive branch. In Constant's scheme, the executive power was entrusted to a Council of Ministers (or Cabinet) who, although appointed by the King, were ultimately responsible to Parliament. In making this clear theoretical distinction between the powers of the King (as head of state) and the ministers (as Executive) Constant was responding to the political reality which had been apparent in Britain for more than a century: that the ministers, and not the King, are responsible, and therefore that the King "reigns but does not rule". This was important for the development of parliamentary government in France and elsewhere. It should be noted, however, that the King was not to be a powerless cipher in Constant's scheme: he would have many powers, including the power to make judicial appointments, to dissolve the Chamber and call new elections, to appoint the peers, and to dismiss ministers – but he would not be able to govern, make policy, or direct the administration, since that would be the task of the responsible ministers. This theory was literally applied in Portugal (1822) and Brazil (1824), where the King/Emperor was explicitly given "Moderating Powers" rather than executive power. Elsewhere (for example, the 1848 "Statuto albertino" of the Kingdom of Sardinia, which later became the basis of the Italian constitution from 1861) the executive power was notionally vested in the King, but was exercisable only by the responsible ministers.

Constant's other concerns included a "new type of federalism": a serious attempt to decentralize French government through the devolution of powers to elected municipal councils. This proposal reached fruition in 1831, when elected municipal councils (albeit on a narrow franchise) were created.

The importance of Constant's writings on the liberty of the ancients has dominated understanding of his work. His wider literary and cultural writings (most importantly the novella Adolphe and his extensive histories of religion) emphasized the importance of self-sacrifice and warmth of the human emotions as a basis for social living. Thus, while he pleaded forindividual liberty as vital for individual moral development and appropriate for modernity, he felt that egoism and self-interest were insufficient as part of a true definition of individual liberty. Emotional authenticity and fellow-feeling were critical. In this, his moral and religious thought was strongly influenced by the moral writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and German thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, whom he read in preparing his religious history.

艺术官网信息声明

1、本站美术网信息均来自于美术家自己或其朋友、网络等方式，本站无法确定每条信息或事件的真伪，仅做浏览者参考。

2、只要用户使用本站则意味着该用户以同意《本站注册及使用协议》，否则请勿使用本站任何服务。

3、信息删除不收任何费用，VIP会员修改信息终身免费(VIP会员点此了解)。

4、未经本站书面同意，请勿转载本站信息，谢谢配合！

信息统计与维护

美术百科参考资料

1、Benjamin Constant