Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T00:23:35.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2014

Melissa Schwartzberg
Melissa Schwartzberg
Affiliation:
New York University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Counting the Many
The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule
 , pp. 217 - 230
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, Henry J. 1992. Justices and Presidents. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce. 1991. We the People: Foundations. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce 1998. We the People: Transformations. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Aeschylus, . 1977. Eumenides. In The Orestia. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Affeldt, Steven G. 1999. The Force of Freedom: Rousseau on Forcing to Be Free. Political Theory 27 (3): 299–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Danielle S. 2000. The World of Prometheus: The Politics of Punishing in Democratic Athens. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Amar, Akhil. 1988. Philadelphia Revisited: Amending the Constitution Outside Article V. University of Chicago Law Review 55 (4): 1043–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle, . 1992. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Ross, D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1995a. Politics. Translated by Baker, E.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1995b. Rhetoric. Translated by Roberts, W. R.. Edited by Barnes, J.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1996. The Constitution of Athens. In The Politics and the Constitution of Athens, edited by Everson, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 209–263.Google Scholar
Arneson, Richard. 1993. Democratic Rights at National and Workplace Levels. In The Idea of Democracy, edited by Copp, David, Hampton, Jean, and Roemer, John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aroney, Nicholas. 2008. The Constitution of a Federal Commonwealth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Austen-Smith, David and Banks, Jeffrey S.. 1996. Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem. American Political Science Review 90 (1): 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austen-Smith, David and Banks, Jeffrey S. 1999. Positive Political Theory I: Collective Preference. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Keith Michael. 1975. Condorcet. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Balasko, Yves and Crès, Hervé. 1997. The Probability of Condorcet Cycles and Super Majority Rules. Journal of Economic Theory 75:237–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, Marshall. 1968. Alexander III and the Twelfth Century: The Popes through History. New York: Newman Press.Google Scholar
Banks, Jeffrey S. 2000. Buying Supermajorities in Finite Legislatures. The American Political Science Review 94 (3):677–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, David P. and Ferejohn, John. 1989. Bargaining in Legislatures. American Political Science Review 83 (December):1181–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, Brian. 1965. Political Argument. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Beatty, John and Moore, Alfred. 2010. Should We Aim for Consensus?Episteme 7 (3):198–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Deborah. 2006. Homeric Conversation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Beitz, Charles R. 1989. Political Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla 1996. Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy. In Democracy and Difference, edited by Benhabib, S.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 67–94.Google Scholar
Benson, Robert L. 1968. The Bishop-Elect: A Study in Medieval Ecclesiastical Office. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1999. Political Tactics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Binder, Sarah A. and Smith, Steven S.. 1997. Politics or Principle?: Filibustering in the United States Senate. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Black, Duncan. 1958. The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Boegehold, Alan. 1963. Toward a Study of Athenian Voting Procedure. Hesperia 32 (4):366–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogdanor, Vernon. 1997. Forms of Autonomy and the Protection of Minorities. Daedalus 126 (2):65–87.Google Scholar
Borgeaud, Charles. 1887. Histoire de Plébiscite. Geneva: H. George.Google Scholar
Brennan, Geoffrey and Lomasky, Loren. 1993. Democracy and Decision: The Pure Theory of Electoral Preference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, Geoffrey and Pettit, Philip. 1990. Unveiling the Vote. British Journal of Political Science 20:311–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, James and Tullock, Gordon. 1962. The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, James Henderson, ed. 1988. The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought c. 350–c. 1450. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Butters, H. C. 1985. Governors and Government in Early Sixteenth Century Florence 1502–1519. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Caplin, Andrew and Nalebuff, Barry. 1988. On 64%-Majority Rule. Econometrica 56 (4):787–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartledge, Paul. 2001. Spartan Reflections. London: Duckworth & Co.Google Scholar
Christiano, Thomas. 1996. The Rule of the Many: Fundamental Issues in Democratic Theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Christiano, Thomas 2000. Waldron on Law and Disagreement. Law and Philosophy 19:513–543.Google Scholar
Christiano, Thomas 2008. The Constitution of Equality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicero, . 1928. On the Republic and on the Laws. Translated by Keyes, C. W.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Coggins, Jay S. and Federico Perali, C.. 1998. 64%-Majority Rule in Ducal Venice: Voting for the Doge. Public Choice 97:709–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1986. An Epistemic Theory of Democracy. Ethics 97:26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, Jules L. and Ferejohn, John. 1986. Democracy and Social Choice. Ethics 97:6–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colomer, Joseph M. and McLean, Iain. 1998. Electing Popes: Approval Balloting and Qualified-Majority Rule. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 29 (1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Condorcet, Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat, Marquis de. 1785. Essai sur l’Application de l’Analyse à la Probabilité des Décisions Rendues à la Pluralité des Voix. Paris: Imprimerie Royale.Google Scholar
Condorcet, Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat, Marquis de 1968. Oeuvres: Nouvelle impression en facsimilé de l’édition Paris 1847–1849. Edited by O’Connor, e. M. F. A. a. A. C.. 12 vols. Stuttgart- BadCannstatt: FriedrichFrommann.Google Scholar
Crimmins, James E. 1996. Contending Interpretations of Bentham’s Utilitarianism. Canadian Journal of Political Science 29 (1): 751–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Daniels, Norman. 2003. Democratic Equality: Rawls’s Complex Egalitarianism. In The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, edited by Freeman, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 241–276.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Partha and Maskin, Eric. 2008. On the Robustness of Majority Rule. Journal of the European Economic Association 6:949–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1988. Classical Probability in the Enlightenment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
De Ste. Croix, G. E. M. 1972. The Origins of the Peloponnesian War. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Demosthenes, . 1949. Against Neaera. In Demosthenes [59]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V. 1982. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics.Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Driver, Justin. 2011. “The Consensus Constitution.” Texas Law Review 89, 755–832.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2002. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 1996. Freedom’s Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eisgruber, Christopher L. 2002. Democracy and Disagreement: A Comment on Jeremy Waldron’s Law and Disagreement. Journal of Legislation and Public Policy 6 (1):35–47.Google Scholar
Elkins, Zachary, Ginsburg, Tom, and Melton, James. 2009. The Endurance of National Constitutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, Jon. 2000. Ulysses Unbound. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, Jon 2007. The Night of August 4, 1789: A Study of Social Interaction in Collective Decision-Making. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales 45:71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, Jon 2009. Alexis de Tocqueville, The First Social Scientist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estlund, David M. 2008. Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Estlund, David M., Waldron, Jeremy, Grofman, Bernard, and Feld, Scott L.. 1989. Democratic Theory and the Public Interest: Condorcet and Rousseau Revisited. American Political Science Review 83 (4):1317–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrand, Max, ed. 1966. Records of the Federal Convention of 1787. Revised ed. 3 vols. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Ferejohn, John. 1997. The Politics of Imperfection: The Amendment of Constitutions. Law and Social Inquiry 22:501–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finley, M. 1979. The World of Odysseus. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Foreville, Raymond. 1965. Latran I, II, III et Latran IV, Histoire de conciles oecuméniques VI. Paris: Editions del’Orante.Google Scholar
Forrest, W. G. 1980. A History of Sparta 950–192 B.C. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Fry, Timothy. 1981. RB 1980 in Latin and English with Notes. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.Google Scholar
Gaudemet, Jean. 1960. Unanimité et majorité (Observations sur quelques études récentes). In Études historiques à la memoire de Noël Didier. Paris: Montchrestien.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 1987. Modelling Collective Belief. Synthese 73 (1):185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glotz, Gustave. 1929. The Greek City and Its Institutions. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner, and Co., Ltd.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert. 2003. Reflective Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1979. Consistent Majority Rule over Compact Sets of Alternatives. Econometrica 47 (3):627–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grofman, Bernard N. and Feld, Scott L.. 1988. Rousseau’s General Will: A Condorcetian Perspective. American Political Science Review 82 (2):567–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groseclose, Tim and Snyder, James M.. 1996. Buying Supermajorities. American Political Science Review 90 (2):303–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groseclose, Tim, and James M. Snyder, Jr. 2000. Vote Buying, Supermajorities, and Flooded Coalitions. The American Political Science Review 94 (3):683–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guicciardini, . 1994. Dialogue on the Government of Florence. Translated and edited by Brown, Alison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Guinier, Lani. 1995. The Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Guinther, John. 1988. The Jury in America. New York: Facts on File Publications.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy. 1980. Liberal Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jurgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Democracy. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1990. The Taming of Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallinger, Kassius. 1965. Das Wahlrecht der Benediktusregula. Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 76:233–245.Google Scholar
Hansen, Mogens Herman. 1991. The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell 1991. Hobbesian Political Order. Political Theory 19 (2):156–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, Russell 1999. Liberalism, Constitutionalism, and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1994. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hastie, Reid, Pernod, Steven D., and Pennington, Nancy. 1983. Inside the Jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, Allison, Herndon, Sheryl L., and Stager, Danielle M.. 1997. The Equal Rights Amendment: Why the ERA Remains Legally Viable and Properly Before the States. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law 3 (1):113–136.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. 1985. Leviathan. Edited by Macpherson, C. B.. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen. 1995. Passions and Constraint. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Homer, . 1990. The Iliad. Translated by Fagels, R.. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Homer, 1996. The Odyssey. Translated by Fagels, R.. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Jaffe, Louis. 1967. Was Brandeis an Activist? The Search for Intermediate Premises. Harvard Law Review 80: 986–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonakait, Randolph. 2003. The American Jury System. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Philip. 1997. The Italian City-State: From Commune to Signoria. Oxford: Clarendon University Press.Google Scholar
Kalven, Harry and Zeisel, Hans. 1966. The American Jury. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. 1946. Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship (University of California Publications in History, xxxiii). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kelsen, Hans. 1989. Pure Theory of Law. Translated by Knight, M.. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.Google Scholar
Kendall, Willmoore. 1965. John Locke and the Doctrine of Majority-Rule. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kishlansky, Mark. 1986. Parliamentary Selection: Social and Political Choice in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Jack. 1992. Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Jack and Johnson, James. 1994. Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy. Political Theory 22 (2): 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Jack and Johnson, James 2011. The Priority of Democracy: Political Consequences of Pragmatism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Konopcyznski, Ladislas. 1930. Le Liberum Veto: etude sur le development du principe majoritaire. Paris: Librarie Ancienne Honore Champion.Google Scholar
Krimmel, Kate, Lax, Jeffrey R., and Phillips, Justin. 2011. Public Opinion and Gay Rights: Do Members of Congress Follow Their Constituents’ Preferences. Typescript.
Kymlicka, Will. 1989. Liberalism, Community and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, William. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lagerspetz, Eerik. 1986. Pufendorf on Collective Decisions. Public Choice 49 (2):179–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanni, Adriaan M. 1997. Spectator Sport or Serious Politics? Hoi Periestekotes and the Athenian Lawcourts. Journal of Hellenic Studies 117:183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanni, Adriaan M. 2006. Law and Justice in the Courts of Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laplace, Pierre Simon. 1814. Essai philosophique sur les probabilités. 14 vols. Vol. 7, Oeuvres completes. Paris: Académie des Sciences.Google Scholar
Larsen, J. A. O. 1949. The Origin and Significance of the Counting of Votes. Classical Philology 44 (3):144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lax, Jeffrey R. and Phillips, Justin. 2009. Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness. American Political Science Review 103 (3):367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1951. Preface to the Universal Science. In Leibniz Selections, edited by Wiener, P. P.. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Levinson, Sanford. 1995. Responding to Imperfection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Sanford 2006. Our Undemocratic Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1969. Convention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lienhard, Joseph T. 1975. Sanius Consilium: Recent Work on the Election of the Abbot in the Rule of St. Benedict. The American Benedictine Review 26 (1): 1–15.Google Scholar
Lintott, Andrew. 1992. Judicial reform and law reform in the Roman Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lintott, Andrew 1999. The Constitution of the Roman Republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
List, Christian. 2004. On the Significance of the Absolute Margin. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55:521–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livy, . 1960. The Early History of Rome. Translated by de Selincourt, A.. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1988. Two Treatises of Government. Edited by Laslett, P.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loraux, Nicole. 1997. The Divided City. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
Lutz, Donald. 1994. Toward a Theory of Constitutional Amendment. American Political Science Review 88:355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macedo, Stephen. 2010. Against Majoritarianism: Democratic Values and Institutional Design. Boston Law Review 90 (2):1029–1042.Google Scholar
Mackie, Gerry. 2003. Democracy Defended. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manin, Bernard. 1987. On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation. Political Theory 15 (3):338–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manin, Bernard 1997. The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond Adversary Democracy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane 1986. Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, et al. 2010. The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1):64–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGann, Anthony J. 2006. The Logic of Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGinnis, John O. and Rappaport, Michael B.. 2002. Our Supermajoritarian Constitution. Texas Law Review 80 (March): 703–805.Google Scholar
McLean, Iain, and Hewitt, Fiona. 1994. Condorcet. Aldershot: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1998. On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford World Classics.
Monahan, Arthur P. 1987. Consent, Coercion, and Limit: The Medieval Origins of Parliamentary Democracy. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat. 1992. Spirit of the Laws. Translated by Cohler, A. M., Miller, B. C., and Stone, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morris, Colin. 1991. The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050 to 1250. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moulin, Léo. 1958. Sanior et maior pars. Note sur l’evolution des techniques électorales dans les orders religieux du VIe au XIIIe siècles. Revue historique de droit française et étranger 4th series (36):368–397 and 491–529.Google Scholar
Najemy, John M. 1982. Corporatism and Consensus in Florentine Electoral Politics 1280–1400. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Nederman, Cary J. 2009. Lineages of European Political Thought. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Novak, Stéphanie. 2010. Decision Rules, Social Norms and the Expression of Disagreement: The Case of Qualified-Majority Voting in the Council of the European Union. Social Science Information 49: 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ober, Josiah. 1989. Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ober, Josiah 2005. Athenian Legacies: Essays on the Politics of Going Together. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ober, Josiah 2008. Democracy and Knowledge: Innovation and Learning in Classical Athens. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogden, Daniel. 1997. The Crooked Kings of Ancient Greece. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Ordeshook, Peter C. 1992. Constitutional Stability. Constitutional Political Economy 3 (2):137–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padua, Marsilius of. 2005. The Defender of the Peace. Translated by Brett, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pausanias, . 1918. Description of Greece. Translated by Jones, W. H. S. and Ormerod, H. A.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, John and Bomberg, Elizabeth. 1999. Decision-Making in the European Union. Basingstoke: Palgrave-MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peltzer, Jörg. 2008. Canon Law, Careers and Conquest: Episcopal Elections in Normandy and Greater Anjou, c. 1140–c. 1230. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plato, . 1970. Laws. Translated by Trevor J. Saunders. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Plato, . 1975. Apology. In The Trial and Death of Socrates. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Plato, . 1996. Protagoras. Translated by C. C. W. Taylor. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Plutarch, . 2001a. Agis. Translated by Dryden, J.. Edited by Clough, A. H.. Vol. 2, Lives. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Plutarch, 2001b. Lycurgus. Translated by Dryden, J.. Edited by Clough, A. H.. Vol. 1, Lives. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Post, Gaines. 1950. A Roman Legal Theory of Consent, Quod Omnes Tangit, in Medieval Representation. Wisconsin Law Review (January): 66–78.Google Scholar
Post, Gaines 1964. Studies in Medieval Legal Thought: Public Law and the State, 1100–1322. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 2010. Democracy and the Limits of Self-Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putterman, Ethan. 2005. Rousseau on the People as Legislative Gate-Keepers, Not Framers. American Political Science Review 99 (1):145–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quillet, Jeannine. 1988. Community, Counsel, and Representation. In Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, edited by Burns, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 520–572.Google Scholar
Raaflaub, Kurt A., Ober, Josiah, and Wallace, Robert W.. 2007. Origins of Democracy in Ancient Greece. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rae, Douglas W. 1969. Decision-Rules and Individual Values in Constitutional Choice. American Political Science Review 63 (1): 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rae, Douglas W. 1975. The Limits of Consensual Decision. American Political Science Review 69:1270–1294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasch, Bjorn Erik. 2011. Veto Points, Qualified Majorities, and Agenda-Setting Rules in Constitutional Amendment Procedures. In 2nd International Conference on Democracy as Idea and Practice. Oslo, Norway.Google Scholar
Rasch, Bjorn Erik and Congleton, Roger. 2006. Amendment Procedures and Constitutional Stability. In Democratic Constitutional Design and Public Policy: Analysis and Design, edited by Swedenborg, R. C. a. B.. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 319–342.Google Scholar
Ratner, R. S. 2008. Communicative Rationality in the Citizens’ Assembly and Referendum Processes. In Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly, edited by Mark E. Warren and Hilary Pearse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Read, James H. 2009. Majority Rule versus Consensus: The Political Thought of John C. Calhoun. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, P. J. 1981. Notes on Voting in Athens. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 22 (2):125–132.Google Scholar
Rhodes, P. J. and Lewis, David M.. 1997. The Decrees of the Greek States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Risse, Mathias. 2004. Arguing for Majority Rule. Journal of Political Philosophy 12 (1):41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, I. S. 1990. Papacy 1073–1198: Continuity and Innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, I. S. 2004. The Institutions of the Church, 1073–c.1198. In Cambridge Histories Online, ed. Luscombe, D. and Riley-Smith, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (accessed August 20, 2010).Google Scholar
Rossiter, Clinton, ed. 1961. The Federalist Papers. New York: Penguin Books.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1997. The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings. Edited and translated by Victor Gourevitch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, Nicolai. 1997. The Government of Florence under the Medici (1434 to 1494). 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruffini Avondo, Edouardo 1925. Il principio maggioritario nella storia del Diritto Canonico. Archivio Giuridico Filippo Serafini IX.Google Scholar
Saks, Michael J. 1998. What Do Jury Experiments Tell Us about How Juries (Should) Make Decisions. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 6:1–53.Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas C. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. 2004. Legality and Legitimacy. Translated by Seitzer, J.. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Carl 2008. Constitutional Theory. Translated by Seitzer, J.. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuessler, Alexander A. 2000. Expressive Voting. Rationality and Society 12:87–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Bernard. 1983. Super Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court – A Judicial Biography. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Edward P. and Schwartz, Warren F.. 2000. And So Say Some of Us … What to Do When Jurors Disagree. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 9:445–447.Google Scholar
Schwartzberg, Melissa. 2003. Rousseau on Fundamental Law. Political Studies 51 (2):387–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartzberg, Melissa 2007. Democracy and Legal Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartzberg, Melissa 2008. Voting the General Will: Rousseau on Decision Rules. Political Theory 36 (3):403–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, John T. 2005. Rousseau’s Anti-Agenda-Setting Agenda and Contemporary Democratic Theory. American Political Science Review 99 (1):137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shaw, Christine. 2001. Counsel and Consent in Fifteenth Century Genoa. English Historical Review 116 (468):834–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherwin-White, A. N. 1982. The Lex Repetundarum and the Political Ideas of Gaius Gracchus. Journal of Roman Studies 72:18–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. 1957. Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Solt, Stephanie. 2011. Vagueness in Quantity: Two Cases from a Linguistic Perspective. In Understanding Vagueness: Logical, Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives, edited by Cintula, C. G. F. Petr, Godo, Lluis, and Hajek, Petr. London: College Publications, 5–23.Google Scholar
Staveley, Eastland S. 1972. Greek and Roman Voting and Elections. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Steiner, Gilbert Y. 1985. Constitutional Inequality: The Political Fortunes of the Equal Rights Amendment. Washington, DC: Brookings.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2001. Designing Democracy: What Constitutions Do. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2002. The Law of Group Polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2): 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, Norman, ed. 1990. Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, vol. 1. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Taylor, Lily Ross. 1966. Roman Voting Assemblies. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Thier, Andreas. 2001. Hierarchie und Autonomie. Regelungstraditionen der Bischofsbestellung in der Geschichte der kirschlichen Walhrechts bis 1140 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich.
Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. Who Should Govern Who Governs? The Role of Citizens in Reforming the Electoral System. In Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly, edited by Hilary Pearse, . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press20–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thucydides, . 1972. History of the Peloponnesian War. Translated by Warner, R.. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, Alexis de. 2000. Democracy in America. Translated by Mansfield, H. C. a. D. W.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsopanakis, Agapētos G. 1954. La Rhètre de Lycurgue-l’Annexe-Tyrtée. Thessaloniki: Hellenika.Google Scholar
Tuck, Richard. 2008. Free Riding. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ullmann-Margalit, Edna and Morgenbesser, Sidney. 1977. Picking and Choosing. Social Research 44:757–785.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia. 2004. Condorcet’s Democratic Theory of Representative Government. European Journal of Political Theory 3 (1):53–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia 2006. Representative Democracy: Principles and Geneaology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaahtera, Jyri. 1990. Pebbles, Points, or Ballots: The Emergence of the Individual Vote in Rome. Arctos 24:161–177.Google Scholar
Vermeule, Adrian. 2007. Mechanisms of Democracy: Institutional Design Writ Small. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voltaire, . 2000. Treatise on Tolerance and Other Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Voltaire, 2009. Oeuvres Completes de Voltaire. Vol. 80B. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1995. The Wisdom of the Multitude: Some Reflections on Book 3, Chapter 11 of Aristotle’s Politics. Political Theory 23:563–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy 1999. Law and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy 2002. God, Locke, and Equality: Christian Foundations in Locke’s Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waley, Daniel. 1988. The Italian City-Republic. 3rd ed. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Wallace, Helen, Pollack, Mark A., and Young, Alasdair R.. 2010. Policy-Making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, Robert W. 1989. The Areopagus Council, to 307 BC. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E. and Pearse, Hilary, ed. 2008. Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Waters, Nicole L. and Hans, Valerie P.. 2009. A Jury of One: Opinion Formation, Conformity, and Dissent on Juries. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 6 (3): 513–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, Alan. 1985. The Digest of Justinian. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Wawro, Gregory and Schickler, Eric. 2006. Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry. 2005. Self-Enforcing Constitutions: With an Application to Democratic Stability in America’s First Century. Working paper.
Weirich, Paul. 1986. Rousseau on Proportional Majority Rule. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research XLVII (1):111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitman, James Q. 2008. The Origins of Reasonable Doubt: Theological Roots of the Criminal Trial. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Melissa S. 1998. Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Winroth, Anders. 2000. The Making of Gratian’s Decretum. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Melissa Schwartzberg, New York University
  • Book: Counting the Many
  • Online publication: 05 June 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013970.011
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Melissa Schwartzberg, New York University
  • Book: Counting the Many
  • Online publication: 05 June 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013970.011
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Melissa Schwartzberg, New York University
  • Book: Counting the Many
  • Online publication: 05 June 2014
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013970.011
Available formats
×