A troubling veil of mystery still shrouds the central institution of the British Constitution – the Crown. In this paper, I examine the modern utility of five historical doctrines: the doctrine of the “King's two bodies”; the doctrine that the Crown is a “corporation sole”; the doctrine that the King can “do no wrong”; the doctrine that (high) public offices are “emanations” of the Crown; and the doctrine that the Crown is “one and indivisible”. Using some insights from social ontology, the history of office in the Western legal tradition, and the sociology of role and status, I argue that the first four of these doctrines can be refashioned into a conception of the Crown as an office. An office is an enduring institutional entity to which individuals bear a relationship from time to time, but which is separate from any individual incumbent and is to be considered in legal analysis as a separate acting subject. Using the logic of office, official personality and official action, I distinguish between the Queen, the Crown, Her Majesty's Government and the Commonwealth and argue that together they provide a serviceable model of the modern British Constitution. The final doctrine, however, must be abandoned – the Crown is plural and divisible and this must be taken into account when using the Crown to reason about the UK's relationship to other constitutional orders.

中文翻译：

---

皇冠办公室

令人不安的神秘面纱仍然笼罩着英国宪法的中心机构——王室。在本文中，我考察了五个历史学说的现代效用：“国王的两个身体”学说；官方是“独资公司”的学说；国王不能“做错事”的教义；（高级）公职是王室“散发”的学说；以及王冠是“一体的、不可分割的”的学说。利用社会本体论、西方法律传统中的官位历史以及角色和地位的社会学的一些见解，我认为前四个学说可以被重新塑造成一个官职的概念。办公室是一个持久的机构实体，个人不时与之建立关系，但它与任何个人在职者是分开的，在法律分析中将被视为一个单独的行为主体。使用职务、官方人格和官方行动的逻辑，我区分了女王、王室、女王陛下政府和英联邦，并认为它们共同提供了现代英国宪法的一个有用模型。然而，最终原则必须放弃——王权是复数和可分割的，在使用王权来推理英国与其他宪法秩序的关系时必须考虑到这一点。s 政府和英联邦，并认为它们共同提供了现代英国宪法的有用模型。然而，最终原则必须放弃——王权是复数和可分割的，在使用王权来推理英国与其他宪法秩序的关系时必须考虑到这一点。s 政府和英联邦，并认为它们共同提供了现代英国宪法的有用模型。然而，最终原则必须放弃——王权是复数和可分割的，在使用王权来推理英国与其他宪法秩序的关系时必须考虑到这一点。