ABSTRACT
The notion that agreement among all parties concerned is the fundamental principle by which the legitimacy of a community’s basic constitutional order is assured seems to be widely shared across a broad range of otherwise quite different intellectual traditions. Upon closer examination it becomes apparent, however, that the notion of agreement takes on somewhat different meanings in different contexts and that, accordingly, there exist systematically different interpretations as to what kind of agreement actually carries with it legitimizing force. In this regard, various dimensions are potentially relevant along which ‘agreement’ may be qualified, concerning, for instance, the conditions under which agreement is achieved, the process by which it is achieved, or the way in which it is ‘revealed’ (e.g., verbal agreement vs implicit agreement, original vs ongoing agreement, etc.).
