Rousseau’s distinction between legitimate government (or democratic government, in contemporary terminology) and representa- tion built upon discourses with quite different historical roots. Democracy originated as direct democracy in ancient Greek city-states whereas representation originated in the medieval Christian church and the feudal re- lationships encompassed within the Holy Ro- man Empire, its monarchies, municipalities, and principalities (Pitkin 2004). In modern discourse, however, the concept of political representation evolved beyond this distinc- tion, becoming something more complex and promising than the Rousseauian distinction between the (democratic) will of the people and the (aristocratic) judgments of political elites. Developing along with the constitu- tionalization of state powers, representation came to indicate the complex set of relation- ships that result in activating the “sovereign people” well beyond the formal act of electoral authorization. After Rousseau, representative politics is increasingly understood as having the potential to unify and connect the plural forms of association within civil society, in part by projecting the horizons of citizens beyond their immediate attachments, and in part by provoking citizens to reflect on future perspectives and conflicts in the process of devising national politics (see Hegel 1967). Political representation can function to focus without permanently solidifying the sovereignty of the people, while transforming their presence from formally sanctioning (will) into political influence (political judgment). And importantly, political repre- sentation can confer on politics an idealizing dimension that can overcome the limits of territoriality and formal citizenship on political deliberation.