There were basically three dimensions of sovereignty at stake in the disputes and civil wars that dominated the entire first half of the 20th century in Rio de la Plata. The first dimension has to do with whom was to be considered the bearer of sovereignty, the second with how sovereignty was represented and the third, about how it could be limited. This article analyzes these three dimensions of what was going on in Argentina during the first few decades after the crisis of the monarchy and the revolution, concluding with some general reflections on the redefinitions that were being worked out during the second half of the 19th century, as the Argentine Republic was being constituted and popular sovereignty was absorbing and condensing new meanings. If on the one hand, resolving the problem of the subject of sovereignty through constitutionalization in the form of a single republic could provide a new institutional framework for the representation and limitation of the exercise of this sovereignty as of the mid 19th century, on the other hand, popular sovereignty was now expected to respond to the new political and social demands that clamored for a redefinition of the "question of democracy".
Sovereignty; Legitimacy; Republic; Representation; Exercise; Democracy