Chapter 70
Monarchy and kingship; kings, princes and royal power.
1011 passages · 268 principal · Covers the 49 volumes of primary texts
Monarchy, the rule of one man or woman over a people, is the oldest form of government these books describe and the one their authors argue about most. It appears in the hall of Hrothgar and the court of Haroun’s caliph, in the Psalms and in Paradise Lost, in Machiavelli’s handbook and Burke’s defence of the French crown. The idea covers what a king is and what makes him one, how a throne is gained and passed on, whether the crown is bound by law, how kings are counselled and misled, what they ought to do, what they suffer, and how far earthly kingship mirrors or mocks the kingship ascribed to God. It is a great idea for these books because nearly every other political question, about justice, law, liberty and the right to resist, was first asked of kings.
The texts give two accounts of where kingship came from. One is natural and paternal. Pope traces it to the father who was king, priest and parent at once, chosen for common interest and virtue rather than by any right divine1. Rousseau has a single eminent man become sole magistrate, until chiefs made their office hereditary and styled themselves kings of kings2. Hugo sees the pastoral staff turning into a sceptre3, and Beowulf opens with Scyld the foundling rising to command tribute4. Pascal offers a harsher version: royal power rests on the people’s reason but still more on their folly, and that weakness is its surest foundation5.
The other account is sacred. The Psalms pray that God will crown the king and grant him length of days6, and they record a covenant establishing David’s throne for ever7. Yet the same book charges God with casting that crown down8, so divine sanction cuts both ways. Homer’s Zeus decrees that Odysseus shall be king all his days9. Macbeth calls the murdered Duncan the Lord’s anointed temple10, and the play sets the healing touch of the good King Edward against the tyrant11. Shakespeare also lets the usurping Claudius claim that divinity hedges a king12, and the irony is pointed. The reformers turn sacredness into obligation. Calvin holds that true royalty means knowing oneself God’s minister, and that a king who does not seek God’s glory is a usurper13,14. Bacon tells kings to remember they are men and God’s lieutenants15. Luther notes that the prophets who anointed kings remained their subjects, so consecration confers no superiority16. Hobbes reads Israel’s demand for a human king as a deposing of God17. Emerson grants that monarchy was relatively right while religion consecrated it18.
A third line of thought measures kingship by worth rather than title. Confucius warns that a king’s joy in being unopposed wrecks a kingdom unless he is right19. Ecclesiastes prefers a poor wise youth to an old foolish king20. Dante’s Solomon asks only for the wisdom to be a sufficient king21. Milton’s Christ calls guiding men to truth nobler than ruling bodies by force22. Pascal tells Queen Christina that a monarch lacks glory without pre-eminence of mind23. Ruskin carries the point furthest: true kingship is moral and intellectual superiority, and kings who treat nations as property are gadflies24,25, whose dominion should be measured by their people’s love26.
When monarchy is compared with other forms, the verdicts divide. Aesop’s frogs, given the king they demanded, find the log useless and the stork deadly27. Plutarch reports many Romans saying only monarchy could cure their government28. Burke prefers a monarchy directed by laws and balanced by hereditary dignity29, and he defends the old French crown against comparison with Turkish despotism30. Emerson quotes Ames, for whom monarchy was a merchantman that may sink and a republic a raft that never sinks but keeps one’s feet wet31. Mill records Bentham’s view of the king as “corrupter-general”32. Lowell grants the hereditary ruler a store of prestige in emergencies that an elected magistrate must slowly build33.
Succession is where the case for monarchy is hardest to make. Pascal admits that choosing the queen’s eldest son is unreasonable, since no one would choose a ship’s captain by family. He then calls it reasonable after all, because otherwise men would come to blows over who is ablest34,35. Burke builds a constitution on this paradox. The British king holds by fixed hereditary rule, not by election36, and the Revolution of 1688 departed from the line only to restore it37,38. Burke expressly rejects divine indefeasible right and defends inheritance on grounds of law and policy39. James II, on this view, was a bad king with a good title40. Dryden takes the other side: Aeneas, like Augustus, was elected, and a crown received as a gift is a trust41. Cromwell’s Instrument of Government made the protectorship elective42. Machiavelli settles the question practically. Hereditary princes hold power easily43, but a capable new prince may hold it more firmly still44.
New princes are Machiavelli’s subject. Some rise by merit, like Hiero45, some by favour or money and so lack the means to keep what they got46, and some by crime or the citizens’ choice47. The poets dwell on the crime. Raleigh shows Henry IV winning the crown by treason and seeing his line overturned48. Hamlet calls Claudius a cutpurse who stole the diadem49. In Grimm, the fisherman’s wife climbs from king to emperor50. Disputed thrones fill the drama. Lear gives up power while keeping the name of king51. Calderón’s Basilio settles Poland’s crown in council and finally resigns it to his son52,53. Marlowe’s Edward yields his crown, calling it transitory pomp54. Beowulf refuses the throne in order to uphold the young heir55. Burke draws a constitutional line here: a king may abdicate for his own person but not for the monarchy56.
The fall of kings is a lesson every period draws. Herodotus’ Apries thought not even a god could end his rule, and he was strangled57. Virgil’s Priam ends a headless, nameless corpse58. Raleigh traces English kings undone by cruelty and broken faith59. Marvell watches Charles I on the scaffold60, and Voltaire asks his reader to weigh that trial against French kings murdered by monks61. Burke grieves over Louis XVI led captive in triumph, insisting that misfortune is not crime62. He adds that a king cannot be deposed by halves63.
Whether the king is above the law is the central question of the modern texts, but it has ancient roots. Tacitus’ Germans chose kings whose power was limited, while the Suiones’ single ruler held unlimited power64,65. More’s Macarien king is bound by oath to a limit on his treasure66. Dryden declares that no Christian monarchy is absolute67. Rousseau praises kings who own themselves subject to their realm’s laws68. Burke holds absolute monarchy illegitimate69, yet he also insists that the British king obeys no person, since in him we obey the law70. The checks are nobles, parliament and church. Bacon calls a monarchy without nobility pure tyranny71, and Machiavelli contrasts the Turkish sole ruler with the French king surrounded by ancient barons72. Marlowe’s Edward declares that the barons shall not limit him and asks why a king should be subject to a priest73,74. Harrison records kings made to rule only as far as the pope allowed75. Sydney Smith argues that no sovereign should bind his successors by conscience against Parliament76.
On resistance, Ecclesiastes counsels keeping the king’s command77. Froissart’s rebels profess loyalty while blaming the king’s counsellors78. Goethe’s Egmont sharpens the distinction, separating resistance to the king from opposition to a monarch’s wrong step, against Alva’s claim that the king wills and must be obeyed79. Loyalty finds its purest voice in the Jacobite songs of Burns, Lady Nairne and Scott, devoted to a king without a throne80,81,82.
Counsel is the king’s remedy for ignorance and also his danger. Bacon says sovereignty is married to counsel and that kings are exalted rather than diminished by it83,84. Machiavelli would have the prince hear the truth patiently but never be governed by one adviser85. Confucius asks courtesy of king to minister and faithfulness in return86. Wiglaf laments that his king ignored counsel87. More’s Raphael likens court service to bondage88. Flatterers are the standing peril: Racine calls them heaven’s most fatal gift to kings89, and Pascal’s prince is the byword of Europe yet alone ignorant of it90. Favourites raise a gentler problem. Bacon sees that kings, set apart by fortune, raise favourites in order to have friends91. Marlowe shows the cost in a king who neglects his realm for Gaveston92.
The precepts for princes split along Machiavelli’s line. It is safer to be feared than loved, provided one avoids hatred93. The prince should join the lion and the fox and break his word when keeping it harms him94, and he need only seem virtuous95. Raleigh’s Henry VII shifted blame for harsh acts onto his ministers96. Yet Machiavelli also teaches that a prince who keeps the people’s friendship has resources in adversity97,98, and on this point the moralists agree with him. Bacon wants princes to be common parents rather than party leaders99. Penn holds that a prince just to his people keeps them100, and Egmont finds a monarch most secure in his people’s goodwill101. Behind such advice stands the old image of king as father and shepherd. Odysseus ruled gently as a father102. Conaire’s reign brought fair weather and peace103. More’s king exists for the people’s sake as a shepherd feeds his sheep104. Penn sets rex against tyrannus105. Adam Smith observes that even a bad sovereign feels more for his people than revenue farmers do106. The failure of this ideal comes in kings who prefer war and conquest to ruling well107 or neglect the state for finery108.
The king’s personal condition draws a melancholy agreement across the ages. Sophocles’ Creon would rather have power without kingly cares109. Bacon finds kings with few desires and many fears110. Marlowe’s Edward says private griefs pass but a king’s do not111. Shakespeare likens the king’s fall to a massy wheel dragging all with it112. Pascal concludes that a king left without diversion is unhappier than his subjects113,114. Pomp is the remedy and the mask. Pascal sees majesty resting on guards and drums115, and Smith reasons that a monarch raised far above his subjects needs greater splendour116. Death levels it all. Shirley has sceptre and crown tumble into common ashes117, the Indian king’s herald reminds him “He will die”118, and Hamlet’s king goes a progress through a beggar’s guts119.
Seen in action, kings are generous and capricious by turns. Cellini’s Francis receives him kneeling and funds great works120. Walton’s James vindicates the slandered Donne121. Molière’s prince sees through the hypocrite122. Against these stand the Arabian kings who condemn at whim123, the ballad king who sends Sir Patrick to drown124, and the Henry VIII of whom More said that a king who knew his strength would be hard to rule, like a lion125. The disguised caliph and the abbot-king among Robin Hood’s men seek among their subjects the truth that courts withhold126,127.
The historical narratives test the theory. Plutarch’s Caesar refuses the diadem while the people dread the kingly name128,129. Pliny praises a Trajan who preferred being loved to being flattered130. Machiavelli analyses emperors destroyed by hatred or contempt131. Dryden defends Augustus’ rule as one shared with the senate132. The crown also travels overseas: Columbus claims islands as absolutely as Castile133, and Raleigh urges Elizabeth to be empress of Guiana134.
Above every earthly throne the texts set another. The Psalms praise God as great King over all the earth135, and the Koran’s God grants and removes sovereignty as He pleases136. Hobbes calls God king by nature and by covenant137. Christ’s kingdom, Luther says, is not of this world138, and Pascal notes that Christ did not come as a king to shine139. Milton gives monarchy its cosmic drama. Satan prefers reigning in Hell to serving140, and in the debate with Abdiel he asks whether anyone may rightfully reign over equals141. Beelzebub, for his part, concedes that God rules Hell with an iron sceptre as Heaven with a golden one142.
That last debate leaves the authors’ deepest question open. If kingship is justified by superiority, few kings are superior. If it is justified by inheritance, the title is, as Pascal saw, absurd yet useful. If it is justified by consent, the king becomes the servant Burke refused to make him. And if it is justified by God, the books disagree over whether the anointing exalts the king or binds him.
Introductory essay written by Claude Opus 5.5 from the outline and the notes on every passage below; quotations are checked against this edition.
See also: Constitution 4b · Revolution 7b
See also: Chance 3a
See also: Tyranny 8b · Revolution 7a
See also: Government 7b · Liberty 7b
See also: Religion 12b · Government 9a
See also: Prudence 4a
See also: Virtue and Vice 10c · Government 4c
See also: Aristocracy 6a · Government 4c
See also: Diversion 2c · Happiness 7a
See also: Life and Death 2a
See also: Liberty 9b · Revolution 4a
See also: Revolution 5a
See also: Wealth 12g · Exploration 3c
See also: God 7c
See also: Race and Nationality 7a · Prophecy 8a
See also: Angel 7c · Exploration 6d · War and Peace 1d
See also: War and Peace, Government, Tyranny, Revolution, Honor, Aristocracy