1. Writers like Aristotle, David Hume and Hobbes are great support­ers of monarchical form of government. For Aristotle, it was the best form of government. His view was that a noble ruler would promote good of the people.

Hume preferred it for in it, “property is secure, industry is encouraged, art flourishes and the prince lives like a father among his children”. Asoka, Akbar, etc, are examples of such monarchs. It is considered to be a benevolent rule.

2. It is claimed that this form of government can take firm decisions and enforce them expeditiously. No time is wasted in discussions as is the case in democracy.

The unity and orderliness which is necessary for a stable political society can best be secured as the supreme authority is vested in a single man. As Thomas Acquinas puts it, ‘the greater the unity within the Government itself, the greater the likelihood of achieving unity among the people”.


3. Monarchy helps to harmonise different interests and prevents social strife. Monarchy is a natural institution, obedience to the king being as natural as obedience of a child to his parents. Filmer in his book Patriarcha suggested that state is but an extension of the family, the king being Father, people his children.

Bodin says, “Monarchy is best govern­ment to deal with emergencies because a monarch need not consult others before taking a decision” Then Monarchy is government in which the attention of the nation is concentrated on one man doing interesting things. A Republic is government in which attention is divided between many, who are all doing uninteresting things.”

4. According to J.S. Mill, “Monarchy is a legitimate mode of government for dealing with barbarians, provided the end being their improvement and the means be justified by actually affecting the end.

” In ancient times, the only suitable form of government was monarchy and it played a very useful part in bringing under discipline and political control barbarian people of those times.


5. Finally, it is said that a monarch can carry out his policy continu­ously and persistently without any fear of change of office as the tenure of his regime is not affected by the vagaries of elections.

He can pursue a continuous policy and with firmness without being challenged at every step as a cabinet is by the Parliamentary debates.