Books: Leviathan

T >> Thomas Hobbes >> Leviathan

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47

Though the Kinds of Soveraigntie be, as I have now shewn, but three;
that is to say, Monarchie, where one Man has it; or Democracie,
where the generall Assembly of Subjects hath it; or Aristocracie,
where it is in an Assembly of certain persons nominated, or otherwise
distinguished from the rest: Yet he that shall consider the particular
Common-wealthes that have been, and are in the world, will not perhaps
easily reduce them to three, and may thereby be inclined to think
there be other Formes, arising from these mingled together.
As for example, Elective Kingdomes; where Kings have the Soveraigne
Power put into their hands for a time; of Kingdomes, wherein the King
hath a power limited: which Governments, are nevertheless by most
Writers called Monarchie. Likewise if a Popular, or Aristocraticall
Common-wealth, subdue an Enemies Countrie, and govern the same,
by a President, Procurator, or other Magistrate; this may seeme perhaps
at first sight, to be a Democraticall, or Aristocraticall Government.
But it is not so. For Elective Kings, are not Soveraignes,
but Ministers of the Soveraigne; nor limited Kings Soveraignes,
but Ministers of them that have the Soveraigne Power: nor are those
Provinces which are in subjection to a Democracie, or Aristocracie
of another Common-wealth, Democratically, or Aristocratically governed,
but Monarchically.

And first, concerning an Elective King, whose power is limited to
his life, as it is in many places of Christendome at this day;
or to certaine Yeares or Moneths, as the Dictators power amongst
the Romans; If he have Right to appoint his Successor, he is no more
Elective but Hereditary. But if he have no Power to elect his Successor,
then there is some other Man, or Assembly known, which after his decease
may elect a new, or else the Common-wealth dieth, and dissolveth with him,
and returneth to the condition of Warre. If it be known who have
the power to give the Soveraigntie after his death, it is known also
that the Soveraigntie was in them before: For none have right to give
that which they have not right to possesse, and keep to themselves,
if they think good. But if there be none that can give the Soveraigntie,
after the decease of him that was first elected; then has he power,
nay he is obliged by the Law of Nature, to provide, by establishing
his Successor, to keep those that had trusted him with the Government,
from relapsing into the miserable condition of Civill warre.
And consequently he was, when elected, a Soveraign absolute.

Secondly, that King whose power is limited, is not superiour to him,
or them that have the power to limit it; and he that is not superiour,
is not supreme; that is to say not Soveraign. The Soveraignty therefore
was alwaies in that Assembly which had the Right to Limit him;
and by consequence the government not Monarchy, but either Democracy,
or Aristocracy; as of old time in Sparta; where the Kings had
a priviledge to lead their Armies; but the Soveraignty was in the Ephori.

Thirdly, whereas heretofore the Roman People, governed the land of Judea
(for example) by a President; yet was not Judea therefore a Democracy;
because they were not governed by any Assembly, into which, any of them,
had right to enter; nor by an Aristocracy; because they were not governed
by any Assembly, into which, any man could enter by their Election:
but they were governed by one Person, which though as to the people
of Rome was an Assembly of the people, or Democracy; yet as to the
people of Judea, which had no right at all of participating in
the government, was a Monarch. For though where the people are
governed by an Assembly, chosen by themselves out of their own number,
the government is called a Democracy, or Aristocracy; yet when they
are governed by an Assembly, not of their own choosing, 'tis a Monarchy;
not of One man, over another man; but of one people, over another people.

Of The Right Of Succession
Of all these Formes of Government, the matter being mortall,
so that not onely Monarchs, but also whole Assemblies dy,
it is necessary for the conservation of the peace of men,
that as there was order taken for an Artificiall Man, so there
be order also taken, for an Artificiall Eternity of life; without which,
men that are governed by an Assembly, should return into the condition
of Warre in every age; and they that are governed by One man,
as soon as their Governour dyeth. This Artificiall Eternity,
is that which men call the Right of Succession.

There is no perfect forme of Government, where the disposing of
the Succession is not in the present Soveraign. For if it be
in any other particular Man, or private Assembly, it is in a
person subject, and may be assumed by the Soveraign at his pleasure;
and consequently the Right is in himselfe. And if it be in no
particular man, but left to a new choyce; then is the Common-wealth
dissolved; and the Right is in him that can get it; contrary to
the intention of them that did institute the Common-wealth,
for their perpetuall, and not temporary security.

In a Democracy, the whole Assembly cannot faile, unlesse the Multitude
that are to be governed faile. And therefore questions of the
right of Succession, have in that forme of Government no place at all.

In an Aristocracy, when any of the Assembly dyeth, the election
of another into his room belongeth to the Assembly, as the Soveraign,
to whom belongeth the choosing of all Counsellours, and Officers.
For that which the Representative doth, as Actor, every one of
the Subjects doth, as Author. And though the Soveraign assembly,
may give Power to others, to elect new men, for supply of their Court;
yet it is still by their Authority, that the Election is made;
and by the same it may (when the publique shall require it) be recalled.

The Present Monarch Hath Right To Dispose Of The Succession
The greatest difficultie about the right of Succession, is in Monarchy:
And the difficulty ariseth from this, that at first sight,
it is not manifest who is to appoint the Successor; nor many times,
who it is whom he hath appointed. For in both these cases, there is
required a more exact ratiocination, than every man is accustomed to use.
As to the question, who shall appoint the Successor, of a Monarch
that hath the Soveraign Authority; that is to say, (for Elective Kings
and Princes have not the Soveraign Power in propriety, but in use only,)
we are to consider, that either he that is in possession, has right
to dispose of the Succession, or else that right is again in
the dissolved Multitude. For the death of him that hath the
Soveraign power in propriety, leaves the Multitude without any
Soveraign at all; that is, without any Representative in whom
they should be united, and be capable of doing any one action at all:
And therefore they are incapable of Election of any new Monarch;
every man having equall right to submit himselfe to such as he thinks
best able to protect him, or if he can, protect himselfe by his
owne sword; which is a returne to Confusion, and to the condition
of a War of every man against every man, contrary to the end for which
Monarchy had its first Institution. Therfore it is manifest,
that by the Institution of Monarchy, the disposing of the Successor,
is alwaies left to the Judgment and Will of the present Possessor.

And for the question (which may arise sometimes) who it is that
the Monarch in possession, hath designed to the succession and
inheritance of his power; it is determined by his expresse Words,
and Testament; or by other tacite signes sufficient.

Succession Passeth By Expresse Words;
By expresse Words, or Testament, when it is declared by him
in his life time, viva voce, or by Writing; as the first Emperours
of Rome declared who should be their Heires. For the word Heire
does not of it selfe imply the Children, or nearest Kindred of a man;
but whomsoever a man shall any way declare, he would have to succeed
him in his Estate. If therefore a Monarch declare expresly,
that such a man shall be his Heire, either by Word or Writing,
then is that man immediately after the decease of his Predecessor,
Invested in the right of being Monarch.

Or, By Not Controlling A Custome;
But where Testament, and expresse Words are wanting, other naturall
signes of the Will are to be followed: whereof the one is Custome.
And therefore where the Custome is, that the next of Kindred
absolutely succeedeth, there also the next of Kindred hath right to
the Succession; for that, if the will of him that was in posession had
been otherwise, he might easily have declared the same in his life time.
And likewise where the Custome is, that the next of the Male Kindred
succeedeth, there also the right of Succession is in the next of
the Kindred Male, for the same reason. And so it is if the Custome
were to advance the Female. For whatsoever Custome a man may by
a word controule, and does not, it is a naturall signe he would have
that Custome stand.

Or, By Presumption Of Naturall Affection
But where neither Custome, nor Testament hath preceded, there it is
to be understood, First, that a Monarchs will is, that the government
remain Monarchicall; because he hath approved that government in himselfe.
Secondly, that a Child of his own, Male, or Female, be preferred
before any other; because men are presumed to be more enclined by nature,
to advance their own children, than the children of other men;
and of their own, rather a Male than a Female; because men,
are naturally fitter than women, for actions of labour and danger.
Thirdly, where his own Issue faileth, rather a Brother than a stranger;
and so still the neerer in bloud, rather than the more remote,
because it is alwayes presumed that the neerer of kin, is the neerer
in affection; and 'tis evident that a man receives alwayes, by reflexion,
the most honour from the greatnesse of his neerest kindred.

To Dispose Of The Succession, Though To A King Of
Another Nation, Not Unlawfull
But if it be lawfull for a Monarch to dispose of the Succession
by words of Contract, or Testament, men may perhaps object
a great inconvenience: for he may sell, or give his Right of governing
to a stranger; which, because strangers (that is, men not used to live
under the same government, not speaking the same language) do commonly
undervalue one another, may turn to the oppression of his Subjects;
which is indeed a great inconvenience; but it proceedeth not necessarily
from the subjection to a strangers government, but from the unskilfulnesse
of the Governours, ignorant of the true rules of Politiques.
And therefore the Romans when they had subdued many Nations,
to make their Government digestible, were wont to take away
that grievance, as much as they thought necessary, by giving
sometimes to whole Nations, and sometimes to Principall men
of every Nation they conquered, not onely the Privileges,
but also the Name of Romans; and took many of them into the Senate,
and Offices of charge, even in the Roman City. And this was it our
most wise King, King James, aymed at, in endeavouring the Union of
his two Realms of England and Scotland. Which if he could have obtained,
had in all likelihood prevented the Civill warres, which make both those
Kingdomes at this present, miserable. It is not therefore any injury
to the people, for a Monarch to dispose of the Succession by Will; though
by the fault of many Princes, it hath been sometimes found inconvenient.
Of the lawfulnesse of it, this also is an argument, that whatsoever
inconvenience can arrive by giving a Kingdome to a stranger,
may arrive also by so marrying with strangers, as the Right of
Succession may descend upon them: yet this by all men is accounted lawfull.

CHAPTER XX

OF DOMINION PATERNALL AND DESPOTICALL

A Common-wealth by Acquisition, is that, where the Soveraign Power
is acquired by Force; And it is acquired by force, when men singly,
or many together by plurality of voyces, for fear of death, or bonds,
do authorise all the actions of that Man, or Assembly, that hath
their lives and liberty in his Power.

Wherein Different From A Common-wealth By Institution
And this kind of Dominion, or Soveraignty, differeth from Soveraignty
by Institution, onely in this, That men who choose their Soveraign,
do it for fear of one another, and not of him whom they Institute:
But in this case, they subject themselves, to him they are afraid of.
In both cases they do it for fear: which is to be noted by them,
that hold all such Covenants, as proceed from fear of death,
or violence, voyd: which if it were true, no man, in any kind
of Common-wealth, could be obliged to Obedience. It is true,
that in a Common-wealth once Instituted, or acquired, Promises proceeding
from fear of death, or violence, are no Covenants, nor obliging,
when the thing promised is contrary to the Lawes; But the reason is not,
because it was made upon fear, but because he that promiseth,
hath no right in the thing promised. Also, when he may lawfully performe,
and doth not, it is not the Invalidity of the Covenant, that absolveth him,
but the Sentence of the Soveraign. Otherwise, whensoever a man lawfully
promiseth, he unlawfully breaketh: But when the Soveraign,
who is the Actor, acquitteth him, then he is acquitted by him that
exorted the promise, as by the Author of such absolution.

The Rights Of Soveraignty The Same In Both
But the Rights, and Consequences of Soveraignty, are the same in both.
His Power cannot, without his consent, be Transferred to another:
He cannot Forfeit it: He cannot be Accused by any of his Subjects,
of Injury: He cannot be Punished by them: He is Judge of what is
necessary for Peace; and Judge of Doctrines: He is Sole Legislator;
and Supreme Judge of Controversies; and of the Times, and Occasions
of Warre, and Peace: to him it belongeth to choose Magistrates,
Counsellours, Commanders, and all other Officers, and Ministers;
and to determine of Rewards, and punishments, Honour, and Order.
The reasons whereof, are the same which are alledged in the
precedent Chapter, for the same Rights, and Consequences of
Soveraignty by Institution.

Dominion Paternall How Attained
Not By Generation, But By Contract
Dominion is acquired two wayes; By Generation, and by Conquest.
The right of Dominion by Generation, is that, which the Parent
hath over his Children; and is called PATERNALL. And is not so
derived from the Generation, as if therefore the Parent had Dominion
over his Child because he begat him; but from the Childs Consent,
either expresse, or by other sufficient arguments declared.
For as to the Generation, God hath ordained to man a helper;
and there be alwayes two that are equally Parents: the Dominion therefore
over the Child, should belong equally to both; and he be equally
subject to both, which is impossible; for no man can obey two Masters.
And whereas some have attributed the Dominion to the Man onely,
as being of the more excellent Sex; they misreckon in it.
For there is not always that difference of strength or prudence between
the man and the woman, as that the right can be determined without War.
In Common-wealths, this controversie is decided by the Civill Law:
and for the most part, (but not alwayes) the sentence is in
favour of the Father; because for the most part Common-wealths
have been erected by the Fathers, not by the Mothers of families.
But the question lyeth now in the state of meer Nature; where there are
supposed no lawes of Matrimony; no lawes for the Education of Children;
but the Law of Nature, and the naturall inclination of the Sexes,
one to another, and to their children. In this condition of meer Nature,
either the Parents between themselves dispose of the dominion
over the Child by Contract; or do not dispose thereof at all.
If they dispose thereof, the right passeth according to the Contract.
We find in History that the Amazons Contracted with the Men of
the neighbouring Countries, to whom they had recourse for issue,
that the issue Male should be sent back, but the Female remain
with themselves: so that the dominion of the Females was in the Mother.

Or Education;
If there be no Contract, the Dominion is in the Mother. For in the
condition of Meer Nature, where there are no Matrimoniall lawes,
it cannot be known who is the Father, unlesse it be declared
by the Mother: and therefore the right of Dominion over the Child
dependeth on her will, and is consequently hers. Again, seeing the
Infant is first in the power of the Mother; so as she may either nourish,
or expose it, if she nourish it, it oweth its life to the Mother;
and is therefore obliged to obey her, rather than any other; and by
consequence the Dominion over it is hers. But if she expose it, and
another find, and nourish it, the Dominion is in him that nourisheth it.
For it ought to obey him by whom it is preserved; because preservation
of life being the end, for which one man becomes subject to another,
every man is supposed to promise obedience, to him, in whose power
it is to save, or destroy him.

Or Precedent Subjection Of One Of The Parents To The Other
If the Mother be the Fathers subject, the Child, is in the Fathers power:
and if the Father be the Mothers subject, (as when a Soveraign
Queen marrieth one of her subjects,) the Child is subject to the Mother;
because the Father also is her subject.

If a man and a woman, Monarches of two severall Kingdomes, have a Child,
and contract concerning who shall have the Dominion of him,
the Right of the Dominion passeth by the Contract. If they contract not,
the Dominion followeth the Dominion of the place of his residence.
For the Soveraign of each Country hath Dominion over all that
reside therein.

He that hath the Dominion over the Child, hath Dominion also
over their Childrens Children. For he that hath Dominion
over the person of a man, hath Dominion over all that is his;
without which, Dominion were but a Title, without the effect.

The Right Of Succession Followeth The Rules Of The
Rights Of Possession
The Right of Succession to Paternall dominion, proceedeth in
the same manner, as doth the Right of Succession to Monarchy;
of which I have already sufficiently spoken in the precedent chapter.

Despoticall Dominion, How Attained
Dominion acquired by Conquest, or Victory in war, is that which
some Writers call DESPOTICALL, from Despotes, which signifieth a Lord,
or Master; and is the Dominion of the Master over his Servant.
And this Dominion is then acquired to the Victor, when the Vanquished,
to avoyd the present stroke of death, covenanteth either in
expresse words, or by other sufficient signes of the Will,
that so long as his life, and the liberty of his body is allowed him,
the Victor shall have the use thereof, at his pleasure. And after such
Covenant made, the Vanquished is a SERVANT, and not before:
for by the word Servant (whether it be derived from Servire, to Serve,
or from Servare, to Save, which I leave to Grammarians to dispute)
is not meant a Captive, which is kept in prison, or bonds,
till the owner of him that took him, or bought him of one that did,
shall consider what to do with him: (for such men, (commonly
called Slaves,) have no obligation at all; but may break their bonds,
or the prison; and kill, or carry away captive their Master, justly:)
but one, that being taken, hath corporall liberty allowed him;
and upon promise not to run away, nor to do violence to his Master,
is trusted by him.

Not By The Victory, But By The Consent Of The Vanquished
It is not therefore the Victory, that giveth the right of Dominion
over the Vanquished, but his own Covenant. Nor is he obliged
because he is Conquered; that is to say, beaten, and taken,
or put to flight; but because he commeth in, and submitteth to the Victor;
Nor is the Victor obliged by an enemies rendring himselfe,
(without promise of life,) to spare him for this his yeelding
to discretion; which obliges not the Victor longer, than in his own
discretion hee shall think fit.

And that men do, when they demand (as it is now called) Quarter,
(which the Greeks called Zogria, taking alive,) is to evade the present
fury of the Victor, by Submission, and to compound for their life,
with Ransome, or Service: and therefore he that hath Quarter,
hath not his life given, but deferred till farther deliberation;
For it is not an yeelding on condition of life, but to discretion.
And then onely is his life in security, and his service due,
when the Victor hath trusted him with his corporall liberty.
For Slaves that work in Prisons, or Fetters, do it not of duty,
but to avoyd the cruelty of their task-masters.

The Master of the Servant, is Master also of all he hath;
and may exact the use thereof; that is to say, of his goods,
of his labour, of his servants, and of his children, as often as
he shall think fit. For he holdeth his life of his Master,
by the covenant of obedience; that is, of owning, and authorising
whatsoever the Master shall do. And in case the Master, if he refuse,
kill him, or cast him into bonds, or otherwise punish him for
his disobedience, he is himselfe the author of the same; and cannot
accuse him of injury.

In summe the Rights and Consequences of both Paternall and
Despoticall Dominion, are the very same with those of a Soveraign
by Institution; and for the same reasons: which reasons are set down
in the precedent chapter. So that for a man that is Monarch of
divers Nations, whereof he hath, in one the Soveraignty by
Institution of the people assembled, and in another by Conquest,
that is by the Submission of each particular, to avoyd death or bonds;
to demand of one Nation more than of the other, from the title
of Conquest, as being a Conquered Nation, is an act of ignorance
of the Rights of Soveraignty. For the Soveraign is absolute over
both alike; or else there is no Soveraignty at all; and so every
man may Lawfully protect himselfe, if he can, with his own sword,
which is the condition of war.

Difference Between A Family And A Kingdom
By this it appears, that a great Family if it be not part of
some Common-wealth, is of it self, as to the Rights of Soveraignty,
a little Monarchy; whether that Family consist of a man and his children;
or of a man and his servants; or of a man, and his children,
and servants together: wherein the Father of Master is the Soveraign.
But yet a Family is not properly a Common-wealth; unlesse it
be of that power by its own number, or by other opportunities,
as not to be subdued without the hazard of war. For where a
number of men are manifestly too weak to defend themselves united,
every one may use his own reason in time of danger, to save his own life,
either by flight, or by submission to the enemy, as hee shall think best;
in the same manner as a very small company of souldiers, surprised by
an army, may cast down their armes, and demand quarter, or run away,
rather than be put to the sword. And thus much shall suffice;
concerning what I find by speculation, and deduction, of Soveraign Rights,
from the nature, need, and designes of men, in erecting of Commonwealths,
and putting themselves under Monarchs, or Assemblies, entrusted with
power enough for their protection.

The Right Of Monarchy From Scripture
Let us now consider what the Scripture teacheth in the same point.
To Moses, the children of Israel say thus. (Exod. 20. 19)
"Speak thou to us, and we will heare thee; but let not God
speak to us, lest we dye." This is absolute obedience to Moses.
Concerning the Right of Kings, God himself by the mouth of Samuel,
saith, (1 Sam. 8. 11, 12, &c.) "This shall be the Right of the King
you will have to reigne over you. He shall take your sons, and set
them to drive his Chariots, and to be his horsemen, and to run
before his chariots; and gather in his harvest; and to make his
engines of War, and Instruments of his chariots; and shall take
your daughters to make perfumes, to be his Cookes, and Bakers.
He shall take your fields, your vine-yards, and your olive-yards, and
give them to his servants. He shall take the tyth of your corne and wine,
and give it to the men of his chamber, and to his other servants.
He shall take your man-servants, and your maid-servants, and the choice
of your youth, and employ them in his businesse. He shall take
the tyth of your flocks; and you shall be his servants."
This is absolute power, and summed up in the last words,
"you shall be his servants." Againe, when the people heard
what power their King was to have, yet they consented thereto,
and say thus, (Verse. 19 &c.) "We will be as all other nations,
and our King shall judge our causes, and goe before us,
to conduct our wars." Here is confirmed the Right that Soveraigns have,
both to the Militia, and to all Judicature; in which is conteined
as absolute power, as one man can possibly transferre to another.
Again, the prayer of King Salomon to God, was this. (1 Kings 3. 9)
"Give to thy servant understanding, to judge thy people, and to
discerne between Good and Evill." It belongeth therefore to
the Soveraigne to bee Judge, and to praescribe the Rules of
Discerning Good and Evill; which Rules are Lawes; and therefore
in him is the Legislative Power. Saul sought the life of David;
yet when it was in his power to slay Saul, and his Servants would
have done it, David forbad them, saying (1 Sam. 24. 9) "God forbid
I should do such an act against my Lord, the anoynted of God."
For obedience of servants St. Paul saith, (Coll. 3. 20) "Servants obey
your masters in All things," and, (Verse. 22) "Children obey your
Parents in All things." There is simple obedience in those that
are subject to Paternall, or Despoticall Dominion. Again, (Math. 23. 2,3)
"The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chayre and therefore All that
they shall bid you observe, that observe and do." There again
is simple obedience. And St. Paul, (Tit. 3. 2) "Warn them that
they subject themselves to Princes, and to those that are in Authority,
& obey them." This obedience is also simple. Lastly, our Saviour
himselfe acknowledges, that men ought to pay such taxes as are
by Kings imposed, where he sayes, "Give to Caesar that which is Caesars;"
and payed such taxes himselfe. And that the Kings word, is sufficient
to take any thing from any subject, when there is need; and that the King
is Judge of that need: For he himselfe, as King of the Jewes,
commanded his Disciples to take the Asse, and Asses Colt to carry him
into Jerusalem, saying, (Mat. 21. 2,3) "Go into the Village over
against you, and you shall find a shee Asse tyed, and her Colt with her,
unty them, and bring them to me. And if any man ask you, what you
mean by it, Say the Lord hath need of them: And they will let them go."
They will not ask whether his necessity be a sufficient title;
nor whether he be judge of that necessity; but acquiesce in
the will of the Lord.