Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan marks the genesis of the artificial political entity that is the Hobbesian commonwealth, with a social covenant as its efficient cause. Hobbes claims that this all-powerful commonwealth that he baptizes the Leviathan (as an allusion to the biblical beast) is the ultimate escape from a state where people have unlimited rights, but fear is the absolute sovereign and war is the only constant. Though he is rather vocal about his preferred form of government being an absolute monarchy, there is still some debate in whether the Leviathan Hobbes described actually takes such form. Thus, it remains the question of what is the true form of this political entity? In Machiavelli’s The Prince, he claims that all governments in his time have either been governed by one man as in a principality or more than one man as in democratic or oligarchic republics (Machiavelli, 5). Along with being a reign of multiple people, a republican government in Machiavellian terms is a state where its people are “accustomed to living by their own laws and in liberty” (Machiavelli, 20). Based on these definitions I believe that the ideal Hobbesian Leviathan is both a principality and a republic as the sovereign wields all of the state’s power individually, but is merely the head to the political entity, as he creates and enforces legislation with the purpose of representing, serving, and protecting the people. By agreeing to the social contract, the masses free themselves of the paralyzing fear of the state of nature and make themselves, not only the authors of the Leviathan, but of each one of his actions. Therefore one could say that a Hobbesian commonwealth allows for people to live “by their own laws” (Machiavelli, 20).
As Thomas Hobbes was a vocal advocate for absolute sovereignty as the greatest form of government, it is almost impossible not to find traces of his absolutism within the Leviathan. One example of this is the indivisibility of the office of the sovereign, in which Hobbes demonstrates when discussing the harm of having unrestricted representatives, who he calls “second sovereigns.” He states,
“For that were to erect two sovereigns, and every man to have his person represented by two actors that by opposing one another must needs divide that power which (if men will live in peace) is indivisible, and thereby reduce the multitude into the condition of war, contrary to the end for which all sovereignty is instituted” (Hobbes, pg.119, s.3).
This signifies that the ideal Leviathan cannot have anything but an individual ruler, as the inconsistency and potential conflicts that may arise from having multiple leaders posses a threat to the peace and protection of those in the commonwealth. Another trace of the monarchic Leviathan, is when Hobbes states the that sovereign should not be limited, but supreme:
“that king whose power is limited is not superior to him or them that have the power to limit it; and he that is not superior is not supreme, that is to say not sovereign” (Hobbes, pg.123, s.12).
In describing a commonwealth, Hobbes calls the head of the Leviathan and the carrier of the combined state’s power, a “sovereign.” However, in this quote, he states that one is not considered a sovereign unless their power is supreme and unlimited. This cannot be achieved in the case of unrestricted representatives or two sovereigns, as their powers would potentially limit each other. They would also not be superior to each other and thus, not supreme. Therefore, to be considered a sovereign, the head of the Leviathan must be an individual with unlimited power.
Though governed by a single ruler or a monarch, the Leviathan is one of republican origins and purposes as it was made by the people, in service of the people, which leave them accountable to the great Leviathan’s actions. This is highlighted in Hobbes’ definition of the Commonwealth:
“one person, of whose acts a great multitude, by mutual covenants one with another, have made themselves every one the author, to the end he may use the strengths and means of them all, as he shall think expedient for their peace and common defense” (Hobbes, pg.109, s.13).
In this passage, Hobbes recognizes that in agreeing with the social contract the people accept accountability or “make themselves the authors” of the sovereign’s actions or legislation. He also recognizes that such legislations are created with the sole purpose of guaranteeing the public’s will for peace and common defense. Therefore, being the co-authors and benefactors of these laws, the public is as influential to the reigning of a commonwealth as the sovereign is, making it a rule by all through the ruling of one. When listing the rights of a sovereign in a Leviathan, Hobbes claims that it is impossible to incriminate him of any potential injury or injustice done to a subject:
“by this institution of a Commonwealth every particular man is author of all the sovereign doth; and consequently he that complaineth of injury from his sovereign complaineth of that whereof he himself is the author” (Hobbes, pg.112, s.6).
He explains this by arguing that all of the actions of the monarch (including those unjust to a particular individual) were not only authorised, but co-written by the public with the establishment of the social contract and the creation of the commonwealth. This affirms once again the accountability of the people to the head of the leviathan’s actions, and thus their ability to “live by their own laws” (Machiavelli, 20).
Another aspect of the Leviathan that makes it a republic, is the fact that the sovereign is meant to represent the people. This is apparent in the text when Hobbes states,
“reduce all their wills, by plurality* of voices, unto one will, which is as much to say, to appoint one man or assembly of men to bear their person, and every one to own and acknowledge himself to be author of whatsoever he that so beareth their person shall act*” (Hobbes, pg.109, s.13).
As the sovereign is meant to be a representative of the people, he must act (or pass laws) parallel to the people’s wants and needs. Therefore the public’s will and necessity often focused on the security of the individuals, dictate what kind of laws the commonwealth will have. Similarly, the sovereign’s duty to represent the masses is discussed when Hobbes states,
“whosoever beareth the person of the people, or is one of that assembly that bears it, beareth also his own natural person” (Hobbes, pg.120, s.4).
In this quote, Hobbes affirms the humanity of the sovereign and although this may draw him to his private interests, it also allows for the monarch to be familiar with the common version of the masses (violent death at the hands of another human being). Therefore such humanity allows for an accurate representation of the people by the sovereign who is then able to serve his purpose, and pass laws that are influenced by the will of the majority.
Though historically Hobbes was considered a faithful royalist, when one considers the Republican undertones of his work, Hobbesian Leviathan is both a republic and a principality, as the social contract that founded this political entity, calls for the representation of his subjects by an absolute monarch and makes him accountable for the service and protection of his people. Due to this accountability and representation, the legislation of the monarch or the head of the Leviathan must be parallel with the will and right of his authors (the people), making it a rule by many.
2019-3-24-1553462031