the function of the chief is altogether one of INTELLIGENCE。 The chief does not teach the others to associate； to unite under his lead； to reproduce their kind； to take to flight； or to defend themselves。 Concerning each of these particulars； his subordinates are as well informed as he。 But it is the chief who； by his accumulated experience； provides against accidents； he it is whose private intelligence supplements； in difficult situations； the general instinct； he it is who deliberates； decides； and leads； he it is； in short； whose enlightened prudence regulates the public routine for the greatest good of all。
Man （naturally a sociable being） naturally follows a chief。 Originally； the chief is the father； the patriarch； the elder； in other words； the good and wise man； whose functions； consequently； are exclusively of a reflective and intellectual nature。 The human racelike all other races of sociable animalshas its instincts； its innate faculties； its general ideas； and its categories of sentiment and reason。 Its chiefs； legislators； or kings have devised nothing； supposed nothing； imagined nothing。 They have only guided society by their accumulated experience； always however in conformity with opinions and beliefs。
Those philosophers who （carrying into morals and into history their gloomy and factious whims） affirm that the human race had originally neither chiefs nor kings； know nothing of the nature of man。 Royalty； and absolute royalty； isas truly and more truly than democracya primitive form of government。 Perceiving that； in the remotest ages； crowns and kingships were worn by heroes； brigands； and knight…errants； they confound the two things；royalty and despotism。 But royalty dates from the creation of man； it existed in the age of negative communism。 Ancient heroism （and the despotism which it engendered） commenced only with the first manifestation of the idea of justice； that is； with the reign of force。 As soon as the strongest； in the comparison of merits； was decided to be the best； the oldest had to abandon his position； and royalty became despotic。
The spontaneous； instinctive； andso to speakphysiological origin of royalty gives it； in the beginning； a superhuman character。 The nations connected it with the gods； from whom they said the first kings descended。 This notion was the origin of the divine genealogies of royal families； the incarnations of gods； and the messianic fables。 From it sprang the doctrine of divine right； which is still championed by a few singular characters。
Royalty was at first elective； becauseat a time when man produced but little and possessed nothingproperty was too weak to establish the principle of heredity； and secure to the son the throne of his father； but as soon as fields were cleared； and cities built； each function was； like every thing else； appropriated； and hereditary kingships and priesthoods were the result。 The principle of heredity was carried into even the most ordinary professions；a circumstance which led to class distinctions； pride of station； and abjection of the common people； and which confirms my assertion； concerning the principle of patrimonial succession； that it is a method suggested by Nature of filling vacancies in business； and completing unfinished tasks。
From time to time； ambition caused usurpers； or SUPPLANTERS of kings； to start up； and； in consequence； some were called kings by right； or legitimate kings； and others TYRANTS。 But we must not let these names deceive us。 There have been execrable kings； and very tolerable tyrants。 Royalty may always be good； when it is the only possible form of government； legitimate it is never。 Neither heredity； nor election； nor universal suffrage； nor the excellence of the sovereign； nor the consecration of religion and of time； can make royalty legitimate。 Whatever form it takes；monarchic； oligarchic； or democratic；royalty； or the government of man by man； is illegitimate and absurd。
Man； in order to procure as speedily as possible the most thorough satisfaction of his wants； seeks RULE。 In the beginning； this rule is to him living； visible； and tangible。 It is his father； his master； his king。 The more ignorant man is； the more obedient he is； and the more absolute is his confidence in his guide。 But； it being a law of man's nature to conform to rule；that is； to discover it by his powers of reflection and reason；man reasons upon the commands of his chiefs。 Now； such reasoning as that is a protest against authority；a beginning of disobedience。 At the moment that man inquires into the motives which govern the will of his sovereign；at that moment man revolts。 If he obeys no longer because the king commands； but because the king demonstrates the wisdom of his commands； it may be said that henceforth he will recognize no authority； and that he has become his own king。 Unhappy he who shall dare to command him； and shall offer； as his authority； only the vote of the majority； for； sooner or later； the minority will become the majority； and this imprudent despot will be overthrown； and all his laws annihilated。
In proportion as society becomes enlightened； royal authority diminishes。 That is a fact to which all history bears witness。 At the birth of nations； men reflect and reason in vain。 Without methods； without principles； not knowing how to use their reason； they cannot judge of the justice of their conclusions。 Then the authority of kings is immense； no knowledge having been acquired with which to contradict it。 But； little by little； experience produces habits； which develop into customs； then the customs are formulated in maxims； laid down as principles；in short； transformed into laws； to which the king； the living law； has to bow。 There comes a time when customs and laws are so numerous that the will of the prince is； so to speak； entwined by the public will； and that； on taking the crown； he is obliged to swear that he will govern in conformity with established customs and usages； and that he is but the executive power of a society whose laws are made independently of him。
Up to this point； all is done instinctively； and； as it were； unconsciously； but see where this movement must end。
By means of self…instruction and the acquisition of ideas； man finally acquires the idea of SCIENCE；that is； of a system of knowledge in harmony with the reality of things； and inferred from observation。 He searches for the science； or the system； of inanimate bodies；the system of organic bodies； the system of the human mind； and the system of the universe： why should he not also search for the system of society？ But； having reached this height； he comprehends that political truth； or the science of politics； exists quite independently of the will of sovereigns； the opinion of majorities； and popular beliefs；that kings； ministers； magistrates； and nations； as wills； have no connection with the science； and are worthy of no consideration。 He comprehends； at the same time； that； if man is born a sociable being； the authority of his father over him ceases on the day when； his mind being formed and his education finished； he becomes the associate of his father； that his true chief and his king is the demonstrated truth； that politics is a science； not a stratagem； and that the function of the legislator is reduced； in the last analysis； to the methodical search for truth。
Thus； in a given society； the authority of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intellectual development which that society has reached； and the probable duration of that authority can be calculated from the more or less general desire for a true government；that is； for a scientific government。 And just as the right of force and the right of artifice retreat before the steady advance of justice； and must finally be extinguished in equality； so the sovereignty of the will yields to the sovereignty of the reason； and must at last be lost in scientific socialism。 Property and royalty have been crumbling to pieces ever since the world began。 As man seeks justice in equality； so society seeks order in anarchy。
ANARCHY；the absence of a master； of a sovereign；＇1＇such is the form of government to which we are every day approximating； and which our accustomed habit of taking man for our rule； and his will for law； leads us to regard as the height of disorder and the expression of chaos。 The story is told； that a citizen of Paris in the seventeenth century having heard it said that in Venice there was no king； the good man could not recover from his astonishment； and nearly died from laughter at the mere mention of so ridiculous a thing。 So strong is our prejudice。 As long as we live； we want a chief or chiefs； and at this very moment I hold in my hand a brochure； whose authora zealous communist dreams； like a second Marat； of the dictatorship。 The most advanced among us are those who wish the greatest possible number of sovereigns；their most ardent wish is for the royalty of the National Guard。 Soon； undoubtedly； some one； jealous of the citizen militia； will say； 〃Everybody is king。〃 But； when he has spoken； I will say； in my turn； 〃Nobody is king； we are； whether we will or no； associat