The Complete Aristotle (eng.)

the kings go on an expedition, and then
they take the command. Matters of religion are likewise committed
to them. The kingly office is in truth a kind of generalship,
irresponsible and perpetual. The king has not the power of life and
death, except in a specified case, as for instance, in ancient
times, he had it when upon a campaign, by right of force. This
custom is described in Homer. For Agamemnon is patient when he is
attacked in the assembly, but when the army goes out to battle he
has the power even of life and death. Does he not say—‘When I find
a man skulking apart from the battle, nothing shall save him from
the dogs and vultures, for in my hands is death’?
    This, then, is one form of royalty-a generalship for life: and
of such royalties some are hereditary and others elective.
    (2) There is another sort of monarchy not uncommon among the
barbarians, which nearly resembles tyranny. But this is both legal
and hereditary. For barbarians, being more servile in character
than Hellenes, and Asiadics than Europeans, do not rebel against a
despotic government. Such royalties have the nature of tyrannies
because the people are by nature slaves; but there is no danger of
their being overthrown, for they are hereditary and legal.
Wherefore also their guards are such as a king and not such as a
tyrant would employ, that is to say, they are composed of citizens,
whereas the guards of tyrants are mercenaries. For kings rule
according to law over voluntary subjects, but tyrants over
involuntary; and the one are guarded by their fellow-citizens the
others are guarded against them.
    These are two forms of monarchy, and there was a third (3) which
existed in ancient Hellas, called an Aesymnetia or dictatorship.
This may be defined generally as an elective tyranny, which, like
the barbarian monarchy, is legal, but differs from it in not being
hereditary. Sometimes the office was held for life, sometimes for a
term of years, or until certain duties had been performed. For
example, the Mytilenaeans elected Pittacus leader against the
exiles, who were headed by Antimenides and Alcaeus the poet. And
Alcaeus himself shows in one of his banquet odes that they chose
Pittacus tyrant, for he reproaches his fellow-citizens for ‘having
made the low-born Pittacus tyrant of the spiritless and ill-fated
city, with one voice shouting his praises.’
    These forms of government have always had the character of
tyrannies, because they possess despotic power; but inasmuch as
they are elective and acquiesced in by their subjects, they are
kingly.
    (4) There is a fourth species of kingly rule—that of the heroic
times—which was hereditary and legal, and was exercised over
willing subjects. For the first chiefs were benefactors of the
people in arts or arms; they either gathered them into a community,
or procured land for them; and thus they became kings of voluntary
subjects, and their power was inherited by their descendants. They
took the command in war and presided over the sacrifices, except
those which required a priest. They also decided causes either with
or without an oath; and when they swore, the form of the oath was
the stretching out of their sceptre. In ancient times their power
extended continuously to all things whatsoever, in city and
country, as well as in foreign parts; but at a later date they
relinquished several of these privileges, and others the people
took from them, until in some states nothing was left to them but
the sacrifices; and where they retained more of the reality they
had only the right of leadership in war beyond the border.
    These, then, are the four kinds of royalty. First the monarchy
of the heroic ages; this was exercised over voluntary subjects, but
limited to certain functions; the king was a general and a judge,
and had the control of religion The second is that of the
barbarians, which is a hereditary despotic government in accordance
with law. A third is the power of the so-called Aesynmete or
Dictator; this is an elective tyranny. The fourth is the
Lacedaemonian, which is in fact a generalship, hereditary and
perpetual. These four forms differ from one another in the manner
which I have described.
    (5) There is a fifth form of kingly rule in which one has the
disposal of all, just as each nation or each state has the disposal
of public matters; this form corresponds to the control of a
household. For as household management is the kingly rule of a
house, so kingly rule is the household