At one time, the idea of kingship, under a variety of names and forms, held sway in many parts of the world as the primary method of unifying people within a kingdom or empire. Over time, however, we observe that this form of governance has lost ground as against the idea of the representative republic. We may still see vestiges of the monarchy, such as in the British Commonwealth, where it represents a symbolic unifying factor, or in small countries that have held on to their traditional ways, although even here, as we see in Bhutan or Nepal, a constitutional parliamentary government has developed. The trend definitely shows a declining influence of monarchy over time. As humanity works to unify diverse cultures, religions and peoples, there is little chance that monarchy will play a role in this process.
Sri Aurobindo notes: “The only apparent chance eventually for the monarchical idea is that its form may be retained as a convenient symbol for the unity of the heterogeneous empires which would be the largest elements in any unification based upon the present political configuration of the world. But even for these empires the symbol has not proved to be indispensable.”
“…there is little chance that even a nominal kingship representing one element of a very heterogeneous whole would be accepted by the rest in any form of general unification. In the past, at least, this has only happened under the stress of conquest. Even if the World-State found it convenient as the result of experience to introduce or reintroduce the monarchical element into its constitution, it could only be in some quite new form of a democratic kingship. But a democratic kingship, as opposed to a passive figure of monarchy, the modern world has not succeeded in evolving.”
Sri Aurobindo, The Ideal of Human Unity, Part Two, Chapter 23, Forms of Government, pp. 199-200