The role of “interest” or “pressure” groups in the United States congressional system has been subjected to analysis by American political scientists for at least three decades, but it is only in the last four or five years that studies have appeared of their role in the British cabinet system, and only one major study of an interest group has appeared in Canada. This disparity in interest is the result no doubt of the more vocal and widespread manifestation of the influence of pressure groups in the wide-open congressional system, but one has the uncomfortable feeling that their less obtrusive role in the cabinet system has been equated with a lesser importance in the political process.

Like the sociologist, the political scientist may be interested in groups as organizational or power systems, in the sense that they are private governments, or he may extend or even limit his interest to the relations of these private governments with each other and with public governments, particularly in the manner and extent of their influence on public policy. For the political scientist concerned with public administration, interest will be extended to the role, if any, played by groups in the execution of public policy. From all three aspects, the medical profession as an interest group is a happy choice for examination, for not only does it provide insights into private government, and have a major influence on public policy, but it seems safe to state that in Canada, at least, no other private group is as deeply involved in public administration, and this despite the fundamental antipathy between the healing arts and bureaucracy.

The political theory of Louis XIV is contained for the most part in the King's manuscripts which repose in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. These include the longest and most fruitful source, the Mémoires de Louis XIV pour l'instruction du Dauphin, some of his letters, and some of his miscellaneous short pieces. Many of the several thousand additional letters which Louis wrote either have been destroyed or scattered far and wide. There are a number of editions of his works but they have been almost entirely literary and designed for the popular market.

In spite of the plethora of literature on Louis XIV and his grand siècle (1638–1715), no systematic exposition of his political theory has ever been published, though a number of authors have touched on his ideas in passing, including the historian Lacour-Gayet who promised a study of Louis' political theory but completed only a preliminary survey of its antecedents. The purpose of this paper is to attempt in brief compass to remedy this deficiency.

Louis XIV is a classic example of a political thinker whose ideas are frequently alluded to but rarely examined. The popular tendency to refer to him as the prototype of all autocrats suffers the usual inadequacies of a stereotype; it overlooks the subtleties in his theories which greatly affect their interpretation. In order to avoid semantic wrangles it may be useful to follow the broad lines of Aristotle's analysis of monarchy presented in his Politics, Book IV, chapter x.