In the Hellenistic age changing political conditions set the stage for refinement and adaptation of the classical analysis and evaluation of forms of government. The most significant development was the rise of powerful autocratic monarchies on the model of the Persian and Egyptian kingships.

By the second century bc even the traditional kingships of mainland Greece, such as the Macedonian elected kingship and the limited dual kingship of Sparta, had been transformed into the autocratic Hellenistic type. Greek city-states continued to exist, but had to work out a new relationship with the monarchs, whose imperial ambitions encompassed the entire eastern Mediterranean. Most either settled for reduced autonomy under the authority of one of the monarchies, or banded together into an independent regional league. The development of regional leagues, chiefly on the Greek mainland, was another development that affected Hellenistic thought.

A third was the disappearance of the distinction between democracy and aristocracy or oligarchy. In the wake of intervening political and economic developments, the typical free city-state remained a democracy, but with a strong executive component, dominated by a narrow group of old wealthy families. Since such cities regarded themselves as democracies despite their aristocratic orientation, the classical distinction disappeared. The significant difference was now between a city with a high degree of self-rule and one administered by an agent of one of the Hellenistic kings, often in the shadow of a military garrison.