Recent scholarship has cast welcome light on the political relevance of Hobbes’s extensive treatment of theology and sacred history. Building on extant contributions, this article argues that God’s historical founding of a Kingdom lends insights into well-known difficulties attaching to Hobbes’s exposition of the Commonwealth by Institution. Although there are evident discrepancies between sacred history and man's natural estate, Abraham and Moses each faced political challenges that persist into the present. Acting as God’s authorized representatives not only allowed them to (...) assuage epistemic uncertainty, it enabled Moses to wield sovereign authority while preserving a claim to natural equality. I argue that Leviathan suggests this model of prophetic authority – conceived of as a particular kind of prudence – is key to meeting the challenges arising from the anthropological vulnerabilities of ignorance and fear. Hobbes’s interest in the role of founding prophets also helps to explain Leviathan’s novel inclusion of representation. This explication of prophetic authority reveals institution to be marked by a greater attention to legitimacy, epistemic authority, and divine sanction, and sheds light on the importance of sacred history for Hobbes’s broader political project. (shrink)