Hobbes was not a monarchist; this is stated in the introduction written by C.B MacPhearson in Hobbes' Leviathan. It's true he wanted order, but calling him a Monarchist is wrong; he merely advocated a SOVREIGN. He alienated Monarchists by claiming that divine rule was NOT a legitimate form of governance.
"He preached obedience, that is to say, he set out the rational grounds for obedience, to whatever political authority actually exercised power at the time. But his doctrine was not calculated to please any of those who successively held power through this period, for it denied all of them the sorts of justification they wanted.... It denied the royalists the exclusive support of both the divine right and customary right doctrines"
You /might/ get away with calling him a monarchist at non-university level, but you would be incorrect. He merely advocated somebody to rule all. Whether this was a monarch, or a despot, or a dictator, or a democratically elected president with unlimited power doesn't concern him.