Dictatorship in Ancient Rome

The Genesis of Dictatorship

In 509 BC, more than two centuries after the founding of the Eternal City, King Tarquin the Proud was overthrown in Rome. The monarchical regime was replaced by a republican system. Instead of a king, Rome was now governed by the Senate and the people, with the highest officials being the annually elected consuls. This is how the establishment of the Republic is described by Titus Livius in his "History of Rome from the Founding of the City."

Livius also reveals the origins of the dictatorship. He claims that the dictatorial magistracy emerged almost immediately after the overthrow of the monarchy. Tarquin the Proud, an Etruscan by origin, did not cease his attempts to regain power with the help of Etruscan troops, while the Roman plebeians actively opposed the absolute power of the patricians. In this situation, the fledgling republican system faced both an external enemy and internal turmoil. The Senate and the patricians decided they needed, in modern terms, a "crisis manager" – a person capable of uniting society to overcome the crisis. This person was Titus Larcius Flavus, the first dictator of Rome. Titus Livius's version is questioned by modern researchers, as the historian wrote his work more than four centuries after the events described.

In Livius's account, the dictatorship was an integral part of the Republic's constitution, a legitimate institution intended to overcome acute crises. According to another version, the position of dictator had a Latin origin. By the beginning of the 5th century BC, Rome also controlled Latin tribes united in the Latin League. A dictator was needed for more effective command of the allied, that is, Roman and Latin, troops.

Due to the poor preservation of sources from the first decades of the Republic, it is difficult to establish the specific circumstances of the introduction of the dictatorship. However, we can certainly assert that the Republic, from the very beginning of its existence, regularly faced external threats – the Roman polis, although playing a prominent role in the Latin League, was far from hegemony in Italy for a long time. Moreover, the conflict between the patricians and plebeians continued, also provoking internal unrest.

In this situation, it seems logical that the collegial governance by the Senate and consuls could prove ineffective. Decisive and prompt measures were required to overcome crises. It should be noted that Rome had both ordinary magistracies, operating under normal conditions (consuls, censors, praetors), and extraordinary ones, operating in exceptional cases (dictators, triumvirs, decemvirs, interreges). The slow collegial governance was replaced by sole governance in the person of a dictator – a person, as a rule, already known to the people and enjoying high authority among the nobility. Otherwise, he simply could not effectively perform his duties.

The first reliably known dictators of Rome date back to the 5th century BC. The procedure for their appointment is not entirely clear – apparently, it was a procedure not regulated by law. The nomination of a dictator could occur at the initiative of a consul, the Senate, or the people's assembly. A dictator was appointed for six months and became the highest official of the Republic: he was the commander-in-chief of the army, consuls were subordinate to him, he had immunity from prosecution, could freely determine punishments for criminals, and much more, but his main advantage over other magistracies was that the dictator acted alone.

In historiography, there is an opinion that initially, the position of dictator was called "magister populi", which is translated as "master of the people" or "master of infantry". The dictator also had a subordinate personally to him "magister equitum", that is, "master of cavalry". The presence of the position of master of cavalry as the dictator's assistant indicates the military origin of the dictatorial magistracy. This version, in particular, was supported by Theodor Mommsen.

It should not be thought that the dictator's power was absolute: he could not ride a horse within the walls of Rome (this was considered a royal honor), he used the treasury only with the Senate's approval, and he could not leave the borders of Italy. The struggle between the patricians and plebeians led to the emergence of the plebeian magistracy of the people's tribunes, who were supposed to protect the people from the arbitrariness of the patricians and veto any Senate decisions that did not suit the plebeians. The people's tribunes were the only magistrates who could disobey the dictator's will.

The dictator's powers were also limited by the purpose of the appointment. Completing the task before the formal end of the term, although it did not eliminate the dictator's "imperium," in practice deprived it of legitimacy in the eyes of the Romans. This is why dictators quickly relinquished their powers and rarely held the position for the full six months.

Researchers identify the following goals or "causa" for appointing dictators:

• War;

• Rebellion;

• Judicial processes;

• Elections or convening of people's assemblies in the absence of consuls;

• Religious festivals, particularly the driving of a nail in the Temple of Jupiter or the Roman Games.

It would be appropriate to consider a number of the most notable early republican dictators to clearly demonstrate how this extraordinary magistracy worked in practice.

Heroic Dictators

One of the most famous dictators of the early Republic can be called Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, who was elected to this position in 458 and 439 BC. Cincinnatus came from the aristocratic Quinctian family, tracing back to the Roman king Tullus Hostilius. He was born around 519 BC, that is, before the overthrow of Tarquin the Proud. However, Cincinnatus first appears in sources only in the 460s BC, when his son Caeso was accused of banditry. Caeso, being a young and noble patrician, gathered a group around him that exerted pressure on plebeian leaders by force. The plebeian tribunes brought charges against the young man in court, and his father was forced to defend him. Nevertheless, the son was exiled from Rome, and Cincinnatus became an enemy of the plebeian movement. After being elected consul in 460 BC, he pursued a decisive policy in favor of the patricians, in particular, obstructing the codification of Roman law to preserve patrician privileges. Not gaining popularity, Cincinnatus voluntarily retired from politics and withdrew to his rural estate.

The dictatorship of 458 BC was associated with the war against the alliance of the Aequi and Sabines. One of the Roman armies was surrounded, and the Senate called upon Cincinnatus, who, although occupied with his own farm, agreed to help his fellow citizens. He led a new army, dismissed one of the consuls for ineffective command, and personally defeated the Aequi and Sabines. After returning to Rome, Cincinnatus celebrated a triumph and relinquished his powers as dictator, having fulfilled the task. Cincinnatus's first dictatorship lasted only sixteen days.

The second dictatorship of 439 BC was associated with the struggle between the patricians and plebeians. The consuls, due to the limitations of their powers, were unable to suppress the plebeian grassroots movement. The elderly patrician was called upon to oppose the plebeian leader Spurius Maelius.

Cincinnatus ordered his master of horse Servilius Ahala to bring Maelius to him for questioning. The plebeian leader, fearing the dictator's wrath, attempted to flee, but Ahala caught up with him and stabbed him. This news shocked the people, and the dictator, to calm them, accused Maelius of plotting to restore royal power. Cincinnatus then declared that the execution of the troublemaker was lawful because he did not obey the order. After this, the elderly patrician finally relinquished his powers as dictator.

Another outstanding dictator is considered to be Marcus Furius Camillus, who was born in 446 BC and came from the patrician Furian family. Camillus had a remarkable political career during his long life. Unlike Cincinnatus, he held the position of dictator five times, consular tribune (a position replacing consuls) six times, and once served as a censor of the Senate.

In 396 BC, the Romans were besieging the Etruscan city of Veii. The siege dragged on, and Camillus, already holding the position of consular tribune, was elected dictator before the decisive assault. The assault was successful, the Romans gained rich spoils, but Camillus was accused of unfair distribution and voluntarily went into exile in the city of Ardea.

His main feat was accomplished in 390 BC during the invasion of the Gauls, who invaded Italy and defeated the Roman forces at the Allia. Then the Gallic leader Brennus besieged Rome and sent separate detachments to the surroundings for plundering. Incidentally, it is to these events that the legend of the sacred geese saving the Eternal City belongs.

One of the Gallic detachments reached Ardea, but Camillus, leading the local militia, defeated it. The exile began gathering an army to save Rome and demanded an official appointment to the position of dictator. His messenger secretly made his way to the Capitoline Hill, where the besieged were holed up, delivered Camillus's message to the Senate, and they gave their consent.

Camillus gathered a large army and managed to approach Rome at the moment when the besieged were already negotiating capitulation and paying tribute. The dictator declared these negotiations illegal and defeated the Gauls in battle, after which he led the restoration of the city. Subsequently, Camillus held the position of dictator several more times, again for military purposes. For his feats and services to the Fatherland, he was honored with the title of "Third Founder of Rome," and even Plutarch wrote his biography.

There are also examples of failed dictatorships. In 363 BC, Lucius Manlius Capitolinus Imperiosus was appointed dictator "for the driving of a nail" into the temple wall to rid the people of the plague. However, after the ritual, he attempted to start a war with the hostile Hernici tribe, which caused outrage among the people's tribunes, and the dictator was forced to relinquish his powers.

The Essence of Dictatorship

The historicity of Camillus and Cincinnatus is indisputable, but the complete accuracy of the stories associated with them is questioned by modern researchers. In the beautiful myths about hero-dictators, researchers see the formation of a patriotic ideal and an instructive example for future Roman magistrates. In these stories, the dictator appears as a "crisis manager," whose main interest is duty to the Fatherland. He does not seek power for personal gain but regards it as a tool for achieving the glory of Rome, after which he relinquishes his powers.

At the same time, these stories also reflect class interests. Early Republic dictators were appointed from the patrician class and acted in their interests. Typical situations involved the Senate appointing a dictator to suspend the powers of the people's tribunes or the plebeian right to "provocations," that is, the right to appeal to the people's assembly bypassing the Senate. Often, dictators were appointed to conduct elections when, for various reasons, consuls were absent.

However, in most cases, dictators were appointed for more effective military command. This issue was particularly acute at the turn of the 5th and 4th centuries BC, when the magistracy of two consuls was temporarily replaced by the magistracy of consular tribunes. There could be from three to nine of them, and this circumstance further disorganized the Roman army. In these conditions, the position of dictator, as a person to whom the consular tribunes were subordinate, became increasingly important. Subsequently, with the expansion of the Republic, military operations were conducted further from the Eternal City, so situations where the dictatorial magistracy was considered necessary arose less frequently.

The turning point for the dictatorship was the period of the Punic Wars, as Rome, having already united Italy, faced Carthage, equal in strength. During the First Punic War, dictators were appointed eight times, and during the Second – twelve times. Conducting military operations outside Italy led to situations where consuls were away from Rome for extended periods and could not effectively perform their administrative duties. Then dictators were appointed to conduct people's assemblies, organize Games, and in 249 BC even for military actions outside Italy, which had previously been prohibited. Such a dictator was Aulus Atilius Calatinus, who led Roman troops in Sicily.

During the Second Punic War, the initial successes of Hannibal Barca in 217 BC at the Ticinus, Trebia, and Lake Trasimene greatly frightened the Romans – the Carthaginian commander invaded deep into Italy without much difficulty. At Lake Trasimene, one of the consuls was killed, and the other consul was outside Rome, so the election of a dictator took place at the people's assembly. Quintus Fabius Maximus received dictatorial power, who had previously held the positions of consul and censor. Maximus understood the danger of a pitched battle against Hannibal and insisted on a strategy of "small war" – the legions under his command did not engage the Carthaginians in battle but disrupted their communications and attacked small detachments, betting on exhausting the enemy.

Among the Romans, there were many dissatisfied with this strategy – the Roman plebeians, whose lands were being plundered by Hannibal, were furious. The plebeian leaders pushed through a decision to equalize the powers of the master of horse Marcus Minucius with the dictator's, and Maximus was forced to give Minucius half of the army. In the fall of 217 BC, Minucius was almost defeated at Geronium, but Maximus managed to come to the rescue, and Hannibal retreated. After Maximus's term ended, the new consul Gaius Terentius Varro, spurred on by the plebs, wanted to immediately drive Hannibal out of Italy. This resulted in the disaster at Cannae in 216 BC – of the two consuls, only Varro survived, and most of the Roman army was destroyed.

At Cannae, a large number of senators also perished, and to replenish the Senate, a dictator was again appointed – the former consul and censor Marcus Fabius Buteo, who appointed new senators in one day and relinquished his powers. Simultaneously, Marcus Junius Pera was appointed dictator for military actions, but he ultimately did not distinguish himself. Subsequently, dictators were appointed only to conduct elections in the absence of consuls.

After the war with Hannibal, the Romans ceased to resort to the dictatorial magistracy, as military operations were now mainly conducted far from Italy. The dictatorship as a tool for overcoming military crises had exhausted itself. The further expansion of the Senate's powers and the highest ordinary magistracies led to the dictatorship being completely excluded from republican practice. The military function of dictators was replaced by the system of promagistracies, where sole command of troops outside Italy was carried out by provincial governors – proconsuls. The new system was more flexible, and the need for appointing dictators disappeared. Such acute crises as the Social War and the Spartacus Rebellion were overcome without them.

Tyrant Dictators

During the 2nd century BC, significant changes occurred in Roman society, the most important of which for us is the military reform of Gaius Marius. To increase the army's size, Marius changed the system of legion recruitment – now the poor could be enlisted, equipped at the expense of the commander, who promised his soldiers land upon completion of service. Thus, the legionaries became loyal not to the Republic but to their commander.

The political consequences of the reform were not long in coming. In the 80s BC, a civil war unfolded in the Republic between the popularis Marius and the optimas Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Sulla emerged as the victor from this confrontation, becoming the first in history to take Rome with Roman troops. To pursue his enemies and implement necessary reforms, Sulla ensured that the people's assembly elected him as a perpetual dictator "for writing laws and restoring the Republic." While early dictators relied on law and tradition, Sulla was not constrained by these frameworks, as he relied on an army personally loyal to him.

First, he conducted a broad repressive campaign against the popularis opposition, which went down in history as the proscriptions. Those who displeased the dictator were included in the proscription lists, and a real massacre of the populares and those suspected of sympathizing with them occurred in the Republic. After eliminating the opposition, the dictator set about strengthening the positions of the senatorial aristocracy. In 79 BC, Sulla relinquished his powers as dictator and retired to private life, declaring that he was ready to be held accountable for his actions under the law, but no one dared to punish the ex-dictator.

The populares took revenge in the 40s BC. In January 49 BC, Gaius Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon with his legions and unleashed another civil war against the optimates, in which he achieved complete victory. In his rule, Caesar also relied on the dictatorial magistracy – he was annually appointed dictator from 49 to 45 BC, until in 44 BC he was declared a perpetual dictator. Unlike Sulla, Caesar did not use his powers for the bloody suppression of the opposition, but with their help, he gave his rule legality and legitimacy. The dictator acted in the interests of the broad layers of the Roman population at the expense of the senatorial aristocracy, for which Theodor Mommsen called him a "democratic monarch."

As is known, Caesar was killed on the Ides of March in 44 BC, so he indeed held his powers as dictator for life. After Caesar's assassination, his supporter Mark Antony was forced to compromise with the republican conspirators and passed a law in the Senate abolishing the dictatorship as a legal magistracy. With this, its history came to an end. After defeating Antony, Octavian Augustus refused the offered dictatorship and formally "restored the Republic," albeit under his complete personal control.

Thus, in the last century BC for the Republic, the dictatorship took on entirely new colors in the eyes of the Romans. From a tool for overcoming crises, it turned into a tool for political struggle and suppressing opponents. Now party leaders, relying on legions, became dictators in the modern sense of the word. The dictatorship became the legal basis for the monopolization of power by one person, and the hero-dictator was replaced by the tyrant-dictator. It can be said that the dictatorship became a kind of bridge from the fall of the true Republic to its "restoration" already in the form of imperial power.