If there is a word that evokes fear in the history of the Roman Republic, it is undoubtedly that of dictator. This Roman magistracy has passed into history as an authoritarian office imposing its will without any kind of limit, just as did Gnaeus Cornelius Sulla, whose government was a true trauma for the Roman people. However, the figure of the dictator, at least in its origins, was far from this reality.
Classical sources reveal that, throughout most of the republic, the dictatorship was a constitutionally regulated mechanism, conceived as a temporary solution to face extreme crisis situations. Absolute power, yes, but limited by the Senate and above all, by time. Then, what gave this figure its legitimacy against other forms of power? Nothing more and nothing less than its extraordinary character.
Origin
When in 509 BC the Romans decided to put an end to the monarchy and expelled their king Tarquinius Superbus, they not only closed a chapter of their history, but opened a period full of uncertainties. The new republican system, based on magistracies and institutions such as the Senate, sought precisely to avoid what they feared so much: the return of absolute and hereditary power, reason why two consuls were designated to exercise power.
However, the transition from monarchy to republic was not a smooth path. The young republic had to face great political instability, fueled by repeated attempts by Tarquinius himself to regain the throne with the support of other Latin cities (Martínez-Pinna, 2017, p. 73). One of these more tense episodes was the resumption of conflict against this league of cities around the year 501 BC, when according to Titus Livius, the figure of an exceptional person was first resorted to: the dictator. Although Livy does not offer absolute certainty about the name of the first dictator, he suggests that it could be Titus Larcius, consul in that same year, who would have been invested with extraordinary powers to face the military threat endangering the city of Rome (Liv., II, 18).
In this context, the creation of the dictatorship was not a break with the new republican order but an emergency solution. The fear that normal political conditions established after the fall of monarchy might disappear was a great impetus to establish a figure that would legally concentrate all power for a limited time (Álvarez de Mora, 2022, pp. 49-50).
Nomination
The nomination of a dictator entailed a radical and instantaneous transformation in the functioning of republican politics. The procedure for its appointment began with Senate intervention. In the face of a serious threat (military, political or religious), this body issued a senatusconsultum, a resolution that prompted the election of a dictator. Although formally it was not a binding order, in practice it had great political weight, marking the beginning of the process. Only consular magistrates could be elected for this office (Liv., II, 18). This restriction responded to the need to entrust the fate of Rome to figures with recognized authority and proven public track record.
Now, who really had the final word in this election? Here classical sources provide us with very relevant information. Dionysius of Halicarnassus tells us that the Senate deliberated and proposed a candidate, but the execution of the appointment ultimately fell to the consuls themselves (D.H., V, 70). This generated an obvious problem: what if one of the two consuls felt offended because his colleague was selected for this decision? To avoid the designation of one of them generating tensions or wounds in honor, it consolidated the practice that both consuls decided jointly (D.H., V, 71). In case they did not reach a consensus, they resorted to an agreed draw between both (Liv., IV, 26), with the aim of designating who would be responsible for choosing the magistrate who would exercise the dictatorship.
Characteristics
The dictatorship was considered the ultimate tool to restore order and stability in times of political or religious crises. De iure, the dictator was nominated solely for the resolution of the extraordinary task entrusted to him. After resolving the crisis or achieving the objective for which he was appointed, he had to voluntarily resign from his office (Bobbio, 1995, p. 224), returning power to the consuls.
However, what made this figure so special? Undoubtedly its absolute power. The dictator combined in his person both military and judicial powers. It was a temporary authority, yes, but during those six months (maximum legal term of office) he was the most powerful magistrate in Rome (Duplá, 2003, p. 52). However, it was not exempt from limitations. Along with the six-month duration, a block on access to public funds was imposed upon him, which was controlled solely by the Senate. He also had movement restrictions, limiting his freedom of leaving the Italian peninsula during the exercise of office, as they believed it could be dangerous for the republic (Smith, 1875, p. 407).
The original function of the dictator was essentially military and it will not be until after 363 BC that a dictator is chosen for ceremonial purposes. This variation in the functions of the dictator eventually created a division within this magistracy, with a clear distinction between dictator optimo iure (greater dictators) and dictator imminuto iure (lesser dictators) (Espitia, 2011, p. 15).
- In the case of the dictatores optimo iure, their election would have as its goal to face a military threat (external or internal), being the dictator holder of the imperium and exercising the rest of magistrates as auxiliaries, always from a subordinate position (Espitia, 2011, p. 15).
- Regarding the dictator imminuto iure, this would have been elected to perform particular tasks of ceremonial or religious nature, which were specified at the time of nomination and whose functions should be exclusively related to this task (Álvarez de Mora, 2022, p. 51).
Other aspects that allow us to know the nuances of the dictatorship was the possibility of re-election. Apparently, there were no limitations preventing a magistrate from exercising the dictatorship more than once. For this reason, we find cases such as Marcus Furius Camillus, who was named dictator five times between 396 and 367 BC, and Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, who assumed the dictatorship twice. Cincinnatus is also particularly emblematic within Roman political vision, as after fulfilling his responsibilities as dictator, he retired to his lands to continue working as a farmer, embodying thus the ideal of the citizen-soldier Roman.
Conclusions
The dictator during the republic in its archaic period (509 BC - 264 BC) should not be seen as a figure contrary to the will of the people, but rather as a legal, punctual and necessary solution to safeguard institutional order in times of crisis. The dictatorship was carefully integrated into the Roman political system, which at its origins, was far from the tyrannical image it would later suffer, whose origin lies in Sulla's dictatorship in 82 BC. The magistracy of the dictator was created with the aim of embodying a model of limited authority that served the republic.
Bibliography
Álvarez de Mora, J. L. (2022). A propósito de las variantes de la dictadura constitucional en la república romana. Revista de Derecho de la UNED, 30, 47–78.
Bobbio, N. (1996). Democracy and dictatorship. In The State, Government, Society: Toward a General Theory of Politics (pp. 188–233). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Dionysius of Halicarnassus. (1984). Roman Antiquities. Books IV-VI (A. Alonso & C. Seco, Eds. and Trans.). Gredos.
Duplá, A. (2003). The Roman Republic in its Archaic Period (509-264 BC). Síntesis.
Espitia Garzón, F. (2011). Dictatorship, "state of siege" and provocatio ad populum in Mommsen's work. Revista de Derecho Privado, 21, 7–20.
Livius, T. (2023). The History of Rome from its Foundation. Books I–III (J. A. Villar Vidal & Á. Sierra, Eds. and Trans.). Gredos.
Martínez-Pinna Nieto, J. (2017). Rome and the Latins: Aggressiveness or Imperialism?. Ediciones Complutense.
Smith, W. (1875). A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. Harper & Brothers.
Comments