The dictator

In times of emergency, when the security of the state came under threat, the Roman constitution provided for the appointment of a special magistrate, the dictator (or magister populi, as he was called in earlier times), in whose hands all state power was concentrated.^[303] The defence of the state against external enemies and the quelling of internal insurrection were the main objects for which a dictator would usually be appointed.^[304] In later times, however, nominating a dictator came to be regarded as a convenient way of dealing with problems of government resulting from the inability of the ordinary magistrates to perform their duties.

Unlike the ordinary magistrates, the dictator was not elected by a popular assembly but was nominated, with the approval of the senate, by one of the consuls or, in exceptional circumstances, by a magistrate who had been invested with the powers of the consulship (e.g. a tribunus militaris consulari potestate).''² Originally only members of the patrician class who had previously held the office of consul (consulares) were eligible for the position of dictator. The first plebeian dictator was appointed after the passing of the leges Liciniae Sextiae (367 BC), in 356 BC. Shortly after his nomination the dictator was invested with supreme power (imperium) by a special law of the curiate assembly (lex curiata de imperia).

The Constitution of the Roman Republic 99 magistrates continued to exercise their regular functions but were subject to the dictator's authority.

During his term in office the dictator had unlimited powers and his decisions were not subject to the intercessio of the tribunes and other magistrates.^[307] [308] He was free to introduce any measures he considered necessary without having to seek the consent of any other state organ or the approval of the senate. Moreover, his judicial decisions were not subject to appeal before the assembly {provocatio ad populum))^ But the dictator's power was limited by the fact that he was expected to resign as soon as the emergency situation was over, or the task for which he had been appointed was fulfilled. In any event, a dictator could not remain in office for more than six months and this rule appears to have been followed without exceptions.^[309] Moreover, if appointed for a specific purpose, a dictator could use his extensive powers in pursuance of that purpose only and might be lawfully resisted if he attempted to interfere in matters unrelated to it.^[310] And if he was entrusted with the conduct of ordinary constitutional proceedings, such as the supervision of the annual elections of magistrates, he was obliged to act in accordance with the established constitutional norms.^[311] Finally, it appears unlikely that the dictator was allowed to handle public finances without the consent of the senate.^[312]

During the earliest period of the Republic, when the constant wars between Rome and her neighbours posed a real threat to the city, the Romans often resorted to appointing dictators as a means of dealing with emergency situations.

occurred, the senate could pass a special decree (senatus consultum ultimum) arming the consuls with additional powers and authorising them to take any extraordinary measures required, including the temporary suspension of certain constitutional norms. The perpetual dictatorships of Sulla and Caesar, in the last century of the Republic, were established by special statutes and should be considered as departures from the traditional constitutional norms at a time when, as a result of factional strife and civil wars, the republican system of government was on the verge of collapse. At that time the dictatorship, as originally understood, no longer existed.