[72.1] This opinion being applauded by all, another senator rose up and said: “I think, senators, this also ought to be added to the motion, namely, that as two persons of the greatest worth have at present the administration of the public affairs, men whose superiors you could not find, one of them should be empowered to make the nomination and the other should be appointed by his colleague, after they have considered together which of them is the more suitable person, to the end that, as the honour is equal between them, so the satisfaction may be equal also, to the one, in having declared his colleague to be the best man, and to the other, in having been declared the best by his colleague; for each of these things is pleasing and honourable. I know, to be sure, that even if this amendment were not made to the motion, they themselves would have thought proper to act in this manner; but it is better it should appear that you likewise approve of no other course.”
[2] ἐδόκει καὶ τοῦτο κατὰ νοῦν ἅπασιν εἰρῆσθαι: καὶ οὐθενὸς ἔτι τῇ γνώμῃ προστεθέντος ἐπικυροῦται τὸ δόγμα. ὡς δὲ παρέλαβον τὴν ἐξουσίαν οἱ ὕπατοι τοῦ διαγνῶναι, πότερος ἐξ αὐτῶν ἄρχειν ἐστὶν ἐπιτηδειότερος, θαυμαστόν τι καὶ παρὰ πάσας τὰς ἀνθρωπίνας ὑπολήψεις πρᾶγμα ἐποίουν. οὐ γὰρ ἑαυτὸν ἑκάτερος ἄξιον ἀπέφαινε τῆς ἡγεμονίας, [p. 250] ἀλλὰ τὸν ἕτερον: καὶ κατέτριψαν ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην τὰς ἀλλήλων ἀρετὰς ἐξαριθμούμενοι καὶ λιπαροῦντες μὴ λαβεῖν αὐτοὶ τὴν ἀρχήν, ὥστε ἐν πολλῇ γενέσθαι τοὺς ἐν τῷ συνεδρίῳ παρόντας ἀμηχανίᾳ.
[2] This proposal also seemed to meet with the approval of all, and the motion was then passed without further amendment. When the consuls had received the authority to decide which of them was the more suitable to command, they did a thing both admirable in itself and passing all human belief. For each of them declared, as worthy of the command, not himself, but the other; and they continued all that day enumerating one another’s virtues and begging that they themselves might not receive the command, so that all who were present in the senate were in great perplexity.
[3] 22 διαλυθείσης δὲ τῆς βουλῆς οἱ προσήκοντες κατὰ γένος ἑκατέρῳ, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων βουλευτῶν οἱ ἐντιμότατοι πρὸς τὸν Λάρκιον ἀφικόμενοι πολλὰς ἐποιοῦντο τοῦ ἀνδρὸς ἄχρι πολλῆς νυκτὸς δεήσεις διδάσκοντες, ὡς ἐν ἐκείνῳ τὰς ἐλπίδας ἡ βουλὴ τέθειται πάσας, καὶ τὸ ἀσπούδαστον αὐτοῦ περὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν πονηρὸν εἶναι τῷ κοινῷ λέγοντες. ὁ δ᾽ ἦν ἀτενὴς καὶ πολλὰ ἐν μέρει δεόμενός τε καὶ ἀντιβολῶν ἕκαστον διετέλει. τῇ δ᾽ ἑξῆς ἡμέρᾳ πάλιν τοῦ συνεδρίου συναχθέντος, ἐπειδὴ καὶ τότε διεμάχετο καὶ πειθόμενος ὑπὸ πάντων οὐκ ἀφίστατο τῆς γνώμης, ἀναστὰς ὁ Κλοίλιος ἀναγορεύει τ᾽ αὐτόν, ὥσπερ εἰώθεσαν ποιεῖν οἱ μεσοβασιλεῖς, καὶ τὴν ὑπατείαν αὐτὸς ἐξόμνυται.
[3] When the senate had been dismissed, the kinsmen of each and the most honoured among the senators at large came to Larcius and continued to entreat him till far into the night, informing him that the senate had placed all its hopes in him and declaring that his indifference toward the command was prejudicial to the commonwealth. But Larcius was unmoved, and in his turn continued to address many prayers and entreaties to each of them. The next day, when the senate had again assembled, and he still resisted and, in spite of the advice of all the senators, would not change his mind, Cloelius rose up and nominated him, according to the practice of the interreges, and then abdicated the consulship himself.
[1] οὗτος πρῶτος ἐν Ῥώμῃ μόναρχος ἀπεδείχθη πολέμου τε καὶ εἰρήνης καὶ παντὸς ἄλλου πράγματος αὐτοκράτωρ. ὄνομα δ᾽ αὐτῷ τίθενται δικτάτορα, εἴτε διὰ τὴν ἐξουσίαν τοῦ κελεύειν, ὅτι θέλοι, καὶ τάττειν τὰ δίκαιά τε καὶ τὰ καλὰ τοῖς ἄλλοις, ὡς ἂν αὐτῷ δοκῇ: τὰ γὰρ ἐπιτάγματα καὶ τὰς διαγραφὰς τῶν δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων ἠδίκτα οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι καλοῦσιν: εἴτε ὥς τινες γράφουσι διὰ τὴν τότε γενομένην ἀνάρρησιν, ἐπειδὴ οὐ παρὰ τοῦ δήμου τὴν ἀρχὴν εὑρόμενος κατὰ τοὺς πατρίους ἐθισμοὺς ἕξειν ἔμελλεν, [p. 251]
[73.1] Larcius was the first man to be appointed sole ruler at Rome with absolute authority in war, in peace, and in all other matters. They call this magistrate a dictator, either from his power of issuing whatever orders he wishes and of prescribing for the others rules of justice and right as he thinks proper (for the Romans call commands and ordinances respecting what is right and wrong edicta or “edicts”) so, as some write, from the form of nomination which was then introduced, since he was to receive the magistracy, not from the people, according to ancestral usage, but by the appointment of one man.
[2] ἀλλ᾽ ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὸς ἀποδειχθεὶς ἑνός. οὐ γὰρ ᾤοντο δεῖν ἐπίφθονον ὄνομα καὶ βαρὺ θέσθαι τινὶ ἀρχῇ πόλιν ἐλευθέραν ἐπιτροπευούσῃ, τῶν τε ἀρχομένων ἕνεκα, ἵνα μηθὲν ἐπὶ ταῖς μισουμέναις προσηγορίαις ἐκταράττωνται, καὶ τῶν παραλαμβανόντων τὰς ἀρχὰς προνοίᾳ, μή τι λάθωσιν ἢ παθόντες ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων πλημμελὲς ἢ δράσαντες αὐτοὶ τοὺς πέλας, ὧν φέρουσιν αἱ τοιαῦται δυναστεῖαι: ἐπεὶ τό γε τῆς ἐξουσίας μέγεθος, ἧς ὁ δικτάτωρ ἔχει, ἥκιστα δηλοῦται ὑπὸ τοῦ ὀνόματος:
[2] For they did not think they ought to give an invidious and obnoxious title to any magistracy that had the oversight of a free people, as well as for the sake of the governed, lest they should be alarmed by the odious terms of address, as from a regard for the men who were assuming the magistracies, lest they should unconsciously either suffer some injury from others or themselves commit against others acts of injustice of the sort that positions of such authority bring in their train. For the extent of the power which the dictator possesses is by no means indicated by the title; for the dictatorship is in reality an elective tyranny.
[3] ἔστι γὰρ αἱρετὴ τυραννὶς ἡ δικτατορία. δοκοῦσι δέ μοι καὶ τοῦτο παρ᾽ Ἑλλήνων οἱ Ῥωμαῖοι τὸ πολίτευμα λαβεῖν. οἱ γὰρ Αἰσυμνῆται καλούμενοι παρ᾽ Ἕλλησι τὸ ἀρχαῖον, ὡς ἐν τοῖς περὶ βασιλείας ἱστορεῖ Θεόφραστος, αἱρετοί τινες ἦσαν τύραννοι: ᾑροῦντο δ᾽ αὐτοὺς αἱ πόλεις οὔτ᾽ εἰς ὁριστὸν χρόνον οὔτε συνεχῶς, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τοὺς καιρούς, ὁπότε δόξειε συμφέρειν, καὶ εἰς ὁποσονοῦν χρόνον: ὥσπερ καὶ Μιτυληναῖοί ποθ᾽ εἵλοντο Πιττακὸν πρὸς τοὺς φυγάδας τοὺς περὶ Ἀλκαῖον τὸν ποιητήν.
[3] The Romans seem to me to have taken this institution also from the Greeks. For the magistrates anciently called among the Greeks aisymnêtai or “regulators,”
as Theophrastus writes in his treatise On Kingship, were a kind of elective tyrants. They were chosen by the cities, not for a definite time nor continuously, but for emergencies, as often and for as long a time as seemed convenient; just as the Mitylenaeans, for example, once chose Pittacus to oppose the exiles headed by Alcaeus, the poet.
[1] ἦλθον δ᾽ ἐπὶ τοῦτο οἱ πρῶτοι διδαχθέντες τῇ πείρᾳ τὸ χρήσιμον. κατ᾽ ἀρχὰς μὲν γὰρ ἅπασα πόλις Ἑλλὰς ἐβασιλεύετο, πλὴν οὐχ ὥσπερ τὰ βάρβαρα ἔθνη δεσποτικῶς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ νόμους τινὰς καὶ ἐθισμοὺς πατρίους: καὶ κράτιστος ἦν βασιλεὺς ὁ δικαιότατός τε καὶ νομιμώτατος καὶ μηθὲν ἐκδιαιτώμενος τῶν πατρίων.
[74.1] The first men who had recourse to this institution had learned the advantage of it by experience. For in the beginning all the Greek cities were governed by kings, though not despotically, like the barbarian nations, but according to certain laws and time-honoured customs, and he was the best king who was the most just, the most observant of the laws, and did not in any wise depart from the established customs.
[2] δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ Ὅμηρος δικασπόλους τε καλῶν [p. 252] τοὺς βασιλεῖς καὶ θεμιστοπόλους. καὶ μέχρι πολλοῦ διέμενον ἐπὶ ῥητοῖς τισιν αἱ βασιλεῖαι διοικούμεναι, καθάπερ ἡ Λακεδαιμονίων: ἀρξαμένων δέ τινων ἐν ταῖς ἐξουσίαις πλημμελεῖν καὶ νόμοις μὲν ὀλίγα χρωμένων, ταῖς δ᾽ ἑαυτῶν γνώμαις τὰ πολλὰ διοικούντων, δυσχεράναντες ὅλον τὸ πρᾶγμα οἱ πολλοὶ κατέλυσαν μὲν τὰ βασιλικὰ πολιτεύματα, νόμους δὲ καταστησάμενοι καὶ ἀρχὰς ἀποδείξαντες, ταύταις ἐχρῶντο τῶν πόλεων φυλακαῖς.
[2] This appears from Homer, who calls kings dikaspoloi or “ministers of justice,” and themispoloi or “ministers of the laws.” And kingships continued to be carried on for a long time subject to certain stated conditions, like that of the Lacedaemonians. But as some of the kings began to abuse their powers and made little use of the laws, but settled most matters according to their own judgment, people in general grew dissatisfied with the whole institution and abolished the kingly governments; and enacting laws and choosing magistrates, they used these as the safeguards of their cities.
[3] ἐπεὶ δ᾽ οὐκ αὐτάρκεις ἦσαν οὔτε οἱ τεθέντες ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν νόμοι βεβαιοῦν τὸ δίκαιον οὔτε οἱ τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐπιμελείας αὐτῶν λαμβάνοντες βοηθεῖν τοῖς νόμοις, οἵ τε καιροὶ πολλὰ νεοχμοῦντες οὐ τὰ κράτιστα τῶν πολιτευμάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ πρεπωδέστατα ταῖς καταλαμβανούσαις αὐτοὺς συντυχίαις ἠνάγκαζον αἱρεῖσθαι, οὐ μόνον ἐν ταῖς ἀβουλήτοις συμφοραῖς, ἀλλὰ κἀν ταῖς ὑπερβαλλούσαις τὸ μέτριον εὐτυχίαις, διαφθειρομένων δι᾽ αὐτὰς τῶν πολιτικῶν κόσμων, οἷς ἐπανορθώσεως ταχείας καὶ αὐτογνώμονος ἔδει, ἠναγκάζοντο παράγειν πάλιν τὰς βασιλικὰς καὶ τυραννικὰς ἐξουσίας εἰς μέσον, ὀνόμασι περικαλύπτοντες αὐτὰς εὐπρεπεστέροις, Θετταλοὶ μὲν ἀρχούς, Λακεδαιμόνιοι δ᾽ ἁρμοστὰς καλοῦντες, φοβούμενοι τυράννους ἢ βασιλεῖς αὐτοὺς καλεῖν, ὡς οὐδ᾽ ὅσιον σφίσιν ὑπάρχον, ἃς κατέλυσαν ἐξουσίας ὅρκοις καὶ ἀραῖς ἐπιθεσπισάντων [p. 253]
[3] But when neither the laws they had made were sufficient to ensure justice nor the magistrates who had undertaken the oversight of them able to uphold the laws, and times of crisis, introducing many innovations, compelled them to choose, not the best institutions, but such as were best suited to the situations in which they found themselves, not only in unwelcome calamities, but also in immoderate prosperity, and when their forms of government were becoming corrupted by these conditions and required speedy and arbitrary correction, they were compelled to restore the kingly and tyrannical powers, though they concealed them under more attractive titles. Thus, the Thessalians called these officials archoi or “commanders,” and the Lacedaemonians harmosati or “harmonizers,” fearing to call them tyrants or kings, on the ground that it was not right for them to confirm those powers again which they had abolished with oaths and imprecations, under the approbation of the gods.
[4] θεῶν, ταύτας πάλιν ἐμπεδοῦν. ἐμοὶ μὲν δὴ παρὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων δοκοῦσι Ῥωμαῖοι τὸ παράδειγμα λαβεῖν, ὥσπερ ἔφην, Λικίννιος δὲ παρ᾽ Ἀλβανῶν οἴεται τὸν δικτάτορα Ῥωμαίους εἰληφέναι, τούτους λέγων πρώτους μετὰ τὸν Ἀμολίου καὶ Νεμέτορος θάνατον ἐκλιπούσης τῆς βασιλικῆς συγγενείας ἐνιαυσίους ἄρχοντας ἀποδεῖξαι τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχοντας ἐξουσίαν τοῖς βασιλεῦσι, καλεῖν δ᾽ αὐτοὺς δικτάτορας: ἐγὼ δ᾽ οὐ τοὔνομα ζητεῖν ἠξίουν, πόθεν ἡ Ῥωμαίων πόλις ἔλαβεν, ἀλλὰ τὸ τῆς ἐξουσίας τῆς περιλαμβανομένης τῷ ὀνόματι παράδειγμα. ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ μὲν τούτων οὐθὲν ἂν εἴη τάχα προὔργου τὰ πλείω γράφειν.
[4] My opinion, therefore, is, as I said, that the Romans took this example from the Greeks; but Licinius believes they took the dictatorship from the Albans, these being, as he says, the first who, when the royal family had become extinct upon the death of Amulius and Numitor, created annual magistrates with the same power the kings had enjoyed and called these magistrates dictators. For my part, I have not thought it worth while to inquire from whence the Romans took the name but from whence they took the example of the power comprehended under that name. But perhaps it is not worth while to discuss the matter further.
[1] ὃν δὲ τρόπον ὁ Λάρκιος ἐχρήσατο τοῖς πράγμασι δικτάτωρ πρῶτος ἀποδειχθεὶς καὶ κόσμον, οἷον περιέθηκε τῇ ἀρχῇ, συντόμως πειράσομαι διεξελθεῖν, ταῦτα ἡγούμενος εἶναι χρησιμώτατα τοῖς ἀναγνωσομένοις, ἃ πολλὴν εὐπορίαν παρέξει καλῶν καὶ συμφερόντων παραδειγμάτων νομοθέταις τε καὶ δημαγωγοῖς καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἅπασι τοῖς πολιτεύεσθαί τε καὶ τὰ κοινὰ πράττειν βουλομένοις. οὐ γὰρ ἀζήλου καὶ ταπεινῆς πόλεως πολιτεύματα καὶ βίους οὐδὲ ἀνωνύμων καὶ ἀπερριμμένων ἀνθρώπων βουλεύματα καὶ πράξεις μέλλω διηγεῖσθαι, ὥστε ὄχλον ἄν τινι καὶ φλυαρίαν φανῆναι τὴν περὶ τὰ μικρὰ καὶ φαῦλα ἡμῶν σπουδήν: ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἅπασι τὰ καλὰ καὶ δίκαια ὁριζούσης πόλεως καὶ περὶ τῶν εἰς τοῦτο καταστησαμένων αὐτὴν τὸ ἀξίωμα ἡγεμόνων, ἅ τις ἂν σπουδάσειε μὴ ἀγνοεῖν [p. 254]
[75.1] I shall now endeavour to relate in a summary manner how Larcius handled matters when he had been appointed the first dictator, and show with what dignity he inv
ested the magistracy, for I look upon these matters as being most useful to my readers, since they will afford a great abundance of noble and profitable examples, not only to lawgivers and leaders of the people, but also to all others who aspire to take part in public life and to govern the state. For it is no mean and humble state of which I am going to relate the institutions and manners, nor were the men nameless outcasts whose counsels and actions I shall record, so that my zeal for small and trivial details might to some appear tedious and trifling; but I am writing the history of the state which prescribes rules of right and justice for all mankind, and of the leaders who raised her to that dignity, matters concerning which any philosopher or statesman would earnestly strive not to be ignorant.
Delphi Complete Works of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Illustrated) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 79) Page 547
