Consul sine collega

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the final phase of the Roman Republic and in late antiquity, a single consul was designated as consul sine collega ("consul without comrades") . Such was actually not provided for in the republican state system, which placed emphasis on the separation of powers . No later than 367 BC. The two-digit number was prescribed for the Roman consuls, and the term of office of the two consuls was limited to one year. The consulate was the highest and most honorable electoral office that the republic had to assign. It was characterized by the complete equality of the two collegial senior officials elected in the previous year. A sole consulate was a deviation from this important rule and thus a serious violation of tradition and of the republican principle of power limitation and control.

After the death of an incumbent consul, his surviving colleague was theoretically obliged to organize a by-election. However, since the election date was determined at his discretion, it happened that the by-election was omitted, especially when the year in office was soon to be over. Then the surviving consul held the consulate alone for the remainder of the time. However, this was not a state either wanted or formally approved. A sole consulate that was wanted from the start came up to 52 BC. In principle not considered. It would have appeared to be a contradiction in terms, because collegiality was considered an essential feature of the highest state office in the republic.

The so-called consul sine collega was a novelty that 52 BC. Was introduced. This was a special measure to remedy an emergency, which was intended as a one-time deviation from the principle of collegiality. The year had started without consuls, because fighting between armed street gangs in Rome had led to anarchic conditions and the consular elections had not been able to take place. Supporters of the famous general Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus demanded his appointment as dictator , since only he was able to ensure order. Such a move, however, encountered resistance in the Senate from the Optimates , an aristocratic group that defended republican "freedom" - the traditional rule of the Senate - against threatened overthrow attempts by ambitious politicians. The dictatorship, like all high offices, was limited in time, but because of its extraordinary power, it could be considered as the starting point for the establishment of tyrannical autocracy. Sulla had already demonstrated this potential , who lived in 82–81 BC. Had used his dictatorship to establish a reign of terror. That is why the dictatorship was very suspicious of those with a republican mind, it formed a foreign body in the republican state system.

At that time Pompey and Caesar were the two most powerful politicians and military commanders; they were suspected of aspiring to a monarchical position. Although they were since 60 BC Allies in the fight against the Optimates, but in fact they already rivaled for the decisive role in the state. Among the Optimates, Caesar was considered the more dangerous of the two men. For this reason, the optimatic senators sought the support of Pompey, although they opposed his establishment as dictator. They relied on his help to restore order in the capital and to keep Caesar and his followers out of power. Therefore, the optimate Marcus Calpurnius Bibulus proposed in the Senate to offer Pompey the position of sole consul. This proposal found the support of Bibulus' influential father-in-law Cato and with it the approval of the Senate. Pompey agreed. Now he could take up his third consulate. He was appointed consul without colleagues by Interrex , an election does not seem to have taken place. His power as sole consul was similar to that of a dictator, but the terminological connection to Sulla's reign of terror could be avoided.

The Optimates expected that Pompey would immediately renounce his extraordinary position as sole consul after the emergency measures were carried out. He met this requirement in August 52 BC. By appointing his father-in-law Metellus Scipio as his colleague for the remainder of the year in office. Thus Pompey was only consul for a few months.

For the year 45 BC After his victory in the civil war against Pompey, Caesar was elected sole consul. This was his fourth consulate and the only one without a colleague. In fact it was meaningless; it was not legally required because Caesar was already a dictator and as such had powers that exceeded those of a consul. He was only concerned with the honor of having achieved the same special position as his defeated and murdered rival Pompey. This was the last consulate without a colleague in Republican times.

During the time of the Principate , the traditional principle of collegiality among consuls was always observed, but in late antiquity it happened repeatedly in the 5th and 6th centuries that a consul officiated without colleagues, for example Boethius in 510.

Remarks

  1. ^ Johannes Michael Rainer: Römisches Staatsrecht. Republic and Principate. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 2006, ISBN 3-534-11544-9 , pp. 67, 70-73.
  2. ↑ John Leach: Pompey the Great. Croom Helm, London et al. 1978, ISBN 0-85664-659-8 , p. 157; Bernhard Kübler : Consul. In: Paulys Realencyclopadie der classical antiquity . Volume 4/1: Claudius mons - Cornificius. Metzler, Stuttgart et al. 1900, Sp. 1112–1138, here 1115, ( digitized ).
  3. ↑ Robin Seager: Pompey. A Political Biography. Blackwell, Oxford 1979, ISBN 0-631-10841-6 , pp. 142-144.
  4. ↑ Robin Seager: Pompey. A Political Biography. Blackwell, Oxford 1979, ISBN 0-631-10841-6 , pp. 144 f .; Ronald Syme : The Roman Revolution. Power struggles in ancient Rome. Fundamentally revised and, for the first time, complete new edition. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2003, ISBN 3-608-94029-4 , pp. 45 f., 52; Johannes Michael Rainer: Roman constitutional law. Republic and Principate. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 2006, ISBN 3-534-11544-9 , pp. 173 f .; Wolfgang Will : Caesar. Primus, Darmstadt 2009, ISBN 978-3-89678-671-5 , p. 128; John Leach: Pompey the Great. Croom Helm, London et al. 1978, ISBN 0-85664-659-8 , p. 156 f.
  5. ↑ Robin Seager: Pompey. A Political Biography. Blackwell, Oxford 1979, ISBN 0-631-10841-6 , pp. 144, 147.
  6. ↑ Martin Jehne : The state of the dictator Caesar (= Passau historical research. 3). Böhlau, Cologne et al. 1987, ISBN 3-412-06786-5 , pp. 39-41.