Through the powers he gained through the position of dictator,
Sulla could remove those elements of Roman life which threatened to send the
state into chaos and enact measures to prop up the republic. As dictator, Sulla
could do whatever pleased him, even holding, “the power of life and death”[i],
over his subjects, making his severe changes to the political balance of the
republic rather commonplace in comparison. Such change was necessary should
Sulla have been serious in his efforts to stabilise the republic, as without
creating support for his measures amongst those who had the authority to reject
them as soon as he left office or passed away, his efforts would be for naught.
In order to create such support, Sulla’s political reforms had two stages: the
removal of dissenting forces and the escalation of supporting voices. In the
first, he destroyed Samnium completely, for, as Baker notes, they, “had been a
disruptive force”[ii], in
Roman politics through their own selfishness; rather than accept policies that would
benefit the state as a whole, the Samnites instead chose to block such measures,
“in the interests of their own independence”[iii],
whether or not such blockage would create enemies against their cause back in
Rome. With the same aim, Sulla drastically reduced the influence of the
equites, who, after their introduction by Gracchus in the late second century
BC, had, “lead to serious discord”[iv],
through their lack of responsibility, political interest and major policies,
with Badian calling them, “the chief anarchic force of the nineties”[v].
Sulla effectively removed the class altogether, giving the majority of their
powers back to the Senate, making it the supreme governing body as it had been
prior to the Gracchi reforms. He achieved this by giving it such power as to prevent
as much as possible decisions made through emotional responses only, securing the
Senate, “from mob rule on the one hand and tyranny on the other”[vi].
This cause was aided by the decision to make election to the office by popular
election, allowing for, “men of enlightenment”[vii],
who were deemed suitable by the majority to have such legislative authority, rather
than those who backroom politics thought able to keep in line with their
wishes. The legislative power granted to the Senate was also drawn from the consulship,
decreasing the ability to abuse it in a quasi-legal form of tyranny as Marius
had done between 104BC and 100BC through the introduction of a ten year waiting
period between consulships, and the introduction of the quaestorship and
praetorship being prerequisites. To ensure this system was maintained, it was
necessary for Sulla to cement support for it in his newly empowered Senate
through the creation of the Cornelians, elevating personally chosen slaves of
the proscribed to citizenship, an act which created a strong sense of gratitude
and loyalty towards Sulla, while simultaneously making a, “deliberate and
careful choice of new blood”[viii],
to introduce to the political sphere. In this way the Italian upper class too
were used to stabilise the republic, Sulla addressing their concerns for he had
recognised that they, “finally threatened to destroy the state”[ix].
To prevent backlash from the displaced equites, the eminent equites were
adlected, concurrently reducing the differences they had previously had with
the senators, thereby stabilising the politically prominent elements of Rome at the time. Clearly, Sulla’s unique role as dictator allowed for the
stabilisation of the political system in Rome, quelling factions who threatened
this aim and elevating those who could be trusted to maintain the republic.
[i]
Plutarch, translated by R. Warner, op. cit. P. 94.
[ii]
Baker, op. cit. P. 259.
[iii]
ibid. P. 260.
[iv]
E. Badian, Lucius Sulla: The Deadly
Reformer, Sydney University Press, Redfern, 1969, P. 22.
[v]
ibid. P. 23.
[vi]
Beesly, op. cit. P. 190.
[vii]
Baker, op. cit. P. 275.
[viii]
ibid. P. 272.
[ix]
Badian, op. cit. P. 22.
No comments:
Post a Comment