litary crisis such as might have proved too serious for the
annual consuls with their divided command. Later constitutional theory
held that the repression of civil discord was also one of the motives
for the institution of a dictatorship. Such is the view expressed by
Cicero in the _De legibus_ (iii. 3, 9) and by the emperor Claudius in
his extant _Oratio_ (i. 28). This function of the office, although it
may not have been contemplated at first, is attested by the internal
history of Rome. In the crisis of the agitation that gathered round the
Licinian laws (367 B.C.) a dictator was appointed, and in 314 B.C. we
have the notice of a dictator created for purposes of criminal
jurisdiction (_quaestionibus exercendis_). The dictator appointed to
meet the dangers of war, sedition or crime was technically described as
"the administrative dictator" (_rei gerundae causa_). Minor, or merely
formal, needs of the state might lead to the creation of other types of
this office. Thus we find dictators destined to hold the elections, to
make out the list of the senate, to celebrate games, to establish
festivals, and to drive the nail into the temple of Jupiter--an act of
natural magic which was believed to avert pestilence. These dictators
appointed for minor purposes were expected to retire from office as soon
as their function was completed. The "administrative dictator" held
office for at least six months.

The powers of a dictator were a temporary revival of those of the kings;
but there were some limitations to his authority. He was never concerned
with civil jurisdiction, and was dependent on the senate for supplies of
money. His military authority was confined to Italy; and his power of
life and death over the citizens was at an early period limited by law.
It was probably the _lex Valeria_ of 300 B.C. that made him subject to
the right of criminal appeal (_provocatio_) within the limits of the
city. But during his tenure of power all the magistrates of the people
were regarded as his subordinates; and it was even held that the right
of assistance (_auxilium_), furnished by the tribunes of the plebs to
members of the citizen body, should not be effectively exercised when
the state was under this type of martial law. The dictator was nominated
by one of the consuls. But here as elsewhere the senate asserted its
authority over the magistrates, and the view was finally held that the
senate should not only suggest the need of nomin