15.  The widely-spread opinion, which sees in the imperial office of Imperator nothing but the dignity of general of the empire tenable for life, is not warranted either by the signification of the word or by the view taken by the old authorities. -Imperium-is the power of command, -Imperator- is the possessor of that power; in these words as in the corresponding Greek terms —­kratos—­, —­autokrator—­ so little is there implied a specific military reference, that it is on the contrary the very characteristic of the Roman official power, where it appears purely and completely, to embrace in it war and process—­that is, the military and the civil power of command—­as one inseparable whole.  Dio says quite correctly (liii. 17; comp, xliii. 44; lii. 41) that the name Imperator was assumed by the emperors “to indicate their full power instead of the title of king and dictator (—­pros deilosin teis autotelous sphon exousias, anti teis basileos tou te diktatoros epikleiseos—­); for these other older titles disappeared in name, but in reality the title of Imperator gives the same prerogatives (—­to de dei ergon auton tei tou autokratoros proseigoria bebaiountai—­), for instance the right of levying soldiers, imposing taxes, declaring war and concluding peace, exercising the supreme authority over burgess and non-burgess in and out of the city and punishing any one at any place capitally or otherwise, and in general of assuming the prerogatives connected in the earliest times with the supreme imperium.”  It could not well be said in plainer terms, that Imperator is nothing at all but a synonym for rex, just as imperare coincides with regere.

16.  When Augustus in constituting the principate resumed the Caesarian imperium, this was done with the restriction that it should be limited as to space and in a certain sense also as to time; the proconsular power of the emperors, which was nothing but just this imperium, was not to come into application as regards Rome and Italy (Staatsrecht, ii. 8 854).  On this element rests the essential distinction between the Caesarian imperium and the Augustan principate, just as on the other hand the real equality of the two institutions rests on the imperfection with which even in principle and still more in practice that limit was realized.

17.  II.  I. Collegiate Arrangements

18.  On this question there may be difference of opinion, whereas the hypothesis that it was Caesar’s intention to rule the Romans as Imperator, the non-Romans as Rex, must be simply dismissed.  It is based solely on the story that in the sitting of the senate in which Caesar was assassinated a Sibylline utterance was brought forward by one of the priests in charge of the oracles, Lucius Cotta, to the effect that the Parthians could only be vanquished by a “king,” and in consequence of this the resolution was adopted to commit to Caesar regal power over the Roman provinces.  This story was certainly in circulation immediately