This chapter focuses on the way the Livian conception of political leadership reflects the corresponding Ciceronian theory. Although Livy does not seem to use any specific term for ‘leadership’, the latter is given a prominent role in his theory regarding the progress and the decline of the res publica: in his much-commented-on passage of his preface (praef. 9), both the relaxation of disciplina and the role of the leaders (uiri) are elucidated by reference to Cicero’s theory and terminology of leadership. Disciplina should then be defined as a way of moral and political life transmitted from one generation to the other, which is essentially based on the principle of obedience to an ‘enlightened’ political leadership. The characteristics of efficient leadership are expressed by Livy in various comments or speeches throughout the work. The role attributed to the people and the leaders in Livy’s scheme also reveals a close affinity with Cicero’s theory of the ideal leader as a moderator rei publicae, especially in the De re publica. Livy also promotes some leaders of the Roman past as exempla which have incarnated the Ciceronian ideal of leader.

For Cicero, effective Republican leadership entailed both morality and agency. Morality meant actions that supported the Republic, while agency was required for such actions to be carried out. It is difficult to subsume any theory of leadership under a single word, but I argue that Cicero’s leadership theory can be signified by consilium. This term encapsulates the best mental and moral aspects of leadership as well as the actions and results of acting on behalf of the Republic. It is inherently tied to the practice of Republican politics, a practice that was fundamentally transactional. Cicero used this idea of consilium to support his acceptance of Octavian as an ally against Antony. According to his theory of consilium, Cicero acted correctly against Antony, but Octavian ultimately exposed the flaws in Cicero’s theory when he refused to participate in traditional Republican transactional politics.