In the first century B.C. Rome established a republican government: i.e., leadership by a senate, rather than a monarchy.
The Senate was traumatized by the tyranny of a dictator named Sulla who made himself emperor by force: using the military under his command to establish his own title. After Sulla, the Roman leadership decided that they would never allow this to happen again.
The Roman Senate did have a "chairman," that was known as consul. But a consul's role did not include commander-in-chief. Eventually Rome would adopt three consuls (a triumvirate).
When Pompey was consul, pirates were intercepting large quantities of supplies being sent from Egypt to Rome to sustain the Romans. This put Rome in jeopardy of famine.
The Senate entered into a debate as to whether Pompey should be commissioned to lead a large army against the pirates.
Those opposed were concerned whether Pompey might take advantage and repeat the tyranny of Sulla. Cato recommended that 10 separate smaller armies be used to combat the pirates, so that no military officer would have too much power.
DECISION: You are a Roman Senator. How do you vote? One large army under Pompey or smaller armies with several different leaders? Why?
How is this dilemma highly relevant to the United States Constitution?
Click here to see what happened.