Haberstroh 1 John Haberstroh History 510A Dr. Hood Final Draft Dionysius I of Syracuse: A Tyrant Turned King Dionysius I (r. 405-367 BC) was the subject of much criticism, even during the days in which he ruled Syracuse. He made notable achievements in military technology and strategy that Alexander the Great emulated half a century later, and he similarly expanded the dominance of Syracuse and “made it the greatest of Hellenic states.” 1 Despite his accomplishments, Dionysius’ reign became the archetype of tyranny for later historians. His detractors labeled him an oppressive and abusive tyrant concerned only with expanding the power of his own office at the expense of his fellow Syracusans. This negativity can be traced to anti-tyrannical propaganda coming out of Athens, 2 but this negative propaganda failed to consider Dionysius’ motivations and aims. At first, Dionysius aspired to hold the office of τύραννος , however he eventually concluded that he was better than a mere tyrant. He believed that he could rule as a king, with all the rights, powers, and privileges held by a legitimate monarch, hoping he could retain power as a benevolent king [ mounarchos ]. Indeed, at some time in his reign he acted more as a king than a tyrant, but contemporaries judged him more as a tyrant than as a king, thus distorting his historiographic portrait and perpetuating anti-Dionysian propaganda. This paper examines the dichotomy between Dionysius Turannos and Dionysius Mounarchos. Ancient Sicily had a tradition of tyrants. Gelon’s resounding victory over the western Greek nemesis, Carthage, in 480 BC at the battle of Himera allowed the Greeks to dominate a 1 Isocrates, Nicocles or the Cyprians, 23, in Isocrates with an English Translation by George Norlin, Ph.D., LL.D, Volume 1, (Cambridge: MA, Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1980). 2 See Lionel Jehuda Sanders, “Dionysius of Syracuse and the Validity of the Hostile Tradition,” Scripta Classica Israelica, Vol. 5 (1979-1980): 64-84.