A Three-Layer Analysis (TLA) of Livy, History of Rome, Book 1
1. Question
Why does rule over a community require a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled?
2. Abstract
Rule over a community requires a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled because silent obedience alone cannot transform rule into the will of the community.
Silent obedience means that the ruled side does not resist commands. However, this does not necessarily mean that the ruled side accepts those commands as legitimate judgments of the community. People can obey commands because of fear, resignation, benefit, custom, or coercive force. But such submission does not form the will of the community.
For a community to be governed in a stable way, rule must be received not as “a command imposed from outside,” but as “our own order.” For this reason, a form of approval is necessary.
In TLA Layer 2, popular approval and civic recognition are understood as approval devices that transform rule into the will of the community. Their purpose is to transform obedience from mere subjection into self-involvement. In other words, approval is an institutional conversion device. It allows the ruled side not only to obey, but also to receive rule as a decision of its own community.
3. Method
This study follows the structure of Three-Layer Analysis, or TLA.
In Layer 1, this study organizes the facts related to the formation of kingship in Roman monarchy, the vacancy of kingship after the death of Romulus, the selection of a king by the people, and the approval of that selection by the Senate.
In Layer 2, these facts are connected to structures such as kingship, popular approval and civic recognition, the Senate, the OS, the Execution Layer, Trust T, Maturity M, and external control IC.
In Layer 3, this study explains why rule over a community cannot be stabilized by silent obedience alone and why it requires a form of approval, from the viewpoints of TLA and OS Organizational Design Theory.
4. Layer 1: Fact
In Livy, History of Rome, Book 1, rule in the Roman monarchy is not established by force or bloodline alone.
The kingship of Romulus was supported by founding the city, augury, the integration of the people, the formation of legal order, and the establishment of the Senate. This does not mean that Romulus ruled simply because he was strong. Kingship was formed as a public governing center through divine will, force, institutional design, popular approval, and senatorial approval.
After the death of Romulus, there was no royal house that naturally inherited the throne. Therefore, a vacancy in kingship appeared, and the Fathers who formed the Senate operated the interregnum. After that, a structure became necessary in which the people chose the king and the Senate approved that choice.
This fact shows that kingship was not established merely by “someone ruling.” For rule over the community to become public order, approval from the people and approval from the Senate, the higher-level decision-making body, were necessary.
In other words, kingship becomes a public center not through silent obedience, but through approval.
5. Layer 2: Order
In Layer 2, popular approval and civic recognition are approval devices that transform rule into the will of the community. Kingship and public offices gain public form not only through force or bloodline, but also through popular approval. The purpose is to transform obedience from mere subjection into self-involvement.
Here lies the essential difference between silent obedience and approval.
Silent obedience creates a condition in which commands are carried out. Approval creates a condition in which commands are accepted as the will of the community. The former is external obedience. The latter is internal acceptance within the community. What matters for governance is not only that commands are carried out. What matters is that those commands are accepted as the order of the community.
The structure of kingship also shows this point. In Layer 2, kingship is understood as the governing center that carries founding, war, institutional creation, and judgment in one role. However, kingship is not supported by heredity or force alone. It is supported by military achievement, divine will, popular approval, senatorial approval, marriage networks, and crisis response.
This means that the strength of a king alone is not enough for the king to function as the center of the state OS. If the king gives commands and the people silently obey, rule may appear to exist. But if that rule is not approved as the will of the community, kingship has not taken root inside the community. It comes closer to a force that presses the community from the outside. In that case, governance depends not on trust, but on fear, custom, and military power.
The Senate is also deeply connected to the approval structure. The Senate is a higher-level decision-making body that strengthens kingship while also carrying its legitimation and continuity. It is connected to royal selection approval, the interregnum, the assembly, clan order, the aristocratic class, and decisions on diplomacy and war. This shows that approval is necessary not only on the side of the people, but also in the continuity structure of the state.
From the viewpoint of OS Organizational Design Theory, rule over a community requires approval because approval connects the OS and the Execution Layer. The OS is the operating body that makes decisions. The Execution Layer is the layer that actually carries out those decisions. Even if the OS makes a correct judgment, commands may be carried out only on the surface if the Execution Layer does not accept them as its own order. Such commands do not lead to deep cooperation or sustainable operation.
Here, T, or Trust, becomes important. In OS Organizational Design Theory, the health of the ruled side is organized as M × T. M means Maturity, and T means Trust. If the Execution Layer cannot trust the OS, the health of the ruled side declines.
Silent obedience can produce temporary obedience to commands. However, it does not necessarily raise Trust T. Rather, silent obedience caused by fear or resignation may lower T. A form of approval supports this T. When approval functions, the ruled side can feel that it is not merely the target of commands, but part of the community involved in governance. This self-involvement supports T and changes execution from mere obedience into cooperative action within the community.
A form of approval is also related to M, or Maturity. Maturity is not merely the ability to obey the ruler. It is the condition in which members of the community can correct their behavior through institutions and external control, while also governing themselves through moral discipline. Approval procedures help organize the behavior of the community as part of external control IC.
Therefore, approval is not merely the form of “agreeing.” It is a device through which the community accepts its own order and governs itself institutionally. Under silent obedience, the ruled side only follows commands. It does not easily gain self-involvement in the order of the community. Through approval, the ruled side is positioned not only as the receiver of commands, but also as a member that composes the order itself.
6. Layer 3: Insight
Rule over a community requires a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled because silent obedience alone does not make rule become the will of the community.
Silent obedience means that the ruled side does not resist commands. However, this does not necessarily mean that the ruled side accepts those commands as legitimate judgments of the community. People can obey commands because of fear, resignation, benefit, custom, or submission to violence. But such submission does not form the will of the community.
For a community to be governed in a stable way, rule must be received not as “a command imposed from outside,” but as “our own order.” For this reason, a form of approval is necessary.
Approval is an institutional conversion device. It allows the ruled side not only to obey, but also to receive rule as a decision of its own community. Silent obedience creates a condition in which commands are carried out. Approval creates a condition in which commands are accepted as the will of the community. The former is external obedience. The latter is internal acceptance within the community.
In Livy, History of Rome, Book 1, Roman kingship is not established by force or bloodline alone. Kingship is supported by divine will, force, popular approval, senatorial approval, and institutional design. This shows that the strength of the king alone is not enough for him to function as the center of the state OS.
If the king gives commands and the people silently obey, rule may appear to exist. But if that rule is not approved as the will of the community, kingship has not taken root inside the community. It comes closer to a force that presses the community from the outside. In that case, governance depends not on trust, but on fear, custom, and military power.
This point also appears in the selection of a king after the death of Romulus. In Rome, there was no royal house that naturally inherited the throne. After a vacancy in kingship appeared, a structure became necessary in which the people chose the king and the Senate approved that choice. This shows that kingship was not established merely by “someone ruling.” It needed approval from the community and approval from the higher-level decision-making body. Kingship becomes a public center not through silent obedience, but through approval.
From the viewpoint of OS Organizational Design Theory, rule over a community requires approval because approval connects the OS and the Execution Layer. The OS is the operating body that makes decisions. The Execution Layer is the layer that actually carries out those decisions. Even if the OS makes a correct judgment, commands may be carried out only on the surface if the Execution Layer does not accept them as its own order. Such commands do not lead to deep cooperation or sustainable operation.
Here, T, or Trust, becomes important. In OS Organizational Design Theory, the health of the ruled side is organized as M × T. If the Execution Layer cannot trust the OS, the health of the ruled side declines. Silent obedience can produce temporary obedience to commands. However, it does not necessarily raise Trust T. Rather, silent obedience caused by fear or resignation may lower T.
A form of approval supports this T. Approval gives the Execution Layer the form that “this judgment has passed through the will formation of your community.” When approval functions, the ruled side can feel that it is not merely the target of commands, but part of the community involved in governance. This self-involvement supports T and changes execution from mere obedience into cooperative action within the community.
A form of approval is also related to M, or Maturity. Maturity is not merely the ability to obey the ruler. It is the condition in which members of the community can correct their behavior through institutions and external control, while also governing themselves through moral discipline. Approval procedures help organize the behavior of the community as part of external control IC.
Therefore, approval is not merely the form of “agreeing.” It is a device through which the community accepts its own order and governs itself institutionally. Under silent obedience, the ruled side only follows commands. It does not easily gain self-involvement in the order of the community. Through approval, the ruled side is positioned not only as the receiver of commands, but also as a member that composes the order itself.
Without this structure, rule always moves closer to external coercion. Coercive rule can be effective in the short term. Fear, punishment, military power, and economic benefit can make people obey. However, this does not guarantee the long-term stability of the community. When coercion weakens, or when the ruler’s ability or prestige declines, silent obedience can easily turn into resistance or departure.
A form of approval reduces this instability. By formalizing rule as the will of the community, commands are received not merely as the will of the ruler, but as the order of the community. This changes rule from a mere relation of obedience into a communal relation of governance.
However, it is important that the form of approval has substance. If an approval procedure remains only as a form and loses its substance, it increases distrust. Therefore, saying that approval is necessary does not mean that the mere existence of a form of approval is enough. Approval can transform rule into the will of the community only when it includes real participation, review, acceptance, and correction.
Therefore, rule over a community requires a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled. Silent obedience creates external obedience to commands, but approval transforms rule into the will of the community. Silent obedience makes execution possible, but approval creates Trust T and self-involvement. Silent obedience depends on the power of the ruler, but approval supports the order of the community. This is why a form of approval is indispensable in the governance of a community.
7. Implications for the Present
This structure also applies directly to modern organizations.
In modern companies and organizations, the fact that members silently obey the commands of a boss or executive does not necessarily mean that they trust or accept those commands. They may obey because of fear, resignation, evaluation systems, economic anxiety, or the need to avoid career disadvantage.
Such silent obedience can move an organization in the short term. However, it does not stabilize an organization in the long term. This is because silent obedience does not necessarily raise Trust T. Rather, it may appear as silence, surface obedience, information blocking, resignation, turnover, or resistance.
In modern organizations, forms of approval include meetings, consensus building, approval workflows, accountability, board approval, feedback from the front line, and transparency in evaluation systems. These are not mere procedures. They are institutional connections that allow members of the organization to receive organizational decisions as “our own order.”
However, if approval procedures become only a form, the effect reverses. Meetings are held, but the conclusion has already been decided. Opinions are collected, but opposing opinions are not adopted. Evaluation systems exist, but treatment is decided by factions. In such conditions, approval procedures do not create trust. Rather, they create distrust because members feel that “we were made to have approved this.”
Therefore, what matters in modern organizations is not making people obey commands. What matters is making it possible for the Execution Layer to receive organizational judgments as its own order. A form of approval is the institutional connection necessary for this.
8. Conclusion
Rule over a community requires a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled because silent obedience alone does not make rule become the will of the community.
Silent obedience creates external obedience to commands. However, it does not necessarily mean that the command is accepted as a legitimate judgment of the community. People can obey because of fear, resignation, benefit, custom, or violence. But such submission does not form the will of the community.
Approval transforms rule into the will of the community. Through approval, the ruled side is positioned not merely as the target of commands, but as a participant in the order of the community. As a result, execution changes from mere obedience into cooperative action within the community.
From the viewpoint of OS Organizational Design Theory, approval connects the OS and the Execution Layer and supports Trust T and self-involvement. Silent obedience makes temporary execution possible, but approval supports the long-term stability of the community.
However, approval must not remain only as a form. If approval does not include real participation, review, acceptance, and correction, it creates distrust. Therefore, what community governance needs is neither mere silent obedience nor empty approval. It needs a form of approval with substance.
Here lies the reason why rule over a community requires a form of approval rather than the silent obedience of the ruled.
9. Sources
Titus Livius, History of Rome, Book 1, translated by Satoshi Iwaya, Kyoto University Press, 2008.
OS Organizational Design Theory_R1.30.14