i suppose the absence of a real 'bureaucracy' in a more modern sense wasn't present. only in the late empire a sort of bureaucracy emerges. typical about antique cultures is this 'amateuristic' approach towards administration. one wasn't general since he was educated such, no, he was it because he was from that family and had that age. same goes for most functions. it wasn't wether you were capable, but wether you were from the right social rank.

the late 3rd-4th century empire new a bureaucracy in a more modern way but i suppose it was alrdy to late to turn the tide then. the 3rd century wars had torn away the foundations of the empire (the civitas) and set in a process of ruralisation.

but i'm moving away from the issue at hand, republicanism vs absolutism. i dont like that title btw. absolutism refers to much to the 17th century and misses to grasp the side caesar represented.