The Significance of the Gracchi

This new republic was plagued by tension arising from the class differences of the patricians and plebeians. The Gracchi brothers attempted to equalize things, Gaius Gracchus proposed a redistribution of farm land that would benefit the plebeians. The end result was rather unfortunate as he was killed; his other brother was also killed ten years later for similar reasons.

Events which stretch as far back as the reforms of the Gracchi brothers’ meant that the Rome was facing a Republic that was already deteriorating before Pompey had stepped into power. While Pompey’s quest for power was harmful, many other factors were also baleful to the Republic, and were hence instrumental in its decline. Gnaeus Pompeius’s measures to gain power were harmful because it was primarily a paradox to the principles of being part of a Republic with all its notions of shared and short power. The fundamental reason why there were other reasons for the decline of the system are that the military power was given to him, the already weak Senate, and the fact that Pompey was not the only player in the breakdown of the Republic due

The fall of the Roman Republic was caused by the expansion of Rome, and it’s class tension, the ruling of Julius Caesar, and all things that followed Julius Caesar’s

In the decade before Marius, the senatorial oligarchy, having been undermined by the various reforms posed by the tribunates of the Gracchi, was

From 509 BC to about 27 BC, Rome was considered a republic. During this time there was no single leader of Rome and the government was run by elected officials. The main leaders of the Roman Republic were the consuls. There were always two consuls in power at a time. Each year new consuls were elected to serve for a one-year term. This kept any one man from becoming too powerful in the government. At the time the Senate was the most powerful governing body in Rome. The Senate had control of the state’s finances and foreign policies. Senators were elected by the people to represent them in government. The Senate was made up of 300 of the most elite and wealthiest of the Roman Republic. One of the most important roles of the Senate to undergo the checks and balances of the Roman government. Checks and balances are the “principle of government under which separate branches are empowered to prevent actions by other branches and are induced to share power” (The Editors). The checks and balances of Rome helped to stabilize the government and allowed the power to be distributed somewhat equally between the consul, the Senate, and the people. However, the fall of the Roman Empire eliminated this type aspect of government in Rome (Kagan 101-103).

It was not one problem that brought the great and powerful Rome to its downfall. it was a collection of internal and external problems that surfaced simultaneously. Rome was once an united empire that flourished. They were masters at conquering places and they thrived in trade. Rome’s once notorius army started to slack off. Rome also faced a series of invasions.

In 132 BCE, Tiberius Gracchus was elected tribune of the plebs. Tiberius proposed massive land reform that would break up some plots owned by the wealthy and powerful and give it to poor and landless Roman landlords. Naturally, this legislation was supported by the plebeians and opposed by the wealthy patricians. The Senate was especially opposed to this proposal. Therefore, there was a large clash (relatively unheard of in the past) between the Senate and a tribune. The other consul, Octavius, blocked Tiberius’ proposal using his power as tribune to block any business. Tiberius was able to use his power as tribune to extraordinarily remove Octavius from office. This was unprecedented to use these powers for this purpose and it purported to open the Pandora’s box for other politicians to use their powers in extraordinary ways to subvert Roman republicanism. Tiberius was killed but his brother Gaius came to power as tribune nine years later to carry the mantle for populism. Gaius expanded his populism past land reform into cheap grain and making juries in corruption trials come from the equestrian and not senatorial class. Because

The citizens of Rome needed to pay heavy taxes in order to finance Rome’s armies. The taxes weakened the economy making trades suffer. Farmers couldn’t compete with rich families leading for them to go into the city, hoping for work. Infamous emperors would waste money and crime rates rose, making the streets unsafe.

Tiberius Gracchus and Cicero were two men who were both concerned with wellness of the citizens of Rome; however, they had different opinions on the best way to achieve political advancements. Throughout the different generations of the two men, the same issues plagued Rome, and throughout their lifetimes the separate factions of the senate became more polarized as they continued to disagree about the fate of Rome. Cicero wrote letters to his friends and family which today offer great primary information about what it was like in Rome during the late republic. In our virtual reality game, Saeculum, I get firsthand insight into the issues that plagued Rome when my clients come to me with the issues of land, food, and water. I am tasked with

Livy lived about one and a half centuries after the tribunes of the Gracchi however his writing is still considered a primary source. His factual and unbiased writings on the Gracchi concur that Gaius’s introduction of controversial bills led to tensions between Gaius and the senate. Tiberius had a similar relationship with the senate, however, he had focused on the single land bill which was enough to anger the senate of that time. The senatorial anger was heightened by both brothers avoiding senate approval and going straight to the tribal assembly to pass their laws.

Subsequently, the system was corrupted because weak or vulnerable individuals were associating with men in power; in exchange of support, and loyalty, for the sake of protection, which broke the Democracy. Socrates said, “Democracy elevates men to positions of authority not because of their wisdom or their fitness to govern, but because of their ability to sway the masses with empty rhetoric. In Democracy, it is not truth that matters; it is public relations.” That is exactly what it was happening in the Roman Republic.

It is clear that the dynamics that characterized Rome’s society during the Republic were never easy. There was a constant push and pull of intentions and interests between Patricians and Plebeians. The Patricians always wanting to maintain economic and political supremacy while the Plebeians were in constant

As Rome was facing attacks from the outside there was an even deeper problem happening from within and it was their economy. Rome’s constant war and overspending in building its empire was becoming costly. As their treasury depleted they decided to impose hard taxation to account for the new expense they were generating. Which actually caused many people who were apart of the upper class to move to the countryside to avoid the oppressive taxes(Andrews) . Another economic problem is that inflation began to occur. Marcus Aurelius increased the copper content of the silver coins and then after that there was even more severe inflation on it way(Starr 144-145). A third problem with the economy, also politically, was that there was an ever growing expansion of bureaucracy. The expansion of their government caused more and more officials to have to be paid. Not to mentions cities already were having a hard

     Two problems facing the late Roman Empire was the instability and non unification caused by inner family civil wars. Rome's rapid expansion, after the Punic Wars, resulted in changes that permanently divided the state. Both Aristocrats and Plebeians wanted total control of Rome and tried to destroy each other. Civil war was the the only way to solve problems in politics. Consequently, the power of the military became strong. Control of Rome's armies changed from the government to the generals because the soldiers began to listen to their generals rather than to the Government. On dismissal from military service, the soldiers had no farms to return to, and they

Classical authors were indeed mainly explaining the events through the deeds of the Gracchi and their consequences, and their view has strongly influenced traditional historians, who approached the period in a similar vein, focusing on the Gracchi while downplaying socio-economic factors and cultural background. Machiavelli states that Tiberius’ ambitions ‘to share honours and belongings with the nobility (…) gave birth to contention over the Agrarian law, which in the end was the cause of the destruction of the Republic’ . For Scottish historian Adam Ferguson, the distinctions of rich and poor are necessary and he deems Tiberius’ policies to have been ‘impracticable and even dangerous’, making him responsible for undermining the authority of the Senate . James Harrington concedes that the agrarian laws were an attempt to restore the republican ‘balance of justice’, but blames the Gracchi to have resorted to forcible means unto the recovery of this balance, producing even worse effects . This ‘conservative’ view did not go unchallenged, as other commentators were inclined to praise the Gracchi’s attempt to reform Roman society. For Jacobite Nathaniel Hooke, Tiberius Gracchus was ‘the most accomplished patriot that ever Rome produced’, aimed to produce measures to secure ‘that equality so necessary in a free state’ . The Gracchi even became a source of inspiration to later leftist thinkers: a famous French egalitarian revolutionary took the name of Gracchus Babeuf in reference to the Gracchi. However, whether the Gracchi were praised or vilified, the historical narrative was still focused on their ‘great