Download Toledo Bianca Toledo Miss Bergen, Mrs. Downer, Mrs. Ibrahim

Toledo 1
Bianca Toledo
Miss Bergen, Mrs. Downer, Mrs. Ibrahim
English 10-7, Latin-2, History M/W/F
16 October 2010
Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus
When the Gracchi name intertwined into the plebeian assembly, the Roman Republic
drastically changed. Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus became important figures during their time as
tribunes, creating tension between the senate and themselves. Their reforms and plans for Rome
created the tension which caused the first violent civil outbreak. Although scholars may argue
that the Gracchi brothers contributed to the fall of the Roman Republic, others would say that
their intentions were to better the Roman and plebian people.
The most benefitting reform set forth by Tiberius Gracchus was the Lex Sempronia
Agraria which allowed plebeians to own land and enlist in the army. The law stated that no
citizen can own more than five-hundred iugera per person, but the wealthier citizens ignored this
and used their land to put slaves into labor. Due to their ignorance, Tiberius proposed that any
excess land would be confiscated by the state and given to the plebeians. The purpose for his
reform was because he saw that it was greatly needed to set equality and give the plebeians an
unbiased set of rights. Respect was then gained by Tiberius Gracchus from the plebeians for
aiding them. He bettered the Roman society because it contributed to an increase of soldiers in
the army, and gave the men land of their own to fight for.
Toledo 2
Tiberius presented the Lex Sempronia Agraria in order to allow the plebeians the
opportunity of having a successful future. He attempted to make the plebeian life much more
easygoing, “The poor, who were thus deprived of their farms, were no longer either ready, as
they had formerly been, to serve in war or careful in the education of their children; insomuch
that in a short time there were comparatively few freemen remaining in all Italy, which swarmed
with workhouses full of foreign-born slaves” (Plutarch 145). The reform was meant to give
excess land, of the wealthier citizens, in small allotments to the plebeians. With countless wars
going on at the time, small allotments of land were granted to the plebeians which made them
eligible to enlist in the Roman army, as well as property to secure; Therefore, money, family, and
education would not be an issue. The Lex Sempronia Agraria did benefit the plebeians in a way
such that they definitely would not go bankrupt while they fought in the war, and the rich would
not buy out their lands.
With the opportunity of a fresh future and earning for future livings, the Lex Sempronia
Agraria is a reform thought out to be long-term and beneficial, “Some may have endorsed and
allowed their clients to vote for the Lex Sempronia Agraria because they had the foresight to
realize that land reform was desirable and necessary in the long run because it would preserve
not only Rome’s empire but oligarchic governance” (Burnstein 120). The Lex Sempronia
Agraria preserved control of the oligarchic governance, leaving no reason to revolt against
inequality. Though the reform took away from wealthy landowners, Tiberius was reasonable
enough to only confiscate any excess property, which is completely fair and necessary. When
excess land was taken away from richer landowners, it was given to the poorer, which came to
obey the law that no citizen can own more than five-hundred iugera. Therefore, there was no
Toledo 3
favoritism given to the plebeian assembly which Tiberius belongs to, but a sense of equality in
the Roman society.
The presentation of the Lex Sempronia Agraria set the changed path of Tiberius from
being selfish to selfless, “With issues yielding to alliances as the subject for study, his
persistence, previously taken as an indication of his selfless commitment to the cause of land
reform, has become a mark of his dedication to the interests of his ‘faction’” (Burnstein 227). It
is proven that Tiberius had become selfless because he took the initiative to aid those under him.
Although Tiberius had an unstable relationship with the senators, he fought rightfully for his
people rather than following through with the motive of personal vengeance. The new
perspectives of Tiberius’ good intentions and motives were shown, due to the obvious changes
from social and economic conditions to the workings of Roman Politics.
Gaius Gracchus’, the younger one of the two brothers, reforms intended good benefits,
although it may have had undermined the senate. Gauis Gracchus believed the undermining to be
necessary, “He believed that to rescue Rome from her troubles, it was necessary to weaken the
power of the senate, whose selfish and avaricious policy had brought on these troubles” (Morey
361). The power contained by the senate had more than they were allowed to have. For example,
when a senate was called to court, the jury was also made up of senators who defended the
defendant. Therefore, when any person, who was not a senate, was put to trial, was in a biased
position. The solution was to give equestrians a place in the jury to make the court fair, which
had given the plebeians a fair trial in court. This did benefit the plebeian people so that there
would not be any favoritism towards the patrician class. Hence, all citizens had an opportunity to
be tried at court in a fair and unbiased approach, under the supervision of equestrians, without
the avarice from those of the higher class.
Toledo 4
Due to the greed of markets claiming all the corn and grain, Gaius set forth a demolition
of the issue which benefitted the urban poor, “First of all, he tried to help the people by a law
which was really the most mischievous of all his measures. This was his famous ‘corn law’ It
was intended to benefit the poor population in the city, which was at that time troublesome and
not easy to control” (Morey 361). Despite the obstacles that came with the effort, Gaius
Gracchus proposed a reform that assured the urban poor that wealthy markets would no longer
be covetous. The Lex Frumentaria reform required the distribution of corn and grain among the
poorer citizens, which made the plebeians more than happy to re-elect Gaius as a tribune once
again. Although the law was not easy to control, the plebeians no longer had the burden of
having to provide food for their families and themselves. The respect given to Gaius was only
achieved in his efforts to help them.
Along with the plebeians, Italian allies were also a concernment in Gaius’ perspective.
Italian allies included Native Latins, Samnites, and Etruscans. Gaius Gracchus wanted to give
Italian allies full Roman Citizenship, which means they were exempt from special taxes and
were allowed to have a voice in the Roman political process. Although enfranchising the Italians
lead to his persecution, Morey stated, “He also believed the Latins and the Italians should be
protected, as well as the poor Roman citizens” (361). His approach was to protect the allies and
give them a voice in the Roman society as well. Gaius believed that the views of the Italian allies
would benefit Rome, and add to the word of the people. The addition of opinions from outside
citizens provided a solid and concrete consensus when it came to political decision making.
Gaius followed through with his proposal to include Italian allies only to benefit the state.
Despite the beneficial factors, it nonetheless, led to his death.
Toledo 5
After the death of both brothers, the senate removed their reforms regardless of the
beneficial characteristics. Removal of beneficial reforms led right back to the Roman Republic’s
previous state of corruptness which clearly proved their senatorial opponents were part of a
corrupt government. The brothers were recognized to have attempted to be heroic, “Thus in a
similar way, the two Gracchi, who had attempted to rescue the Roman people from the evils of a
corrupt government, perished” (Morey 363). The Gracchi brothers had several unnecessary calls,
but their intentions were for the good of all Roman people, richer or poorer. They did not act
upon favoritism, but brought up equality to match the patricians which caused the senate to not
look down on them. With that, the only plausible conclusion is that the senators prevented the
Roman Republic from reaching its potential chance of improvement.
The senators were imprudent and violent in comparison to the Gracchi brothers whose
intentions were only to rescue the Roman people. The senators did not only believe that violence
was necessary to keep the governmental traditions intact, but believed that it was acceptable in
these cases. Though the Gracchi brothers angered the senates, it was the senators who responded
in a violent approach rather than negotiation. If the senators had chosen the path of negotiation,
there would be composure in their relationship, which would have prevented turmoil. The first
violent civil outbreak was caused by the Gracchi brothers indirectly, but the situation would have
been handled more gently if only the senate had chosen to approach the situation differently. It
was all a matter of cause and effect, and the way the senate reacted to the situation was
unnecessary, for the Gracchi brothers’ intentions were well thought out. Each reform rescued the
Roman people all by distributing land, lowering grain prices, creating an unbiased court, and so
forth.
Toledo 6
In contrast to previous cases before the Gracchi brothers, the senate’s modus operandi
had been a peaceful process, not a violent one, “Certainly the assassination of Tiberius was the
first important civil outbreak in many years. It seems difficult, therefore, to try to explain why,
after so long a period of relatively peaceful politics, the senatorial opponents of Tiberius should
have become so disturbed by his program that, led by Scipio Nasica, the pontifex maximus, they
resorted to crude violence. The answer has usually been though a simple one” (Boren 358).
Considering the answers have previously been simple, it is certain that the senate was in a state
of corruptibility. Turning to the massacre of Gracchi’s supporters showed that the senators had
no sensibility whatsoever towards the people whom they represented. Senators resorted to
violence and anger for their own personal resentment towards both Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus.
The Gracchi brothers benefitted the state significantly; it was only the senate who intruded in an
innocent act of propitious reformation.
The first violent civil outbreak was not entirely the Gracchi brothers’ fault, for their
senatorial opponents were egocentric. The Gracchi brothers showed concernment towards their
people while the senate basked in selfish desires. Morey stated, “Hence with the death of these
reformers, the senate was restored to its previous position as the chief ruling body of the state.
The government became more corrupt than ever before. The senators ruled to enrich themselves,
while the real interests of the people were forgotten” (364). Though the Gracchi brothers may
have had selfish desires of their own, the senates acted upon their resentment and troubled the
Gracchi brothers. The Gracchi brothers were incomparable to the senate, because the senate did
nothing to benefit the state except return corruptibility in contrast to the Gracchi brothers who
proposed great impacts. Although the brothers’ reforms were caused by selfish desires, they
benefitted the Roman people regardless of their motives.
Toledo 7
Though the Gracchi brothers triggered a civil outbreak in the Roman Republic and
strayed from the corrupt government, their intentions were to aid the Romans bottom to top,
starting with the plebeians. The Lex Sempronia Agraria, presented by Tiberius and carried on by
Gaius, benefitted the plebeians long-term as well as the Roman army. Through the political
process of passing laws and new reforms, undermining the senate was a necessary turn in order
to benefit the well-being of the state. The well-being of the state lied in the hands of the Gracchi
brothers, not the inconsiderate and narcissistic senates. The Gracchi brothers are most recognized
for their unsuccessful events and how it contributed to the fall of the Roman Republic, though
they should be credited for their beneficial impacts.
Toledo 8
Works Cited
Bernstein, Alvin H. Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus: Tradition and Apostasy. United Kingdom:
Cornell University Press, 1978. Print.
Boren, Henry C. The American Journal of Philology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press, 196. Print.
Morey, William Carey. Outlines of Ancient History. Knoxville: American Book Company,
1906. Print.
Plutarch. The Parallel Lives: The Life of Tiberius Gracchus. Translated by John Dryden. Loeb
Classical Library Edition, 1921. Print.
Riddle, John M. Tiberius Gracchus: Destroyer or Reformer of the Republic? Lexington: D.C.
Heath and Company, 1970. Print.