Eli Pritchard
Professor Delores Davison
Hist 004A
20 July 2016
The Brother Gracchus
The actual amount of time both of the Brother Gracchus served as Tribune in Rome was only a total of two years collectively (Tiberius 133-132 and Gaius 123-122). Two years is extremely short time frame for two proto civil rights figures like the Gracchus brothers that affected the Roman Republic political structure till its end. Tiberius the older of the two Gracchus brothers, a major proponent of agrarian reform in Rome served as plebeian Tribune until ideas became his undoing. Tiberius successor (and important in his own right) Gaius Gracchus carried on the politics of Tiberius; moreover he fought for Latin citizenship. Altogether Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus had 3300 followers a true indicator of their influence, mostly owing 3000 to Gaius alone (1). Sometimes all it takes is a measly two years to change history, in the case of the brothers Gracchus the impact of their brief service(and quick martyrdom) stands as testament to their revolutionary reforms that shook the bedrock of the Roman power structure.
Biography
Who were the Gracchus brothers? And more importantly why were they so fervent about reform? The answer to who were Gracchus brothers lay in somewhat modest upbringing (by patrician standards) of both Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus and his younger sibling Gaius Sempronius Gracchus. Both Tiberius and Gaius were born somewhere around 169 BCE (1) to a less than ideal patrician family. The mother of the Gracchus brothers, Cornelia belonged to the patrician Scipios family (1), but their father was of plebeian descent (unfortunately not much is known about the father of the Gracchus brothers). Both Tiberius and Gaius were primarily raised by Cornelia after the early death of the father of the Gracchus brothers. Cornelia herself was seen as an ideal Roman woman due to her strict commitment to raising her children, even refusing a marriage offer from King Ptolemy VIII of Egypt (1). This humble upbringing amongst the political elite of Republican Rome under the care one of the most respected Roman women of the time may have played a role in the later progressive reforms of the Gracchus brothers.
Tiberius Gracchus would be the first of the Gracchus brothers to serve as Tribune in the Roman Senate. After he served in the military against Carthage and a stint as a Quaestor in Spain (1) Tiberius Gracchus was made Senate Tribune in 133 BCE (2).
When Tiberius took the seat of Senate Tribune he was faced with the shrinking power of the Senate due the growing power of rich landowners in Republican Rome. Tiberius Gracchus perhaps in part because of his humble upbringing(more on this later) was highly sympathetic to the soldier/plebeian class who as he himself put it, “Have not a lump of earth they call their own”(Hunt, Lynn 159). What Tiberius proposed was a mass land reform that would strengthen the power of the Senate by redistributing land to the plebeian class, therefore breaking up the patrician monopoly. The land reforms and proposed use of the Attalid Kings gift(2)to create new farms would be seen as controversial at the time, furthermore Tiberius bid for re-election(the Senate forbid consecutive terms) would be met with fierce opposition. Tiberius’s revolutionary policies however would prove to be his undoing when he was murdered by a mob of senators in 133 BCE (1). Tiberius would go down as a Martyr, yet the legacy of Tiberius would only come to an end with the younger Gracchus brother Gaius.
The Younger of the Gracchus brother Gaius Sempronius Gracchus would come to power following the death of his brother Tiberius. Gaius was elected as Senate Tribune in 123 BCE (the same position as his brother) and would hold a position in history similar to his older brother. Both Tiberius and Gaius held the same plebian sympathesis, reform minded politics and the desire to strengthen the Senate. Gaius would propose even more controversial reforms like subsidized prices for grain, colonization and Roman citizenship for native Italians. Out all of Gaius reform the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back was the equite juries. Gaius seeked to employ equestrian juries who had separate convictions (commercial mainly) from those of the land owning senators, therefore creating an impartial judiciary branch to enforce laws onto the senators. Gaius Gracchus would however find himself sharing a nearly identical fate as his older brother Tiberius. Gaius’s reforms were blocked by the Senate in 121 BCE (2) and again history would repeat itself with an only slight twist. Gaius died at the hands of slaves instead of another mob of senators like his older brother. The death of the Gracchus brothers would foretell the political strife of the perfect incubus for the Roman Empire that was the twilight years of the republic.
Political effects
The after effects that ensued in the post Gracchus Roman politics led to the development of factionalism. The obvious division of wealth and representation made clear by the deaths of Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus smothered Roman political unity, thus the populares and optimates factions were born. The populares faction was more attached to the common population, meaning plebeians and Italians. On the other hand the optimates or, “the best”(2) would represent the landowning elite in the patrician class. The further political division of Rome along class in the form of faction would govern the political maneuvering that led to the Roman Empire.
The post-Gracchus factionalism that divided Rome was key tool in the political maneuverings of several of the Roman military elite leading up to Caesar. Gaius Marius and Lucius Cornelius Sulla both used factionalism to their advantage for sordid political reasons. Marius played to both the populares and proletarians in Rome mainly because the elite of Roman society, the optimates who disapproved of him (possible because he was an equite). Specifically Gaius Marius curried favor with the proletarian faction by allowing them to serve in the Roman military. Factionism was not only used to gain favor, but like the case of Lucius Sulla it was the main source of division. Sulla’s use of proscription to gather wealth and eliminate his political enemies backed the Roman Senate into a corner until it caved in and gave Sulla the title of dictator. To what end did Sulla pursue wealth and power? Well besides personal gains, Sulla reorganized the Senate along more optimate lines making them the ruling faction. The competition to cement or play a singular Roman faction would continue until the first triumvirate up until the formation of the Roman Empire, merely one of the unforeseen effects of the Gracchus brother’s martyrdom.
Civil Rights
The reforms of both Tiberius Gracchus and Gaius Gracchus in the context of Republican Rome are so radical that they border on proto-civil rights figures. Tiberius and Gaius were nobility advocating for agrarian laws that would alleviate the burden of the plebeian population. Tiberius measure to use the king of Attalid’s lands to redistribute land amongst the large poor and veteran population of Rome would prove to be one of many agrarian laws for plebeian equality. Likewise Gaius Gracchus was trying to secure rights for the large Latin/Italian population of Rome despite the senator’s chagrin. Despite Gaius fervent support of the equites (mainly to gain influence amongst the second most powerful class in Rome), Tiberius and Gaius both sought to secure land reform on behalf of the massive plebeian population of Rome.
Tiberius’s service as military Tribune in Carthage and as Quaestor in Spain tints his motivations in rallying for plebeian agrarian rights. Tiberius motivation stems from a combination of early disillusionment with the Senate and a genuine desire to alleviate poverty while strengthening the Roman military. Tiberius’s distant relationship with the Senate began in 137 BCE when acting as Quaestor in Spain under Hostilius mancinus the Senate, purposefully disrupted negotiations with Carthage (1). Acting upon the elder Scipio’s instruction the Senate choose to interfere with Tiberius effort to negotiate the safe return of the Roman army trapped in Numatia. Despite the Senate’s interference Tiberius skills as a negotiator in Spain was well received, in turn Tiberius Gracchus was elected to Tribune of the plebeians in 133 BCE (1). Tiberius plebeian sympathies from his military background combined with his distaste for the patrician’s class of the Senate led him pursue a series of aggressive radical agrarian reforms. Partly genuine and partly an effort to create a larger military recruitment pool by increasing the number of landowning families. The reforms of Tiberius would prove to be too radical, leaving them to be continued by his brother Gaius.
Gaius Gracchus was soon tasked with carrying on his brothers reforms as Tribune of the plebeians after his older brother’s death. Gaius however worked fiercely to secure rights for the Latins in Rome his reasoning combination disillusionment with the Senate (like Tiberius) and revenge. Gaius similarly to Tiberius also served in Spain in 134 BCE under his cousin Scipio aemilianus in the campaign in Numatia (1). Gaius strained relationship with the Senate began in 126 BCE when unsuccessfully opposed a measure that would deport Rome of non-citizen settlers (1). The Senate in turn decided to punish Gaius by sending him off to Sardinia as quaestor, however this was short lived as Gaius abandoned the post within a year (probably due to the death of Tiberius). Gaius soon took over as Tribune of the plebeians using his position to carry on the agrarian reforms of his brother Tiberius. What’s unique about Gaius stint as Tribune of the Plebeians was his fight to secure Latin citizenship which gives him more credence as a proto civil rights figure. What’s not clear however is why Gaius would try to curry favor with the Equites? Perhaps mainly to try to gain leverage over a Senate he resented. Some combination of revenge and genuine concern may have served as fuel for Gaius’s reforms, despite that both Gaius and Tiberius are curiosities due their compassion for the lower class citizens of Rome.
Influence on modern world
What significance does the story of Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus to the modern world? The lessons are unclear. The influence of the brothers Gracchus on the modern world is hard to quantify, perhaps the only really influence is their tragedy depicted by Plutarch in Parallel lives. Plutarch in his work The Parallel Lives retells the life of both Tiberius and Gaius, however what is different is the interplay of Greek dramatization. The death of the younger brother Gaius is especially graphic as Plutarch retells his beheading and the filling of Gaius head with molten led (3). To measure the influence of the Gracchus brother’s sacrifices in the context of their own draws an easy conclusion of their exact influence. In context my own time I can really draw no other than the prose written down by Plutarch that carries on the meaning behind the life of the brothers Gracchus today.
Conclusion
The morals to be taken away from the two years that Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus served as plebeian are unclear. The Gracchus brothers came to the rank of Tribune with the best intentions to help the long suffering plebeian population, yet left Rome a place fervent factionalism. Gaius Shared and equal sense of resentment of the Senate (more specifically the patrician class) with older brother Tiberius, but always maintained sympathy with the marginalized classes they represented. So even with these good intentions and with some of these smart agrarian reforms being instituted why did the Senate tear itself apart over the brothers Gracchus? The answer lies in the Roman power structure. Roman democracy being an early form of democracy lacked a truly equal representative government, moreover when the brothers Gracchus wanted to challenge the land monopoly the patrician had they drew to much ire(like any good civil right figure should). Gaius Gracchus especially gained too much senatorial, plebeian and equite support further separating the Senate along factional lines and risking his life with every new proposal. The Brother Gracchus truly opened Pandora’s Box by challenging the status quo as a member of the Roman nobility. While the reforms they had worked for inevitably did not all come to fruition, the combined challenge to a top heavy Roman power structure ensured that Gracchus would indeed change the history of Rome.
Bibliography
Hazel, John. Who’s Who in the Roman World. London: Routledge, 2001.
Plutarch, and Bernadotte Perrin. Plutarch’s Lives. London: Heinemann, 1920.
Hunt, Lynn. The Making of the West: Peoples and Cultures. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005.
