Rome: Attempts at land reform in the last century of the republic

How to get out of that sea of evils? When, after the successful war against Carthage and the Hellenistic East, foreign policy and not continually disturbed the spirits, figures began to consider seriously the serious internal problem. The panacea they thought it lay in the restoration of ancient agricultural class held italics. He was still alive in the memory of all the irresistible force and strong popular that there had been until recently, so it was expected that the old trinity of "farmer, citizen and soldier would still be strong enough to stop the gradual economic decline . But here were not taken into account several points of importance.

The dreamers and idealists who harbored such plans and were honestly convinced of their achievement, belonging to the aristocracy. But they were a few white crows. If all the aristocracy would have thought the same way and would not shrink from the sacrifices necessary, the length and vitality of the aristocratic republic that was then essentially the character of the Roman State would have dragged on much, perhaps even for centuries . But the nobility was not capable of such sacrifice, such idealism is found only in some individuals, while the class never renounced its interests and privileges. Moreover, any sacrifice would have been useless, if Rome had not abandoned while his historic role, its global policy. A continuation in the way of conquering policy would inevitably reproduced in a short time the same evils. Such aspirations were, therefore, though inspired by noble intentions, completely regressive. Instead of aspiring to the highest form of culture and found a new social order based on the variety and harmony of the productive forces and receptive, they sought to escape through plasters, influences coming impetuously East, and at the same pile time increasing wealth, with whom he did not want nor could nor should start anything.

And also despised other circumstances those early proponents of Roman social reform. The unsustainability of the social conditions derived largely from the outdated ways of the Roman constitution. He was still in the realm of the City - State. Although possession of civil rights was independent of the home, its exercise was only possible in Rome, which had to exercise enormous attraction on rural populations, especially since, as noted often, participation in political life in the old had always strongly material aspect. The further away from Rome there lived a citizen, the less heavy in the life of the state. It was necessary to proceed with decentralization. More on this ran into an insoluble problem for the political experience of time. Only a genius could find a solution.

The first attempts at reform were unsuccessful, as the tribune of Licinius Crassus (145 d O), which wanted to distribute small plots of 1 3 / 4 acre. How to get the land should be planned to distribute, our sources do not need it. Shortly after a member of the Roman aristocracy, Laelius (140), the intimate friend of the most famous Roman of that time, African Scipio the Younger, destroyer of Carthage, presented a project worthy of consideration, which was later reconsidered under several application forms and many politicians as well-meaning but short-sighted, looking for the salvation of the Republic.

The state owned large tracts of land throughout Italy, especially in Campania. These public lands (ager public ") were cultured as explained on the basis of right of occupancy, not only by Roman citizens, but also by allies or confederates against payment of a tax on income, which in most the cases was not made. Even if every citizen had a right to such occupation, in reality, as we have seen, only those that had large capital were able to make use of that right. These available, then, large tracts of land, which were not his property but who are still members, from a strictly legal standpoint, to the State. Lelio proposed, with the progressive impoverishment of the masses, and restore the legal situation for needy citizens demand the restitution of land belonging to the State. But this claim really mean much. How could one expect the "civic sense" of aristocrats decided to return lands that they had added over generations and perhaps centuries, to his family estate in which they had already invested significant amounts of work and money and in many cases have turned deserts into fertile? But the issue did little way. Just Lelio had filed his suggestion, he rose quickly among the occupants of those lands a cry of indignation. The proponent noted with dismay the large extent of it and how to persist in this way would have led to an unprecedented and unexpected civil war. On the advice of his friends withdrew, therefore, its purpose and was, in thanks, the title of "judicious".

But only a few years had passed when the same thought held its resurrection, but this time advocated a strong and enthusiastic personality, also belonging to the nobility. Most often the drivers of the oppressed classes, aimed at their release, come from the ranks of the privileged and wealthy: Mirabeau, Sieyes, Lassalle and most of the current chiefs of socialism. Also the new host and head of the Roman proletariat, Tiberius Gracchus, he could, by birth and intelligence, fully participate in the feast of the lords. His father had occupied the highest public office, his mother, Cornelia, was the daughter of Scipio Major African, the man who had conquered the most dangerous enemy of Rome, the Carthaginian Hannibal (Battle of Zama, 202 ad O), breaking with this victory forever the power of Carthage. Tiberius Gracchus himself had already highlighted as an officer and quaestor, receiving clear evidence of popularity, so could go with the best catrera hopes the usual policy of the Roman nobility.

But his ambition was of a more noble. It was attracted by the material gain, wanting, instead, do something great. When he returned to Rome after military service, was among the lowest urban plebs some old comrades in arms, unworthy of traffic delivered to their civil and political rights. How deep was your impression arises in the most eloquent of his impassioned speech in favor of agrarian reform. "The wild beasts," said Tiberius in that famous speech, "who live in Italy, each have their lair, his bed, his hideout on the contrary, people who fight and die for Italy, own nothing except the light and the air. It i's seen wandering homeless with their wives and their children lie when our generals in the heat of battle urge soldiers to defend the temples and tombs on the enemy. Is there, perhaps, some of many Romans, who still holds the sacred altar of his family or the tomb of their elders? These so-called masters of the world, who do not own or a speck of land, fighting and dying for the lust and wealth of others. "

Tiberius Gracchus in this field was a task worthy of his warm heart and noble spirit. At the age of 30 years (134) presented its candidature for the Tribune, was elected and then, according to a circle of highly esteemed classmates, intelligent v generous, prepared to endorse the plan Lelio, withdrawn by the same author. Contrary to custom, Tiberius presented the project directly to the popular assembly, without prior notice to the Senate for its views and possible changes. By law Hortensia your procedure was perfectly legal, but from a political standpoint, Tiberius had acted recklessly. The strength of the aristocracy was all the more bitter given that its parent body, the Senate, had been mortified at one of their most important but usurped. Moreover, Tiberius had to think it offered fewer difficulties to proceed without consent against the will of the Senate. The discussion in the Senate would have led to limited and reduced, whereby the law would have lost much of its effectiveness.
The bill submitted by Tiberius Gracchus demanded that no Roman citizen or Confederate could hold more than 500 hours of public land (125 hectares), adding 250 days (62 1 / 2 hectares) for each of the two older children. Land and property rescued became free and were also required to agree to the former occupants a convenient compensation for improvements made. The land thus became the property of the State, should be divided into batches of 30 hours (7 1 / 2 acres) each and given to needy citizens, but not title, but as possessing inalienable and tax-free.

Tiberius Gracchus sought, as follows from the law, take into account also, if possible, the interests of the wealthy. From all appearances, even proposing something entirely new, but only the application of an old law which included the above provisions, perhaps it was again put into force the same basic law on communal lands, eventually fall into oblivion. Violent resistance from landowners reveals the extent to which those provisions had been violated. Yes Tiberius wanted to let those landowners, in addition to their private property, also the considerable increase of 125 - 250 hectares of state land, this means that large groups were still available for delivery. So great storm would not have been triggered by a few small assignments! But all resistance was futile. In large groups came to Rome, from campaigns to give their vote, farmers already failed or were on the brink of ruin, indeed, the enthusiastic dreamer inflamed eloquence succeeded in lighting his idea also to the urban proletariat, awakening in this aspiration for a life worthy of man and the abandonment of the idle life of guest.

Although the people did not save their applause for the words of the tribune, the adoption of the law was not as smooth and simple as Tiberius had imagined in his sanguine temperament. At the time of the vote was one of his colleagues, Marco Octavio, belonging, as Gracchus, the nobility, brought, based on its right tribune, the veto ( "intercessio") and repeated when Tiberius summoned shortly afterwards a second assembly for the same purpose. As this power of veto contained in the Constitution, Tiberius, if I wanted to stay in the realm of legality, he had no recourse but to defer reform next year. But this was not to his liking. In their fanatical enthusiasm for his law and firmly convinced that she could have stopped the increasing impoverishment of the masses, decided to break up opposition Octavio by going against the Constitution. Therefore proposed to the People's Assembly deprive Octavius of his office of Tribune. This procedure was certainly unheard of, but not unconstitutional per se, unless they mediate the veto of Octavio also against this motion, you have to admit that it happened. We proceeded, however, the vote, the town had already excited both by their driver, who declared deposed Octavius, choosing instead a staunch supporter of Tiberius. Thus eliminating the only opposition supported by the Constitution, tribes overwhelmingly passed the Farm Bill, but omitted the provision about compensation to occupiers for the improvements made to land. Unable to establish if Tiberius adopted this amendment the original project because of the irritation due to resistance from the owners or because of fears that the claim for damages reach so high that it is impossible to satisfy. The law was therefore more hated even by the landlords.

Reached the first hit, appeared immediately the real difficulty: the implementation of the law. On the one hand Tiberius had a windfall. With the single allocation of land to people lacking the means of life had not secured its economy. Lacked the tools, seeds and the means to live until the next harvest. This required such large sums of money that had never been required in Roman domestic politics and the State Fund could hardly sustain. In this urgent situation salvation came from the fact that Attalus III, king of Pergamum (Asia Minor), devoted friend of the Romans, had just died (133), leaving as heir to his vast fortune to the Roman people. This was stated at least in Rome, while the national party in that country claimed to be false will. Anyway, the fact is that shortly after acceptance for the project came to Rome graquiano Pergamon ambassador for the delivery of inheritance, and Tiberius then put his hand on it, proposing to the Assembly used heavily in those purchase everything you need for new agricultural locations, The nobility objected, using the lowest average and even spreading the stupid gossip that the ambassador had delivered Pergamon Tiberius regal in purple, but the tribes approved the proposal with great enthusiasm, as this solved also this pressing issue.

From easy solution was not, however, a second drawback, ie setting the land to be distributed. This was a very complicated task, since public lands were in many cases for centuries held by individuals. Because the state had long since stopped demanding the rent lawfully due him, he had erased almost entirely from the general consciousness the boundary between private property and the state, so it was not unusual for the change of ownership by purchase - sale. It was therefore necessary to examine the files of the State to establish what land had been delivered after every war won, as free to the public property and what had been, at least formally, the collective property of the State. This task required not only acumen and willpower, but also understanding and great care. Tiberius had appointed for that purpose by the People's Assembly to a three-member Commission, which should immediately take the challenge. Besides himself, the Assembly appointed his brother, Gaius, then very young, and his father, Appius Claudius, whose ancestor paved to Rome, as amended, the road to empire. From energy, ability and selflessness of these three men could be expected carry out its mission under the law, but the composition of the Commission by close relatives of the proponent did nothing but increase the existing irritation in the ranks of the wealthy. The Commission was treated with derision by the Senate, you were denied the diets that are usually allocated to employees for special functions outside the capital, and was set compensation did not exceed the salary of a laborer. Tiberius and his men stationed themselves on the work without being drawn into feuds as futile and insidious, but when his work is just beginning to move, the activity of Tiberius Gracchus was quickly and violently curtailed.

Tiberius Gracchus knew how great was the irritation it caused among the powerful and the annihilation of his person was fervently desired by the Roman aristocracy. He still protecting the inviolability tribunicia as a strong shield that would have returned to the head of the projectile shooter for the Tribune. Tiberius was decided, therefore, to resubmit his application for the tribune for the following year. Apparently this was not contrary to existing laws, but to custom, to touch and political decency. Annual fees for other waiting periods were arranged in the sense that an officer was out of the nomination during the year of their duties. Although the tribune did not fall between the judiciaries covered by that law, was deemed too natural that the tribunes, as in reality were no longer regarded as private servants of the people, but of all people, had to abide by the rules general, as had happened a long time in the past. The second application of Tiberius shocked, then, at least against the common law generally recognized. Even in the same college of the tribunes, basically inclined to Tiberius, not dared in the election day, despite the consent of the people, ignore the violent protests of the opponents.

The election was postponed for the next day and Tiberius was prepared to repel possible riots by force of the enemy. In fact, even before the voting begins tumult rose strongly, because the Senate had also mobilized their supporters. The Senate, meeting in a temple near the polling place, was in wait to escape at the right time, and under the guise of legality, the hated tribune. Spreading gossip is more awkward: it is often said that Gracchus sought to preserve the tribune without any choice, now that, as with Octavius, he had declared deposed all his colleagues. When Tiberius, in a moment, touched her head to indicate the risk of his life, his enemies interpreted this gesture as meaning that he claimed the royal diadem. It was the most stupid invention, it was enough for the nobility terribly exasperated. Your speaker in the Senate, Scipio Nasica, demanded the death of Tiberius, and when the presiding consul would not accede to this wish sacrilegious full advantage of the nobility went tumultuously the temple under the direction of Nasica and assailed the starting - Tiberius rivers, using pieces of chairs, walking sticks and other similar weapons. Graco's supporters had not even imagined such an attack and did not dare to receive the most illustrious personages of the state with the same weapons and even to contain them. It stopped the slaughter like timid sheep, besides their chief, 300 of his supporters covered the field (133 d C.). The aristocracy was triumphant.

Continued to maintain the legend about the vagaries of slain monarchical and treated him as well as its adherents as guilty of high treason. Tiberio's body is challenged the funeral and many of his followers were indicted for conspiracy against the republic lots were strangled in prison, while the murderer, Nasica Scipio was awarded the dignity of Pontifex Maximus.