However, since its inception in this system revealed its shortcomings and abuses. Real considerations, objective, did not prevail against the sympathy and personal inclinations, developers! necessarily so, a government crony. But in the meantime, the families of the new nobility had consolidated its position so that it was not so easy to shake. Leaving aside the fact that great masses voted already in the habit of known and celebrated names, they exploited with great success the economic advantages offered them political influence, to reduce to a state of subordination to the bottom and in need of the people. The voluntary clientele, which was based on material support of the employer and the associated political support to customers in the Assemblies, was taking an increasing extent. And since this relationship was not based on coercion outside of a law, but it was always the appearance of spontaneity, the more firmly tied to the parties.
Further, although such relationships between high and low, social differences were becoming more pronounced. The steady increase of possession was now also accompanied by their natural historical consequences - cultural. The owner was away from the old and simple peasant customs. The clash with peoples of the highest cultural level Carthaginians, Greeks, Egyptians and Asians also taught the Romans to appreciate and care that culture. Just the representatives of the people and the lords of trade were more opportunities to meet and transplanting their products in the soil. His manner, his tenor of life, took a cut Hellenic, as Appius Claudius had wanted to confer on Rome. The common man, he could not, of course, still part of such manners, all that huge jump in sight. He began to consider that people who showed up, spoke and felt quite differently from yours, and privileged as superior beings, who could rightfully claim and veneration and benefits in the state. And if those superior beings deigned contact with the common man and give him some of their surplus, it was friendly and grateful to his lordship thought he had achieved everything he was entitled to claim. This feature, usually human, to grovel in the external pomp, this need to reflect the splendor down, is what explains the successes particularly, variously incomprehensible, the new nobility in the voting. Therefore, neither the introduction of the secret ballot entirely filled the people's assemblies in hopes that she had stood. Even leaving aside the fact that customers expect special advantages from the success of their employers, were attached also with much of his heart to the personalities. Only the worst economic crisis could deter the people from the worship of their idols. The great orators, who in the last century of the republic wanted to knock down in the interest of the masses, the corrupt government of the nobility, that purpose also failed because they were presented as masters but as servants of the people and equal. Julius Caesar barely knew and failed to break the dominance of the new nobility, using the same means used by it.
Social equality, which once existed between large and small farmers and to rural serfs, was disappearing with the flowering of a new layer lordly, steeped in foreign culture. The distance, as everywhere, was filled by a middle layer, which is spoken very little in our sources. They were the people who live modestly, did not demand anything of the above, and were envied by those below. We know them more closely for their solid houses, but simple, discovered in large numbers in several places in Italy. But also among the wealthy had the most diverse grooves and nuances, such as has to produce any competition. The various interest groups sought to increase the share of profit of its components by the narrowing and possible restriction of their circles, and partly by using, in part by law, limits are stretched outwardly and documenting the existing differences and contrasts .
Two main groups of the ruling class attained special importance. One was the official nobility (nobilitas), bound specifically to high political office (seats). Because they also constitute an important power, as was the Senate, had his hands on the most effective policy to serve their own interests. Indeed, it was not possible, given the limited number of senators-the normal number was 300 -, to assure all those families belonging to a seat in the Senate. But class consciousness did not have his limit on the walls of the curia. The class concept was broader than the law. Even the noble less fortunate in his political career would have to defend their interests, with the support of relatives and friends, being considered by them, from the social standpoint as well, although not entitled to any honors belong, by law and tradition, senators, for example, the special robe, sandals Senate, the best seat in the circus. It is significant the existence of these privileges and of itself, particularly because special seats in public games had been agreed by the senators popular deliberation. This shows, at least, a significant setback in that spirit of democracy, which had emerged throughout the Roman imperialist policies. This award was voted on, which somewhat explains the fact, shortly after finishing the second Macedonian war (200 - 196), which immediately followed the second and decisive Punic War. Such condescension as the crowd was never explained at that time: in these wars the Senate had honestly earned the trust of the people both in the military and the diplomatic.
But the people continued demanding certain guarantees to prevent if possible the unlimited exploitation of the media and state resources on behalf of individuals. We have already noted the restriction of freedom of trade for the Senators. Next to that extent wrong about its purposes as ineffective, in execution, it was more important to the ban for senators to participate in state contracts and procurement, ie, in business between the State and, the individuals. The administration of the Roman Treasury was extremely short on job creation. Wherever it seemed possible, delivering both inflows of private expenditure, which hoped to collect taxes and credits or public works, instead receiving or paying a specified sum. In this way were rented Ostia salt-established by the State but the sale price of salt, the recovery of communal grazing leases, customs duties, taxes set to the provinces. The tenants were called publicani (publicans), and these taxes were paid under the State protection. The tickets were, of course, awarded to the highest bidder, the costs, in turn, the child, not just the most important, as the construction of large buildings and roads, but also insignificant, as the sacred geese feeding on Capitol Hill. In both cases, ie, for both revenues and expenditures are required to guarantee how certain level of assets. Expenses (supplies, public works, etc..), Could not be entrusted only to persons who are known "a priori" that would not need, for their plight, exaggerated to profit, which would have severely damaged the implementation of orders granted. The same guarantee was necessary for the collections. State finances should not be harmed by the possible bankruptcy of tenants (publicani), or excessive thirst for profit should lead to unjust oppression of the taxpayers. Therefore, only big business could go to those businesses profitable, even more, for companies as large as the task of collecting taxes from whole provinces, not enough credit not a single person, and so came with stock companies a large staff and trained, not unlike those of today.
For this system offered the Senate, undoubtedly great advantages, because it sure was ahead of its inputs and its work was greatly simplified. But taxpayers were less satisfied. For an old experience has shown that individuals concerned with his own money in tax collections, comes with much less power state contemplations. This, in general, recognizes that each contributor to a member of the social whole, part or, if it is provincial to an object of the sovereign people, to which attention must be certain. The state has to think of the future and know that greater momentary recovery for many years can destroy the country's tax potential, the particular tenant, however, holds the prey, provides only the duration of the contract, he naturally takes care much to renew if not to take advantage of it any more. In addition, individuals are less easy prey for frauds that employees of the State, especially as Roman officials were in office only a short time, the individuals most familiar with the wiles and tricks of bad payers, and particularly as between tenants were not uncommon dark "men of honor." The State therefore had reason to look though the faces of people with whom such contracts concluded, especially after dishonest tenants had resulted in serious injury. Senators would have been the best people to such leases, as the political career always presupposed the possession of an estate not insignificant and there was a guarantee against fraud and vulgar in honor of caste consciousness. That however, did well to exclude them from such business principle.
As the contracts concluded by the staff under the control of the Senate, the whole business could have become an internal matter of that body. Both parties had gathered in the same individuals, which would have, under the conditions of political morality then, deplorable results. Even now regarded, rightly, as some decent members of the public corporations that participate in community services. For the ban sought to prevent the Senate from becoming a large corporation, whose field it was operating throughout the territory under Rome. But over time it also evaded the ban or push through the presentation of nominees, who were content with a smaller share of the profits. Furthermore, the law affected only the Senators and not los1: Other members of the "nobilitas" means that from the social viewpoint, also belonged to the senatorial caste. So there was always plenty of scope for the cartels.
But even outside the nobility, had rich people can just make effective competition in the field of tax leases. This independent financial strength, he was not impeded in their freedom of movement or by obligations, not by caste bias in that field showed its superiority perhaps by the fact that he could devote all his time and his energies to such a class business.
This financial power, dominating the second layer of republican Rome, is ordinarily called the caste of gentlemen. This name is not, however, entirely appropriate and it is only in capitalist gentleman and were often gathered in the same person. Yes the wealthy Roman banker remembered more than his knightly dignity of their profession, this is not a strange phenomenon Not even by the most recent experiences. Under public law, the expression of knight fits only for 1. 800 people assigned by the appraisement of the censors, to the centuries of knights, but those people soon ceased to serve in the army cavalry. The Confederate cavalry Italic was much higher in quality v quantity, a Roman, so it is very willingly resigned to that citizen soldiers dearly. But in time it is needed, the traditional figure 1. 800 knights, who had the right to ride a horse owned by the state, seemed insufficient, so cough censors established, the assessment of property, the obligation for the richest citizens to serve in the cavalry with their own horse. Hence was formed the idea that belonging to the caste of gentlemen rested on a certain quantity of goods (about 80 thousand marks in the Republican era).
As to the caste of the senators belonged socially a large number of citizens who had nothing to do with the business of the Senate, similarly was awarded to the caste of gentlemen also many who had never ridden a horse, but which by its heritage or would have rendered the cavalry service. On the other hand, is ascribed to the caste of gentlemen, in the legal sense - government, large numbers of people who belonged to the caste socially Senate, as perhaps a member of the cavalry could come to occupy a bench or a bench in the Senate, without being immediately assigned to the nobility. In earlier times the senators voted to in the centuries of knights, and suffering that Gaius Gracchus only declared incompatible these two dignities. But that measure did not extend to the children, siblings and other relatives of senators, so, being established in economic conditions could be included in the class of knights. In using the word "gentleman", it is therefore always wonder if it is legally closed caste and privileged, ie 1. 800 members of the centuries of knights or the political party of the capitalists. In fact, the capitalists had the majority in the centuries of knights, so the two concepts could easily be filled.
Even when the class of knights was next to the senators the second, he missed so very soon you'd be jealousy and fighting. Senators had to warn the superiority of the gentlemen in business management, especially as they were, like them, hampered by legal prohibitions, the knights, on the other hand, were gnawing at the fact that they were available to Senators some heavy perks and distinctions, which aspired in vain greed and vanity. Especially on the occasion of the contacts required by business, could hardly avoid discrepancies. Officers and Senators were to stipulate contracts with the knights, and the lively haggling over the profit must necessarily cause great unrest and exacerbation. In extraitálicas possessions, in which both staff knights party wanted to ensure their profits, the two classes came to an often strained relations concern.
Governors (former consuls or former magistrates, called by this or propraetor proconsuls), only members of the nobility, had to rule on any disputes between taxpayers and tenants, and, moreover, had in the knights, from whose ranks came tenants, annoying their exploitative activities comptrollers. In the numerous trials for extortion cases against many Roman rulers and that one should have reason to try almost against each of them, the decision often depended on the statements of the tenants (publicani).
But despite all the fanfare and disagreements, both classes had to be mutually supportive. It was, therefore, a very clever stroke of genius leader of the proletarian movement, Gaius Gracchus, the break, by offering great benefits to the class of knights, the alliance between high political office (large landowners) and capital ( gentlemen). For both layers equally pernicious their discord was revolutionary at the time, but occasionally, aware of the danger, the more closely unite against the common enemy, the democratic movement - proletarian.
No comments:
Post a Comment