TIBERIUS GRACCHUS - PART III
After the murder of Tiberius Gracchus by a gang of armed Senators led by the Pontifex Maximus, Rome reached an uneasy peace. Remarkably, the Lex Agraria remained the law, and the land commission tasked with allocating parcels to veterans was properly funded. The Senate had made their point with the murder, and any additional resistance was likely to inflame the populari further, leading to more destruction and societal dysfunction.
The Pontifex Maximus, Cornelius Scipio Nasica, was brought up on murder charges. While he tried to frame his actions as a religious act to rid Rome of a tyrant, the Romans didn’t buy it. He had violated the sacrosanctity of a tribune, and killed his first cousin, no less! But rather than being convicted, Nasica was assigned as a delegate to Pergamon to oversee the transfer of King Attalaus III’s bequest to Rome. This was, in effect, a banishment, though, and Nasica died one year later in disgrace.
The Tiber River, ignominious final resting place of both Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus.
No other senators were ever prosecuted.
The dream of Tiberius wasn’t dead, however. In fact, it, and the conflict around it, had only just begun. A decade later, the Republic would descend further into chaos as his fiery younger brother Gaius took up the mantle of the populari. His proposals were much more ambitious than his brother’s and included citizenship for provincials, restrictions on capital punishment, price-fixing of grain, limits on military conscription and much more. It should not come as a surprise that Gaius met the same violent end as his brother. But the Senate had wised up by this point and hired thugs to kill him, rather than doing the deed themselves.
The Gracchi Brothers would have the last laugh, however. They, along with their chaste and upright mother Cornelia, were greatly revered by the people immediately following their deaths and for centuries afterwards. Multiple statues of the brothers were erected, and one built for Cornelia marked the first time a non-mythical Roman woman had been so honored.
So why is Tiberius Gracchus so important? Four reasons stand out.
1. He advocated for land reform. This may seem like a boring bit of policy, but it was a huge problem that affected tens of thousands of people and desperately needed a resolution. By the 2nd century BC, Rome had grown wealthy with plunder from its conquests, but this wealth was not reaching the masses. Tiberius knew this imbalance would destroy the empire, not simply because of its inherent inequality but also due to the negative impact it had on military recruitment since only landowners could fight in the legions. He resolved to do something about it, even if it cost him, which it did.
2. He introduced populism into Roman politics. Never had someone fought so vociferously for the people and wielded them like a weapon. This would start a trend of populist politicians including leaders like Gaius Marius and Saturninus that would culminate in the reign of Julius Caesar whose popularity with his soldiers, in particular, was a key reason for his ascension.
3. Tiberius introduced violence to the political process. You could perceive this as a negative, but as I’ll argue below, he’s no less a hero for taking this path. In the tumultuous century that followed, violence was a tool wielded by strong men from both the populari and the optimates. Thousands would die, if not more, as the Republic entered its final convulsions. But in many ways, this violence was necessary to dismantle the Republic and clear a path to a greater peace.
4. Tiberius Gracchus obliterated the mos maiorum - the way things had always been done - and paved the way for others to do the same. Once one custom fell, they were all at risk. Traditions were fine in the sense they furthered the goals of the empire, but most of the social norms solely benefitted the optimates who employed them to protect only their own interests.
With these actions, Tiberius Gracchus set the Republic on a century-long tumble into the abyss. While he can’t be solely blamed for its collapse, his unprecedented actions exposed deep divisions and, critically, the state’s inadequacy at addressing the needs of its citizens. It’s likely the Republic would have fallen without Tiberius, but perhaps with much more bloodshed than ultimately occurred. At any rate, he started the ball rolling in spectacular fashion.
The remains of the Temple of Concordia, erected without irony by the optimates after the death of the Tiberius Gracchus
The republican form of government worked well for Rome when it was a relatively small city-state, but as its land holdings and wealth grew, it proved woefully inadequate to address the needs of its people and the challenges brought about by its many wars. Conquered tribes would revolt on multiple fronts, disgruntled plebians would march in the streets, corrupt elites gamed the system, and famine was an omnipresent risk. The Republic couldn’t handle these simultaneous stresses and still deliver the promise of peace and prosperity to its citizens. Something had to give.
And Tiberius Gracchus gave it. That’s why I regard him as a hero.
Granted, advocating violence may not be characteristic of a hero. But here we must be careful not to impose our 21st century morals on the ancient world. Rome was violent owing to war, brutal justice, slavery and more. It was inevitable that this frame of mind would influence the empire’s politics. The greater surprise may be why it hadn’t happened sooner. But beyond violence being relatively normal, Tiberius used it for noble reasons which I’ll address below. It was among the most effective tools at his disposal, and he was careful only to support it rather than advocate for it
The Capitoline Hill was the site of a riot that followed the murder of Tiberius Gracchus. Obviously, it would have looked very different back then.
As one of the optimates, Tiberius operated against his self-interests in advocating reform. His family was among the most elite and honored in Roman society. He was wealthy beyond belief and could have easily lived within the comfortable confines of his class. But Tiberius was a patriot. He believed in the promise of Rome but also saw that its trajectory, littered as it was with corruption and dysfunction, was unsustainable. He was a man of deep resolve who put himself at great personal risk to help his country. It may be a mistake to regard him as a 'man of the people'; rather, that was simply the injustice that needed correcting at the time. It’s not difficult to imagine him advocating for a patrician cause if the populari were the ones endangering the empire. His singular focus was the success of Rome.
Now, this is solely my opinion. Scholars are divided. Some buy into the idea that Tiberius Gracchus really did want absolute power, that he was shamelessly inciting the populari to achieve this goal. They cite the support of the families of the 20,000 soldiers he saved from the Numantines. This was a huge client base that would propel him to higher political office as a Tribune. I think both things can be true, though – his motives were sincere, and he took the opportunity to gain political power to advance them. Nothing I’ve read supports the idea that he sought absolute power, but as with all of ancient history, we’ll never be certain.
It should be clear by now that Tiberius Gracchus didn’t singlehandedly destroy the Roman Republic. Rather, he was the first rock to tumble in the landslide. The rest of the story is equally fascinating, and I highly recommend two books if you want to learn more. Each reads like a thriller and takes you right to the brink. First is Mortal Republic by Edward J. Watts. Next is The Storm Before the Storm by Mike Duncan, host of the exceptional podcast "The History of Rome," which started this whole obsession for me and easily inspired my answer to the question, ‘how often do you think about the Roman empire?’ My response: only constantly.
