Editing Gracchi brothers (section)

== Aftermath ==

=== Gracchan {{lang|la|leges agrariae}} ===

Tiberius' reforms were focused on the rural peasantry. They were not, however, "so much oppressed as eager (quite justifiably) to share in the increased economic prosperity brought by Roman imperialism".{{sfn|Gruen|1994|p=877}} In general, more recent scholarship has stressed that the ancient sources have exaggerated the extent to which the Roman yeoman farmers were in fact in decline.{{sfn|Perelli|1993|p=21}} Tiberius' reform law was not revolutionary, but his tactics in pursuit of it were, especially when they mobilised the assemblies which gave some genuine expression of the popular will.{{sfn|Perelli|1993|p=28}} Those tactics threatened "to break the oligarchic stranglehold on Rome's political system, thus leading to his demise".{{sfn|Gruen|1994|p=877}} This was exacerbated by Tiberius' use of social justice rhetoric, which further set him aside from his aristocratic brethren.{{sfn|Perelli|1993|pp=32–33}}

While substantial acreage was distributed as a whole, more than 3,268 square kilometres in the first few years of operation,{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|pp=252–54}} there is some debate to the extent to which the Gracchan land allotments were actually economically viable for the families placed atop them.{{sfnm|Perelli|1993|1pp=92–94, 148|Lintott|1994|p=346}} However, there are some indications that the lands distributed were used for pasture rather than intensive agriculture, even if they were suitable for farming.<ref>{{cite book |last=Uggeri |first=Giovanni |chapter=Le divisioni agrarie di età graccana: un bilancio |title=Dai Gracchi alla fine della Repubblica |editor-last1=Alessandrì |editor-first1=Salvarore |editor-last2=Grelle |editor-first2=Francesco |pages=31–60 }}</ref>

Gaius' role in land reform is more obscure; the sources are largely unclear on it except in mentioning offhandedly that he brought legislation on the matter.<ref>{{harvnb|Roselaar|2010|pp=241–42|ps=, citing Livy ''Per.'', 60.8; Vell. Pat., 2.6.2; Flor. 2.3.15.2.}}</ref> By the time of his tribunate, the census results of 125–24&nbsp;BC had been published and belief in a depopulation crisis had disappeared.{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|p=228}} His agrarian reforms likely did little more than grant the agrarian commission – of which he was still a member – the necessary jurisdiction stripped in 129&nbsp;BC.{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|pp=241–42}} He was, however, sufficiently visionary to see that further land exactions from Rome's allies would seriously damage their interests (and be politically infeasible).{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|p=243}} This led him, "one of the first to realise that the amount of land in Italy was insufficient to provide for all inhabitants of the peninsula", to pursue extra-Italian colonisation. This change in scope proved long-lasting and by the time of Caesar, it would be standard policy to establish citizen colonies outside the Italian peninsula, which "would in time prove the only adequate method of finding enough land" for Italy's growing populations.{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|pp=242–43}}

The Gracchan {{lang|la|leges agrariae}} continued in operation through their deaths until 111&nbsp;BC, which again overhauled Roman policy with public lands. Much of [[Lex agraria (111 BC)|this law]] survives to the present.<ref>Eg a critical edition of the [[Lex agraria (111 BC)|111&nbsp;BC ''lex agraria'']] in {{Cite book |last=Crawford |first=Michael |chapter=Lex agraria |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Pp98nQAACAAJ |title=Roman Statutes |volume=1 |date=1996 |publisher=Institute of Classical Studies |isbn=978-0-900587-67-2 |pages=113–80 }}</ref> Building upon those laws, it abolished the rents that Tiberius' law passed, making the lands fully private and alienable. By 111&nbsp;BC, most of the lands that could be distributed already had been; what was left over was "mostly pasture or land which had been assigned to specific people" through long-term leases or set aside for the purpose of providing money for road maintenance.{{sfnm|Roselaar|2010|1p=278|Santangelo|2007|2p=474}} The continuing increase of the Italian population, however, would trigger later proposals for land redistribution; especially notable is [[Julius Caesar|Caesar]]'s {{lang|la|lex agraria}} during his consulship in 59&nbsp;BC, which gave away the {{lang|la|ager Campanus}} to some 20,000 settlers, albeit on less generous terms. After this, it became increasingly clear that there was simply insufficient land in Italy to accommodate demand.{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|pp=286–87}}

Reassessments of the causes of the [[Social War (91–87 BC)|Social War]] have also trended toward viewing the {{lang|la|lex agraria}} as a major contributing factor. Land holdings in Roman-dominated Italy gave the Roman state a latent title to large swaths of land which had never been formally surveyed. While the Gracchan land commission quickly parcelled and redistributed lands in southern Italy that had been confiscated from the allies that had defected to [[Hannibal]] during the [[Second Punic War]], the older lands had been occupied for centuries.<ref>{{cite book |last=Mouritsen |first=Henrik |title=Italian unification |year=1998 |series=BICS Supplement 70 |publisher=Institute of Classical Studies |location=London |isbn=0-9005-8781-4 |pages=148 et seq }}</ref> Attempts, through to the start of the Social War, to press Roman claims on those lands – which "the allies assumed that they would be able to keep... as long as they did not rebel" – may have greatly undermined allied support for Roman hegemony.{{sfn|Roselaar|2010|p=289}}

=== Gaius' urban and administrative reforms ===

Gaius' reforms were broad and covered large portions of the republic's administration. Their main purpose was to advance the quality of Roman government, reducing extortion and corruption among the senatorial governors while acting within the bounds of what his contemporaries would have considered due process.{{sfn|Sherwin-White|1982|p=28}}

One of the elements best attested to is Gaius' {{lang|la|lex repetundarum}}, which reformed the {{lang|la|[[quaestio perpetua]]}} on provincial corruption with an equestrian jury to check senatorial governors. The law is preserved on a bronze tablet once owned by Cardinal [[Pietro Bembo]].{{sfn|Sherwin-White|1982|p=18}} While, in the long run, the equestrian jury would prove a political issue for the next half century, these reforms were not meant to set the senate and equites into conflict.{{sfn|Gruen|1994|p=878}} Nor were they some kind of programme at true popular oversight, as moving the jury from the senators to the equites "merely reallocated influence from one section of the elite to another".{{sfn|Mouritsen|2017|p=149}} [[Ernst Badian]], writing in the ''Oxford Classical Dictionary'', gave the assessment:

{{blockquote|
A proud aristocrat, [Gaius] wanted to leave the senate in charge of directing policy and the magistrates in charge of its execution, subject to constitutional checks and removed from financial temptation, with the people sharing in the profits of empire without excessive exploitation of the subjects. The ultimate result of his legislation was to set up the {{lang|la|publicani}} as a new exploiting class, not restrained by a tradition of service or by accountability at law. But this did not become clear for a generation, and he cannot be blamed for not foreseeing it.
}}

His {{lang|la|lex frumentaria}}, which created a subsidised grain supply at around what he considered to be a "normal" price, set up an influential model for welfare in Rome.{{sfn|Garnsey|Rathbone|1985|p=20}} It was a reaction to corn disruptions in recent times that likely developed from army service, but his idea to have the Roman state smooth much of the variability of agriculture put the population less at the mercy of speculators and less dependent on magisterial largesse. The lowered incentives for magistrates giving food away for popularity at home had the added effect of reducing their proclivity to extort corn from provincials.{{sfn|Garnsey|Rathbone|1985|pp=24–25}} These provisions continued in force after the death of Gaius, suggesting an emerging consensus at Rome that there was a "right of the people to enjoy the rewards of the empire [and that] {{lang|la|frumentationes}} [were useful] to divert the interest and support of the urban plebs from the prospect of agrarian reform".{{sfn|Santangelo|2007|p=480}} After a period of abrogation by Sulla, the dole in the future would expand, however, both in cost and generosity, as later generations of politicians acted with or without senatorial support to do so.<ref>Eg [[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus (consul 78 BC)|Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]] and [[Cato the Younger|Marcus Porcius Cato]]'s bills in 78 and 62&nbsp;BC expanding the grain distributions with senatorial support and little opposition. {{harvnb|Mouritsen|2017|p=113}}.</ref>

Gaius' {{lang|la|lex de provinciis consularibus}} was a similar policy to reduce senatorial corruption and was "far from being revolutionary":{{sfn|Santangelo|2007|p=480}} his purpose with the law "was to prevent sitting consuls from using their position to influence provincial assignments improperly (and perhaps to Rome’s detriment)" by requiring provinces to be assigned before the consuls took office.{{sfn|Drogula|2015|p=260}} To further insulate such decisions from political meddling, he even made senatorial decisions on consular provinces immune from tribunician veto.{{sfn|Drogula|2015|p=298}}

=== Political violence ===

The impact of Tiberius' murder started a cycle of increased political violence: "the oligarchy had introduced violence into the political system with the murder of Tiberius Gracchus and over the years the use of violence became increasingly acceptable as various political disputes in Rome led to more and more bloody discord".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Mackay |first=Christopher S |title=Ancient Rome: a military and political history |date=2007 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-71149-4 |edition=1st |location=Cambridge |oclc=165407940 |page=129}}</ref> The use of force to suppress reform also suggested that the republic itself was temperamentally unsuited for producing the types of economic reforms wanted or needed, as in the Gracchi's framing, by the people.{{sfn|Flower|2010|p=84}}

In terms of periodisation, the death of Tiberius Gracchus in 133&nbsp;BC is widely viewed as the start of the "late republic" and the beginning of the republic's eventual collapse.{{sfn|Flower|2010|pp=61, 13, 62 n. 1}} For example, in ''The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic'', Jürgen von Ungern-Sternberg writes:

{{blockquote|It was Tiberius' assassination that made the year 133&nbsp;BC a turning point in Roman history and the beginning of the [[crisis of the Roman Republic]].{{sfn|von Ungern-Sternberg|2014|p=81}} }}

Even in ancient times, Cicero remarked as much in saying "the death of Tiberius Gracchus, and even before that the whole rationale behind his tribunate, divided a united people into two distinct groups". However, scholars such as Mary Beard also warn that Cicero is exaggerating for rhetorical effect and that "the idea there had been a calm consensus at Rome between rich and poor until [133&nbsp;BC] is at best a nostalgic fiction".{{sfn|Beard|2015|pp=226-7}}

The death of Gaius as well inaugurated a new tool for the senate in upholding the current order by force: the so-called {{lang|la|[[senatus consultum ultimum]]}}. Opimius was prosecuted in 120&nbsp;BC for violating Gaius' law against extralegal punishment. The ex-consul, however, was able to successfully defend himself by appealing to the senate's decree and by arguing that Gaius and Flaccus deserved to be treated as seditious enemies rather than citizens.{{sfn|Lintott|1994b|p=84}} Opimius' acquittal set the precedent that the {{lang|la|senatus consultum ultimum}} – which was merely advice from the senate: "the senate could pass any decree it liked, it was the magistrate who was responsible for any illegal actions"{{sfn|Lintott|1994b|p=84}} – was an acceptable ground to vitiate citizen rights extralegally.{{sfn|Lintott|1994b|p=85}}