Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program

Among all the factors that either promoted the reform or prevented it, social and political factors were the most powerful.

Rome’s political condition was not quiet at that time. Since legionaries were obliged to serve for the whole campaign, regardless of how long it lasted, soldiers often left their farms for their wives and children. As land properties went steadily into bankruptcy, latifundia (large estates) were created. Moreover, some lands terminated their existence, being taken by the state in war both in regions in Italy. After the war ended, much of the farming territories were sold or rented to citizens. Much of this territory was provided to only a few planters who then had huge land territories that were more beneficial than the lesser farms. The farmers with bigger farm territories had the land farmed by slaves and never did the work by themselves, unlike the farmers with smaller territories.

The social situation appeared to be sophisticated. Consequently, it reasoned dissatisfaction.

Tiberius mentioned how much of the lands were included in latifundia, owned by powerful landowners and farmed by slaves, rather than small lands farmed by the landowners themselves.

To change this incomplete structure, Tiberius offered the laws called Lex Sempronia Agraria. These laws offered that the government should remove public land that had been taken in previous wars and was held larger than the 500 iugera (approximately 310 acres) permitted under preceding land regulations. Some of this land had been owned by large landowners who had purchased, settled, or leased the property much earlier. Sometimes it was rented or resold to other owners after the original sale. Actually, this was an effort to realize the Licinian Laws accepted in 367 B.C., which were never implemented. This would resolve two matters by augmenting the number of men eligible for military forces and also offering lands for homeless war veterans.

In spite of the fact that the proposition was rather attractive for the well-being of the state, the political leaders did everything to prevent the performance of the reforms.

The Senate was against the Sempronian agrarian reforms and was also opposed to Tiberius’ highly unconventional method of holding the reforms. As Tiberius clearly realized that Senate would not approve his improvements, he avoided the Senate overall by addressing the Concilium Plebis (the Popular Assembly), who maintained his ideas.

Nevertheless, any Tribune could impose a veto on the proposal. So, in an attempt to stop Tiberius, the Senate convinced Octavius, another tribune, to use his veto to stop the submission of the bills to the meeting.

The people started voting to overthrow Octavius, but he banned their actions. These actions infringed Octavius’ power of sacrosanctity and worried Tiberius’ followers, and so rather than moving to topple him, Tiberius initiated using his veto on every day ceremonial rituals in which Tribunes were asked if they would permit for public constructions, for instance, the Markets and the Churches, to be opened. In this way, he efficiently shut down the whole city of Rome, entailing all trade and production, until the Senate and the Assembly accepted the land regulations.

The Senate provided trivial funding for the agrarian expenses that had been assigned to perform Tiberius’s laws. Nevertheless, late in 133 BC, king Attalus III of Pergamum died and left his kingdom of Pergamum to Rome. Tiberius regarded this as s chance and instantly used his powers to assign these riches to fund the reforms. This was a straightforward attack on Senatorial power, as it was conventionally responsible for the organization of the reserves and for decisions taking into account the overseas affairs.

History shows that there were lots of reasons to obstruct the performance of the land reforms by Tiberius. Nevertheless, the social situation encouraged the changes, but the political circumstances and the personal interests of the Senate made everything possible not to permit the reform.

References

Plutarch. Makers of Rome: Nine Lives. Penguin Classics publishing, 1965.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

StudyCorgi. (2021, September 22). Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program. https://studycorgi.com/implication-of-tiberius-gracchus-reform-program/

Work Cited

"Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program." StudyCorgi, 22 Sept. 2021, studycorgi.com/implication-of-tiberius-gracchus-reform-program/.

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

References

StudyCorgi. (2021) 'Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program'. 22 September.

1. StudyCorgi. "Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program." September 22, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/implication-of-tiberius-gracchus-reform-program/.


Bibliography


StudyCorgi. "Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program." September 22, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/implication-of-tiberius-gracchus-reform-program/.

References

StudyCorgi. 2021. "Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program." September 22, 2021. https://studycorgi.com/implication-of-tiberius-gracchus-reform-program/.

This paper, “Implication of Tiberius Gracchus’ Reform Program”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal. Please use the “Donate your paper” form to submit an essay.