family characters; and these are more than mere political maxims.[74]
Throughout the family of the Gracchi, as has been already mentioned,
we find a certain mildness, and an unaffected kindliness towards those
who were in need of help. This is shown in the three generations which
are remarkable in history, by Tib. Gracchus in the Second Punic War, by
Tib. Gracchus the censor, and by the two unfortunate brothers Tiberius
and Caius; it is a disposition moreover which in Rome was not often
met with, and which had now disappeared entirely. The same thing is to
be seen in every free state, and it is one of those spells by which a
commonwealth is upheld. Those who are born in certain families, are,
as it were, predestined to such and such political principles: thus in
England it is known at once to which party a Russel is sure to belong,
just as every one receives from his church the doctrines which he is to
follow.[75]
If the notion that the tribunes belonged to a different class from
the ruling one, is quite erroneous at the very outset, it is utterly
groundless now. At this time, we may positively say that as a rule
the tribunes--though they did not all become consuls themselves, as
every year there were ten tribunes elected, and not more than two
consuls--belonged to the consular families, and that it was only very
rarely that a plebeian was made consul who had not once been tribune.
This is a point, which we must not lose sight of. It now happened not
unseldom that a man like Gracchus was among the tribunes. M. Octavius,
who was tribune with him, belonged to a good family, although not one
of the very first rank. Him the opposite party gained over, to put
in his veto. There is nothing to say against his character: he had
formerly been a friend of Tiberius Gracchus, but party spirit had
now got the better of him. He himself had much to lose, and Gracchus
offered to make it up to him out of his own property; but this, of
course, he could not accept. In vain did Gracchus try to convince him
of his error, and adjure him to recal his intercession: it was all to
no purpose, as Octavius had bound himself by his word of honour, and
could not act otherwise than in the trammels of his faction, which
is the worst thing that a man can do in a struggle of parties. The
question now was, whether Gracchus should give up a law which might
save the nation and check the spread of vice, merely because a man who
was his friend had sold his soul to the evil faction; or whether he
should do a thing which was indeed contrary to the letter, but quite
in the spirit of the constitution. He made up his mind to the latter
course, which was to move in the assembly of the people, that Octavius
should be put out of his tribuneship. This was an irregularity; but,
properly speaking, the independence of the tribunes was an abuse:
consuls had been deposed more than once, and an office from which its
holder cannot be removed, is an absurdity in a republic. The tribunes
were merely commissioned to bring motions before the people, and
whoever has given a commission can also take it away again. But what
Gracchus did, was wrong in point of form. That he might swerve from
the law as little as he could, he proposed to Octavius, first to put
himself to the vote; and when Octavius refused, he went on with his
motion. Seventeen tribes had already voted against Octavius, when
Gracchus once more besought him to give up his opposition, or else
to resign. But he would do neither, and was deposed. As he wished to
make a scene, he would not leave the rostra, until Gracchus had him
dragged down by force, thus awakening that feeling of disgust among the
beholders, which the senate and the men in power were eager to call
forth.
The opponents of Tib. Gracchus had now the advantage of seeing
him wrong in form. The agrarian law was carried, and a standing
triumvirate was appointed to watch over the way in which it was kept.
Tib. Gracchus, his brother, and his father-in-law, were named as
triumvirs. From the _Somnium Scipionis_, we see that the _socii_ and
_Latini_ attached themselves to P. Scipio, and we have even a great
many statements which show that they, like the senate, were against
the agrarian law: the reason for this we may make out by laying things
together, there being several ways of accounting for it, one of which
must undoubtedly be the true one. The Roman laws, unless it were
expressly stipulated, did not apply to the allies, as we know from the
usury laws, which are a case in point. Now it may be that the law of
Licinius had said nothing about the _socii_ and _Latini_; so that if
these had a _possessio_, they were not tied down to the maximum of five
hundred _jugera_. Those who were rich, may have bought up in remote
districts the _latifundia_ of former Roman possessors, and they would
now have been disturbed by the Sempronian law. Certain it is, that
the _socii_ and _Latini_ had always been granted a certain portion
of the _ager publicus_: thus for instance the Campanians had a very
large one, which they could only have acquired as allies; the Marsians
had a share in the Apulian pastures. That Gracchus had meddled with
these holdings, is not very likely, though it cannot be positively
denied. It is more probable, on the other hand, that many places had
been allowed, till further orders, to have the use of their _ager_
on condition of their paying tribute for it, though the right of
ownership, which these had lost in war, had not been restored to them
by the Roman people: if this indulgence were now taken away, it was
hard upon them. They also got compensations, as we know for certain in
the case of Carthage. Those who held on such tenures, had now the same
interest as the wealthy Romans. However this may have been, the allies
felt themselves aggrieved.--The plea then of defending the rights of
the subjects, was the mask behind which the covetousness of those who
were in power was hidden: they put on the guise of being the champions
of these without thinking at all of themselves, an hypocrisy, which
has taken in even a clear-headed man like Cicero, who is remarkably
wavering with regard to these and other like transactions: his heart is
with the Gracchi, but led by _a priori_ reasoning, he decides against
them; and thus he feels quite at a loss, and is afraid to speak out.
The circumstances under which he wrote the books _de Re publica_ and
_de Legibus_, are his excuse. The opposition of the Latins was a great
stumblingblock in the way of Gracchus; the _optimates_ were only able
to counterbalance the popular party by thus leaguing themselves with
the allies. But when the oligarchy had gained the victory by the help
of the _socii_, they afterwards basely sacrificed them, very nearly as
the Irish Roman Catholics were sacrificed at the Union.
About this time, already in the beginning of the year, Attalus died.
The establishment of the province of Asia now forms an episode in the
tribunate of Gracchus, in which he again showed himself to have been
a statesman of deep thought, and earned great honour. Among the goods
which the king left, was a large treasure, as is always the case with
eastern princes, who, much as they spend, hoard as much again; and this
was sent to Rome. Now it is often thrown out as a reproach against
Gracchus, that he divided it among the Roman people; but there was
nothing wrong in what he did. In Rome, as in the small Swiss cantons,
every citizen had a share in the sovereignty; besides which, the public
_ærarium_ was becoming richer every day, as the tributes already
yielded so immense a surplus, that the citizens had no longer to pay
any direct taxes. As the great mass of the people had now sunk into the
lowest depths of wretchedness, this division was quite justifiable; and
the more so, as land was to be assigned to them, and they wanted money
to stock it. The triumvirs for the distribution of the land were now
first to make out, which estates belonged to the republic, and which
to private persons: for many had been sold, and many in the midst of
the allotted districts had been left to their former owners; so that
the keeping of the registers was exceedingly difficult. The Romans had
these registers, just as we have our surveys for the assessment of
taxes; but they were very carelessly done, as the seat of government
was at Rome alone, and there was hardly anything like sub-delegation.
The time for choosing new tribunes was now at hand. The tribunes
entered upon their functions on the ninth of December; but for a longer
time than we can tell, the elections had been held at the end of June,
or in the beginning of July, that the tribunate might never be vacant.
As the tribunes took part in the discussions of the senate, and in
these Gracchus was treated with a vulgar and most reckless fury, he
could easily foresee, that when once out of office, he would be at
the mercy of his foes: as _triumvir agrorum dividundorum_, he was not
_sacrosanctus_. He therefore tried, in accordance with the laws, to
have his tribuneship renewed. This was done very often in the first
ages; but it may have fallen into disuse, and thus the party against
him have had the plea of prescription on the score of which they
might withstand him. When the _prærogativa_ had nominated him, and
another tribe had followed on the same side, the opposition declared
this vote to be null and void, and demanded that the tribunes should
not receive any suffrages for him. Q. Rubrius, a tribune who presided
over the election, having become quite at a loss what to do, Mummius,
another tribune who had been chosen instead of Octavius, said that
Rubrius ought to yield his place to him: on this, as the other tribunes
demanded that the matter should be decided by lot, a quarrel arose, and
the day passed away without anything being settled. Gracchus already
saw that his death was aimed at, and he went about with his child among
the people, begging them to stand by him, and to save his life. In the
earliest times, the _plebes_ assembled on the forum; but in the war
with Hannibal already, it always votes on the _area_ before the temple
in the Capitol; I have not yet been able to find out when it was that
this change began. It also seems that the votes were now given by word
of mouth, and not, as formerly, on tablets, a custom which afterwards
the _Lex Cassia_ only restored, so that it is by no means to be looked
upon as an innovation, as is generally thought. Professor Wunder has
very correctly perceived this. Let no one believe that it is possible
to honour Cicero more highly than I do; yet I cannot help saying, that
he is to be blamed for all the erroneous notions which are rife on this
subject, as well as on so many others. Gracchus now was on the area of
the Capitol, and was speaking most movingly to the people, who seemed
as if they would uphold him. At any other time of the year, when the
country folks were in great numbers in the city, he would undoubtedly
have found the strongest protection; but these were away on account
of the harvest, and the townspeople were not only lukewarm, but many
of them were directly under the influence of the _optimates_. Here
also we see how the constitution, owing to circumstances, had become
quite different from what it had been formerly under the self-same
forms. In the earlier ages, when the territory did not yet reach over
many leagues, the citizens might assemble and the _tribus rusticæ_
be represented, if not fully, at least in considerable numbers: but
now that the Roman peasantry lived so far away, especially, for
instance, after the assignments of Flaminius in the Romagna, they
were no more able to come to town and vote; and the form of the law,
which was suitable to the former size of the city, was now thoroughly
preposterous and mischievous. On the following day, the elections were
to go on, and people now met together with a gloomy foreboding that
blood would be shed. Gracchus came only lightly armed. The senate
was assembled in the temple of _Fides_. The votes were about to be
given, when a tumult arose. The senate being near, at the news that
there was an uproar among the people, Scipio Nasica called upon the
consul Mucius Scævola to take strong measures. The latter appears in
a doubtful light: according to most of the accounts, he seems to have
been favourable to Gracchus; according to others, just the reverse;
but if we suppose him to have been a weak-minded man who stood in
fear of his faction, this contradiction may be accounted for. Nasica,
seeing that a bold stroke would decide the matter, called upon all
the senators to follow him; and they all, to a man, while leaving the
temple, declared Gracchus a traitor. The people fell back before men
of such high rank, and the senators seized hold of everything that
might serve as a weapon. There seem to have been scaffoldings erected
all round (even now-a-days in Italy, wherever there is anything to be
seen, benches are placed); part of these were broken in pieces. The
report had been spread, that Gracchus had appeared with a diadem, and
that he wanted to have himself proclaimed king: the senators, with the
exception of some blockheads who would believe anything, well knew the
whole to be a lie; but the people, who could not tell their own mind,
and had no leader, many of them dispersed. The senators laid hold of
the broken pieces of timber, and made an onset against the few unarmed
men that were still gathering round Tiberius Gracchus, who, on their
side, did not dare so much as to lift up a hand against the senators.
Tiberius fled down the _centum gradus_ to the Velabrum; and there his
foot slipped, one of his pursuers--according to some, one of the common
people; according to others, a senator, or a colleague of Gracchus
(there were persons who afterwards disputed for the honour)--having
pulled him by the toga: this man struck him on the head with a bit of
wood, and when he fell down stunned, the murder was completed. Many
of his followers shared the same fate, and their dead bodies were
thrown into the Tiber: the carcase of the great man himself, having
been washed ashore, was left to rot in the fields. He was not even
yet thirty years old when he died. A great number were also arrested
as accomplices. But the real persecution only began in the following
year, under the consul P. Popillius Lænas, the descendant of one of the
leaders of the _plebes_ at the time of the Licinian law: he has left a
terrible memory behind him. He caused thousands to be imprisoned, and
some of them to be put to death without any trial, like a real Duke of
Alva; one he condemned to be thrust into a chest filled with snakes, an
atrocity which Plutarch expressedly speaks of in his life of Tiberius
Gracchus. It is sad that even Cicero looks upon this Popillius Lænas
as a man of honour. One anecdote I cannot help telling here. It was
either at that time, or very likely some years before, that Diophanes
of Mitylene and C. Blossius of Cumæ, the most intimate friends of Tib.
Gracchus, were summoned before the inquisitorial tribunal, to give
account of their connexion with Gracchus. The latter answered, that
his connexion was well known; that Tib. Gracchus had been his most
intimate friend. They then asked him, whether he had done everything
that Gracchus had told him to do. He answered that he had.--“Whether
he would have done anything that Gracchus might subsequently have
required of him?”--“Yes,” was his answer again.--“Whether then he would
at his bidding have set fire to the Capitol?” He said, that Gracchus
could never have commanded such a thing.--“But what if he had commanded
it notwithstanding?”--“Well then,” said he, “I would have done it.”
This horrid speech was held to be a proof of his utter wickedness; but
it is not so much a disgrace to him who looked upon his friend as his
better self, as to the man who wrung it out of him by his captious
questions. Blossius got off; but he afterwards took away his own life,
that he might not fall into the hands of these bloodthirsty wretches.
It is remarkable, that the ruling party did not again abolish the new
office of triumvirs, M. Fulvius Flaccus, the friend of Tiberius, being
chosen in his room; but the efficiency of these was hampered, and
they were able to do nothing, as those who were called upon to show
their titles to their estates, did not come forward, or else made no
declaration. But when the first burst of their rage was over, they saw
that they were playing a dangerous game; and they left the laws of
Gracchus untouched, and, for appearance’s sake, appointed the consul
Tuditanus to pass judgment on the disputed points: instead of doing
this, he took the field, and thus the matter was put off. Whether
anything was done at all, cannot be made out. When Ap. Claudius also
died, he was succeeded by C. Papirius Carbo, an unworthy disciple of
Gracchus, who did the same things as his master had done before him,
but from bad motives. It is the curse of revolutions, that the onward
march of events hurries along with it even good men who have once
plunged into them; the power of freeing oneself from the influence
of what is passing around us, belongs only to that iron will which
neither heeds nor shrinks from anything. A distinguished man, who
had gone through all the horrors of the revolution, but had kept his
hands unsullied, once said to me, “It is a terrible remembrance
to have lived to see a revolution, and to have had a share in it;
one goes to the attack along with the noble-minded, and one remains
before the breach with the knaves.” This one should have before one’s
eyes as a warning; but perhaps we may not have to dread a revolution
for centuries to come. The period in Roman history which we have
now reached, is one in which the explanation of forms is no longer
sufficient; we must take men psychologically, and make a study of the
personal characters of those who tore from each other’s grasp the
spoils of the state when its life had fled from it. Carbo was a man of
much talent; but he was possessed by evil spirits: he might perhaps,
in peaceful times, have belonged to the number of fine souls; but in
that age, he sank down into the lowest depths of guilt and meanness.
His character was such, that the charge of his having murdered Scipio,
is not at all impossible in itself: yet, as in the south it is so very
common for it, to be reported that a man has been poisoned, if his
death has exhibited any symptoms like it (as, for instance, in putrid
fevers), we ought not to place unqualified belief in that suspicion.
Scipio was laying siege to Numantia, when he heard the news of his
brother-in-law’s death; and he expressed his approval of it. After his
return to Rome, Carbo called upon him to declare whether he looked
upon the death of Gracchus as just; but he shuffled out of this,
saying, that it was just, if Gracchus had meant to make himself king.
This was mere senseless slander, and thus men’s minds were generally
embittered against Scipio. The oligarchs themselves were divided:
not every one who had clamoured for Gracchus’ blood, was therefore
Scipio’s friend; but they all wanted him, and it flattered his vanity
to consider himself also as the protector of the Latins and of the
allies. Tiberius’ death had by no means brought the dispute to a
decision; far from it, it was carried on with unabated violence. Scipio
intended to speak in the assembly of the people against the enforcing
of the Sempronian law, which was never repealed; as we may see from the
original tables of the _Lex Thoria_ (640-50), and the few fragments of
a later agrarian law. The evening before the day on which he was to
address the people, he had betaken himself to rest at an early hour, to
think over his speech; but in the morning he was found dead in his bed.
This sudden death now raised the suspicion of his having been murdered;
yet, strange to say, no inquiry was made, although it would have been
the interest of the ruling party to have had one. The result might,
however, perhaps have turned against this very party;[76] for instance,
against Q. Pompeius, or Metellus: people even went so far as to charge
Scipio’s wife, Sempronia, a sister of the Gracchi, with having got him
out of the world by poison. Yet poisoned he could not have been, by all
accounts; for as his corpse was borne upon an open bier, the symptoms
of it would have shown themselves. If he died a violent death, he must
have been strangled.
From the death of Tiberius, to the first tribunate of Caius Gracchus,
several remarkable measures were debated: the question of the new
division of land was no more to be got rid of. Unluckily, we do not
know the particulars: it is a pity that the books of Livy, from the
50th down to the 60th, have been lost. We have a decree of the tribune
M. Junius Pennus, that the allies should be left in possession of their
land, but should not be raised to the right of citizenship; which was
quite in the spirit of the oligarchy. In many towns of the Marsians,
Samnites, and others, there were a great many rich and uncorrupted
families, which, had they been engrafted upon the worn out Roman stock,
would very soon have thrown the Roman aristocracy into the shade.
For this reason, they were not to become citizens, but to keep their
land; and by this means it was hoped to quiet them. But when they saw
themselves thus taken in in every way, they began to plot together: the
details, however, of this conspiracy are shrouded in darkness. In the
lifetime of Tib. Gracchus already, there had been a talk of giving the
right of citizenship to the Latins, especially to Tibur and Præneste,
and perhaps also to the towns of the Hernicans, but above all, to the
colonies. These consisted of Romans, Latins, and Hernicans of all
kinds, who lived under the Latin law, and had the best claims to the
right of citizenship; but Gracchus must either have put off his plans
with regard to them, or have quite given them up. Now they insisted
upon having it, as it had been chiefly their support which had upheld
the senate. It is inconceivable how Fregellæ, the most flourishing
of them, could at that time have been so mad as to take up arms; the
other Latins would have nothing to do with it, and the colonies were
scattered throughout the whole country. The Italians proper, as they
stood one step lower down, were perhaps not always glad when the
Latins got such privileges; they rejoiced at their trouble, and gave
them no help. The prætor L. Opimius besieged, conquered, and destroyed
Fregellæ: not a trace is left of the town, and a dreadful revenge was
taken on the people.
CAIUS SEMPRONIUS GRACCHUS.