Chapter M: Livius Drusus, 340 (12)

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.

It is beyond a doubt, that C. Gracchus surpassed his brother in talent: he was altogether a different man. The parallel drawn by Plutarch between Agis and Cleomenes and the two brothers, is a very happy one. Of the speeches of Tiberius, nothing has been left to us; from those of Caius, many passages are quoted. He was the first refined, polished, and elegant writer of the Roman nation: Scipio and Lælius are still strikingly rough and harsh, as Tib. Gracchus also certainly must have been, more so perhaps, even than Cato; (we see this from a fragment, hitherto unknown,[77] of a speech of Lælius, in an unpublished commentary of Cicero which Maï has discovered.) In what still remains of him, we find Cicero’s saying borne out, that he had been the first to come forth in an old literature with a new language; even as among the French, Corneille forms the link between the antique and the classic. In all likelihood, the language of C. Gracchus was far older than that of Cicero, or even Sisenna; but it nevertheless had the stamp of the modern age, and none of the stiffness and mustiness of the earlier times. He was perhaps also more of a statesman than his brother; at least he showed himself more to have been such, the reason of which may have been, that while the career of Tiberius was ended in seven months, he was engaged in public life much longer: his activity began even before his tribuneship; and the two years that he was tribune, and yet a half a year besides, it was in full play. His high accomplishments, and the development of his character, he owed chiefly to his excellent mother: the kindly disposition of the Gracchi is seen also in their affectionate behaviour to their mother, the like of which was very seldom to be found elsewhere among the Romans. On the whole, we know very little indeed of the domestic relations of the Romans; yet we may reckon as examples Horace’s loving mention of his father, and that of Agricola by Tacitus.

Caius was driven on by fate into the path in which he met with his ruin. Heart-broken by the death of his brother, he seemed as if he wished to keep away from the higher offices of the state: he rose indeed to be a triumvir,--there he could not help himself,--but even then he would only act where it was possible for him to do so without shaking the existing state of things. But there was an inward call, which would not let him follow his own inclinations, although he foresaw his doom. At a very early age he had the eyes of the people bent upon him; he had served for twelve years, had been quæstor in Sardinia, and thus already had awakened jealousy: for a young man who displayed the most perfect disinterestedness, was a reproach and an object of hatred to every one. When the soldiers were in want of warm clothing, and the miserly senate would not grant any money, he did not rest until he had scraped together in the province, and from other sources, the means of buying warm cloaks; he also got a cargo of corn from Micipsa, the king of Numidia. All these things gave rise to such rancour and ill-feeling, that it was intended to keep him in Sardinia, where, even at that time, the air was so unwholesome, that it was hoped that he would fall a victim to it. By law he was only obliged to be there for one year; but he had been three years in the island, and therefore he now went without leave to Rome, where he publicly justified himself, showing how he had been thwarted in everything. This made such an impression, that not only did the tribunes take him under their protection, but he was himself chosen to be tribune of the people for the following year, and that under more favourable auspices than his brother had been: for among the enlargements of the tribunician power, which the senate had yielded, owing to their evil conscience, since the death of Tib. Gracchus, there had also been a _plebiscitum_ passed, by which a tribune who wished to carry through his laws, might be elected twice. In the year 629, C. Gracchus entered upon his tribuneship. He was upright and pure, like Tiberius, but passionate; he was superior to his brother in energy, and he knew more clearly what he was about. With regard to the possession of land, in the outset he had indeed only to enact Tiberius’ laws: but he aimed also far beyond these at other reforms: since, as a tribune, he had a power just as lawful as that of the senate itself, and therefore did not act the part of a revolutionist. But had he also a chance of success? That was the question. In his own mind, he was satisfied that his cause could make its way. It is a pity that we do not get a sight of the whole of his plan; the most important points are the very ones which have been the most corrupted: his legislation consisted of a number of detached laws which affected the most different branches of the state. What we know of it, is quite enough to show how little he was of a demagogue. There are seemingly the greatest contradictions in it; but they vanish when we look at them from the right point of view: for we thus see that he did not wish to lend himself to any party. Far from it, he made use of the factions to carry out wholesome reforms, holding out to one side such and such advantage, and to the other something else, while he himself stood quite apart. His first step, as tribune of the people, was, of course, to avenge the death of his brother and his friends. Nasica had gone off with a commission to Asia, and did not return.

His first law was that no one who had been deprived of his office by the people, should be invested with any other: this bill, which was evidently aimed against Octavius, he withdrew at the intercession of his mother. The second enacted that those men should be punished with death, who, without any previous trial, had laid hands upon Roman citizens, and slain them. This was chiefly directed against Lænas, who, when it passed, went into voluntary exile. Of the speech, in which Gracchus made these motions, we have a fine fragment still left, which Gellius pedantically criticises. These were the offerings with which he made atonement to the dead.

The carrying out of the agrarian law had been decreed, and it went on, though rather sluggishly. The measure which has been most found fault with, is his having first brought in the practice of distributing corn to the common people living at Rome: in the way in which he did it, the _modius_ of corn was to be given out at three-quarters of an _as_, one-fourth of what it would cost elsewhere. This surely was not by any means a bribe, but a charity to the poor who wanted it. Rome had those great revenues which were paid in grain, and the treasury was so rich that it was not necessary to convert the corn into money. At the time of the Social war, there were about seventy-four millions sterling in the treasury, and these certainly could not be better bestowed than for the good of the poor: besides which, even from of old, corn had been distributed in the temple of Ceres; so that this was not even an innovation. The idea of a certain dignity being inherent in every one who belongs to a free people, lies at the bottom of everything that is done in a republic. A commonwealth has the duty of providing for its members, even for the most humble: this is a principle which England in some measure follows in her poor’s rates, whereas there is nothing of the kind in a despotic country, to belong to which gives no privilege. Now it so happened that part of the true Roman citizens, who also had their share with the rest in the sovereignty, were as poor as those paupers among us, who are maintained by the alms of the public: their numbers must have been immense; some of them were not in the tribes at all; others, as, for instance, the descendants of freedmen, were in the _tribus urbanæ_. The Gracchi wished to make peasants of as many of them as possible; but this could not be done with all, nor perhaps had the greater part of that _plebes_ even so much as a claim to it, as the division of the land was to be according to tribes. C. Gracchus did not want the corn to be given them entirely for nothing; but at such a rate that they might easily earn their livelihood by their work. From this time, I believe the difference of the _plebes urbana_ and the thirty-five tribes to be dated, the free Roman citizens of lower rank being the main elements of that _plebes_.

Another of Gracchus’ measures was for the relief of the soldier. Every soldier had formerly to find his arms, and part of his pay was kept back to defray the expense of repairing them. But the treasury was so very full, that the sacrifice was not felt, if those who had to serve, had at least their arms given them. This point C. Gracchus carried. He also established between the quay, the Aventine, and the Monte Testaccio, a corn-magazine (_horrea populi Romani_): this afterwards expanded into immense buildings, the traces of which were very distinctly seen even so late as in the sixteenth century. Moreover, he made highways, and gave a new impulse to paving: it was perhaps under his management that the great Roman roads were brought to that perfection which we still admire in them; for he had them paved with basalt, which until then had been done on a small piece of the Appian road only. By this means he gave employment to the poor man, who was thus enabled to get his living.

All these arrangements were administrative ones; he now went on to make others which affected the constitution itself. The senate was at that time without control with regard to one of the most important branches of civil government: Polybius already remarks, that the great power of the senate in so democratical a republic was owing to two causes. In the first place, it had quite an unbounded power over the finances; so that many were dependent on it for their incomes. All the revenues of the state from customs, mines, tithes, and other sources, were let to companies of wealthy Romans; and these again in their business employed the lower classes down to the very lowest, who, therefore, were all of them under the influence of the senate, which had the supreme direction: thus indeed, though every one engaged in this way did not get his maintenance from a government employment, as with us; the result was practically the same among the Romans, that the state itself provided for a great part of its subjects. Hence swarms of these citizens spread themselves as _negotiatores_ over the provinces, and sucked their life’s blood. This was one of the circumstances which enabled the small body of the senate to stand its ground so steadily. The other means which it had, was, that all these people were obliged to have their patrons in the senate itself, and that the judges in nearly all the more important causes were senators; at least in all those which did not directly concern Quiritary property. It is one of the erroneous notions to be found everywhere, that in ancient Rome a sort of jury had existed, which was instituted only after the laws of Gracchus. During the earlier times, no trial was required in any case of _delictum manifestum_; the identity of the person being proved, the prætor immediately enforced the law, and that was all. In other cases, as in criminal causes and those civil suits which were not brought before the _centum viri_, the decision of one _arbiter_ was needed, before the prætor could pass a sentence which might be acted upon. The complaint was laid before the prætor, who after thirty days named a judge. The latter gave judgment according to certain fixed rules, from which there was no further appeal; for the appeal which there had once been to the people had been done away with, whilst for anything that was not _judicium publicum_, none perhaps had ever been allowed. Since the seventh century, several pleas for which formerly special _quæsitores_ had been appointed, from whom they came before the popular tribunals, were now judged according to the common course of law; especially the _actiones repetundarum_, the complaints of the unfortunate provincials against their governors: for these, however, several judges were granted. But this single judge, or, as the case might be, these several judges, were always senators; and this was indeed a strong tie, by which the senate strengthened its authority. But these courts were detestable: the most scandalous judgments were given; and the senator who by lot had become _judex_, allowed himself to be bribed in the most barefaced manner, no one making any secret of it: nor indeed was any body ashamed of doing thus; those who were not to be bought formed but a small exception, and that perhaps merely from calculation. The right of bringing an action made the provinces yet worse off than if they had been utterly debarred from it; for the governor had to plunder so much the more, that he might be able to bribe his judges. This reminds me of the saying of the Neapolitan minister, the prince of Canosa, an eccentric but witty man: he said, that no where out of the kingdom of Naples could one get so many false witnesses for a carlino (about fourpence) each; and that, if one wanted a quantity of them, they were to be had cheaper still. Thus the senators in Rome merely asked, “How many thousands will you give me, that I may acquit you?” One crow does not pick out the eyes of the other. This was revolting, and it was clear that it would bring the state to ruin: a change was necessary, and that of Gracchus was certainly the best as things were, though, on the other hand, it might also have ill consequences. He cast his eyes upon that body of men which now in some measure filled the place of a middle class, although sometimes possessing immense riches: it was composed of those who had more than a hundred thousand _denarii_ (400,000 sesterces), there being no longer any other standard but that of wealth. From what is called the people, Gracchus expected nothing whatever; he knew that part of it was a rabble which either did not care for anything, or else was open to the worst bribery; the knights, on the other hand, had no interest to screen the misdeeds of those who were in power. As in the senate there were three hundred members, Gracchus transferred the jurisdiction to a like number of knights in their stead. That the three hundred knights were alone to be the judges, and that, as the case might require, each of these was one by one to be chosen by lot from among them, is placed beyond a doubt by the researches of Manutius. At first, this did not altogether work badly, as these new judges had none of the family and other connexions of the leading senators at Rome; but, on the other hand, they were no fair judges for the provincials. The Roman companies which farmed the revenue, consisted chiefly of knights, and they had been guilty of most unrighteous dealings in the provinces. Hitherto these had been ground down by the magistrates who had been sent to rule over them; and now that a remedy had been found for the evil, if the latter chose to make a bargain with the knights, they could buy them over by letting them go beyond their contracts, and take, for instance, one-fifth, instead of the tenth which was their due. In return for this, the knights would guarantee them impunity, should they be prosecuted for extortion. This was a monstrous abuse, occasioned by accidental circumstances; but for Rome and Italy the change was an improvement: and so it was on the whole for all those places to which the farming companies did not extend.

This fell upon the senators like a thunderbolt. And when an independent body of judges had now been formed, Gracchus went still farther: he substituted their jurisdiction for those popular tribunals which were not worth anything, and which henceforth are only met with as an exception. This was setting bounds to democracy, where democracy was no longer in its right place.

In order to put better blood into the veins of the thirty-five tribes, he wished to extend the full right of citizenship to the Latins, among whom there were some forty colonial towns besides the old Latin cities: they had existed for three hundred years, and had for two centuries been entirely amalgamated by language and manners with the Romans; and in all likelihood he meant to form them into new tribes. The Italian allies, on the other hand, from Lucania to the March of Ancona, nay all the Italian districts as far as to the Alps, he wished to raise to that position which the Latins then held; that is to say, to give them a vote in the assembly of the people, and prepare them to become full citizens after thirty or forty years. It may even be that something was really done to carry this out. This law again was most wise and judicious, and those who were for a reasonable aristocracy must have rejoiced at it. In the Latin towns, there were many good families of local celebrity, which were now to be ranked among the Roman citizens. In Augustus’ times, the most distinguished families came from the allied towns: the Asinii were Marrucinians; thus also, the Munatii and others; according to Cicero, literature was more cultivated among them than at Rome. Thus, an aristocracy of wealth and refinement was to be brought in; a wiser and more praise-worthy scheme than that of C. Gracchus, there could not possibly have been.

Many of his laws are either not known to us at all, or only from occasional notices. Though he wished to make the plebeians good husbandmen, if he could, and therefore assigned land to them, he did not make them a present of it. The state, the interests of which Gracchus did not lose sight of, had hitherto always had the tithes from the occupants; and this burthen he allowed to continue, as we learn from a passage in Plutarch which can have no other meaning. To him it seemed evident, that Rome could only hold her own by returning to her first principles: he therefore gave the Italians hopes of the right of citizenship, and also moved for a reform of the manner of voting; so that the republic would no longer have comprised one city, but the whole of Italy.

The distribution of the provinces had until now given rise to the greatest intrigues in the senate. Sometimes the tribunes even interfered. When the new consuls and prætors had come in, and the reference was made _de provinciis_, every one would apply for himself, and try to get what seemed to him most favourable to his purpose of enriching himself; and the senate decided from personal considerations. At that time already, the elections took place long before the end of the year. C. Gracchus now made the wise rule, that the senate should settle before the elections, to what provinces a consul or a prætor was to be sent, and then assign them afterwards to the persons who were to have them: this was wont to be done by lot, and thus anything like favouritism was put an end to. This rid the republic of a great many evils. He, no doubt, was also the one who brought in the rule of having the _comitia_ held so early, that the year might not come to an end without the curule chair being filled. This is one of the real and lasting improvements of Gracchus, and it was still in force seventy years after his death.

These laws of his, Gracchus made in 629 and 630, having been tribune for two years running. His tribunate was less stormy than that of his brother, as he had much greater power, and was less thwarted. He got himself, and his friend M. Fulvius Flaccus, and very likely Q. Rubrius also, to be appointed triumvirs for the establishing of colonies; for his activity was unwearied, and it was felt in all the branches of the state to which his influence as tribune could reach. Among others, he had founded a colony by the side of old Carthage, and against this settlement a hypocritical outcry was raised, as if it might one day become dangerous to Rome; a most senseless notion, which some folks even held in good earnest. The jealousy and spite against him had now risen to the highest pitch, and the present opportunity was seized to harass him. The senate, with fiendish cunning, egged on another tribune, M. Livius Drusus, to outbid him in liberality to the people, and that in the name of the senate, so as to undermine his popularity. The great mass did not care, who it was that offered a boon to them; they thought, “Gracchus wants to buy and cheat us, Livius bids more: let us take what we can get, and not let ourselves be cheated.” Such, the Italians are even to this day. I myself have seen a striking example of this in the citizen of a small town, who had some coins which I valued for him. He fancied that I wanted to overreach him; and immediately after, he asked me, for a piece which I wished to buy, three times as much as I had told him, whereas before that, I might have had all of them for the third part of what they were worth. When one gives the modern Romans any advice from real kindness, and with perfect disinterestness, they will at once suspect you of having some secret end in view; for indeed they will not trust anybody. Thus it was also in those times. Livius did away with the tithes with which the lands were still burthened; and instead of the two colonies which Gracchus had proposed, he founded twelve, each of which was to consist of three thousand citizens. This the rich could easily grant, the only losers by it being the old inhabitants, unhappy men who hitherto had dwelt by sufferance on the soil where their ancestors had been conquered; for the estates of the rich were only in those places where the old towns had been destroyed. With regard to these colonies of Livius, we may ask, have they really been founded? There seems to be no doubt of it, as those of Gracchus were certainly established; indeed they were in all likelihood those _duodecim coloniæ_ in Cicero’s oration _pro Cæcina_, about which there has been so much controversy. These cannot have had any reference to what happened in the war with Hannibal, when the number of those which had remained faithful was eighteen; so that eighteen and not twelve must have had the _commercium_ given them as a boon. The MSS. have XII.: it has been proposed to write XIIX. instead; but this kind of notation is not met with in any of the old manuscripts. If, as I take it for granted, they were not twelve new colonies, but twelve Latin towns which, as they had a great deal of unoccupied ground, were increased by three thousand citizens, it is quite easy to understand why they had better rights than the other colonies.

Gracchus saw that the thoughtless people turned away from him to the senate, and to the tools of the senate who deceived them. There are many men, frank and kindly souls, who heartily love the Beautiful, and are delighted at seeing distinguished men play their part, and look upon them as the ornaments of their age; others think of nothing but themselves: driven on by envy and jealousy, and grieved at hearing any name praised be it ever so slightly, even when it does not harm them in the least, they are glad if they can discover any weaknesses in great men. All this tribe now raised an outcry against Gracchus, laughing at him as a _doctrinaire_, a man of crotchets and theories. He had now for so long a time enjoyed great consideration, and he stood forth in too full a blaze of light not to become an eyesore to many people; just as the Athenian citizen gave his vote against Aristides, because he was called the Just. Thus it came to pass, that when he again offered himself as a candidate for the tribuneship, he was rejected; nor is there any reason to believe that his colleagues had been guilty of foul play. Among the independent educated middle classes only, Gracchus seems to have had many partisans; but these had not much political weight, and his friends of high rank were hot-headed people. In the year 631, his enemy L. Opimius, the destroyer of Fregellæ, whom, the year before, he had kept out of the consulship, was chosen consul. For when he was in the heyday of his popularity, he once asked the people to promise him a favour; this they granted, and while it was thought that he would demand great things, he begged the consulship for C. Fannius. The latter was a _homo novus_, at least for the consulship, and it would have been hard for him to get it without the help of Gracchus: he, however, soon left him, and went over to his foes. Opimius also was a plebeian; but, like Popillius Lænas, he sided with the aristocracy against Gracchus. The oligarchical party was bent upon getting up a quarrel. Gracchus, now that he was no longer _sacrosanctus_, did not feel sure of his life, and was therefore always surrounded by many of his friends. The measures of the senate became more and more hostile: the colonies granted to him were to be broken up by a decree of that body, and there was a deliberation on the subject; one of the tribunes moreover, who had been nominated by the oligarchs, spoke to the people then assembled before the Capitol, against Gracchus, and when the latter came forward to defend himself, he was charged in a tumultuous manner with having interrupted the tribune. The consul, who just then was offering a sacrifice on the Capitol, sent one of his lictors, as if to fetch something for the sacrifice, but in reality for another purpose; and the man while forcing his way across the friends of Gracchus, cried out, “Ye evil-minded fellows! make room for the good citizens!” One of them was rash enough to strike him; a tumult arose, and the lictor was murdered. His dead body was displayed in the forum, and a scene was got up, as if he had been a martyr to the good cause. For the first time,[78] the senate now passed the decree, _viderent Consules, ne quid detrimenti res publica caperet_. Opimius was invested with dictatorial power; for the custom of making dictators had fallen into disuse, as it could no longer be managed in the old forms, the curies having ceased to exist. Gracchus now took leave of his wife and children; after which, he and Fulvius went to the Aventine, the ancient refuge for persecuted innocence. He had had no foreboding of the misfortune which had come upon him: his whole party was all in confusion, and he could not make up his mind to let things go on to extremity. His friend and colleague, the consular M. Fulvius Flaccus, who was more resolute, armed some of the common people, and slaves; in short, any one whom he could get. The mob itself--from henceforth we meet with nothing better--for which Gracchus had no sympathies, left him to his fate, taking him for a knave or a fool, and being quite content, so long as they kept the benefits which he had gained for them. Thus it cost the consuls no trouble to attack the Aventine, though they had only a small force, the city being either paralyzed or indifferent. The knights, whom Gracchus had nearly remodelled as an order, were likewise idle lookers on, owing to that fear which is inherent in rich men whose wealth is not in landed property, but merely in money. This class shows itself lukewarm in every commotion, and lets itself be trampled on in every possible way, as we see, for instance, in the history of Florence.