Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

peoples from Spain and Asia as subjects and made her conquered territories into provinces.1 Their inhabitants were compelled to pay tribute and to accept the oversight of Roman officials.

As the Romans came more and more to relish the opportunities for plunder afforded by a wealthy province, its inhabitants

Evils of the provincial system

were often wretchedly misgoverned. Many governors of the conquered lands were corrupt and grasping men. They tried to wring all the money they could from their helpless subjects. To the extortions of the governors must be added those of the tax collectors, whose very name of "publican' "2 became a byword for all that was rapacious and greedy. In this first effort to manage the world she had won, Rome had certainly made a failure. A city-state could not rule, with justice and efficiency, an empire.

The profits of conquest

In the old days, before Rome entered on a career of foreign conquest, her citizens were famous among men for their love of country, their simple lives, and their conservative, old-fashioned ways. They worked hard on their little farms, fought bravely in the legions, and kept up with careful piety all the ceremonies of their religion. But now the Roman republic was an imperial power with all the privileges of universal rule. Her foreign wars proved to be immensely profitable. At the end of a successful campaign the soldiers received large gifts from their general, besides the booty taken from the enemy. The Roman state itself profited from the sale of enslaved prisoners and their property. Large sums of money were sometimes seized and taken to Rome. When once peace had been made, the Roman governors and tax collectors followed in the wake of the armies and squeezed the provincials at every turn. The Romans, indeed, seem to have conquered the world less for glory than for profit.

So much wealth poured into Rome from every side that there 1 In 133 B.C. there were eight provinces - Sicily, Sardinia and Corsica, Hither Spain, Farther Spain, Illyricum, Africa, Macedonia, and Asia. See the map facing page 184.

2 In the New Testament "publicans and sinners" are mentioned side by side. See Matthew, ix, 10.

could scarcely fail to be a sudden growth of luxurious tastes. Rich nobles quickly developed a relish for all Growth of sorts of reckless display. They built fine houses luxury adorned with statues, costly paintings, and furnishings. They surrounded themselves with troops of slaves. Instead of plain linen clothes they and their wives wore garments of silk and gold. At their banquets they spread embroidered carpets, purple coverings, and dishes of gilt plate. Pomp and splendor replaced the rude simplicity of an earlier age.

Disappearance of the peasantry

But if the rich were becoming richer, it seems that the poor were also becoming poorer. After Rome became mistress of the Mediterranean, her markets were flooded with the cheap wheat raised in the provinces, especially in those granaries, Sicily and Africa. The price of wheat fell so low that Roman peasants could not raise enough to support their families and pay their taxes. When agriculture became unprofitable, the farmer was no longer able to remain on the soil. He had to sell out, often at a ruinous sacrifice. His land was bought by capitalists, who turned many small fields into vast sheep pastures and cattle ranches. Gangs of slaves, laboring under the lash, gradually took the place of the old Roman peasantry, the very strength of the state. Not unjust was the famous remark, "Great domains ruined Italy." 1

The decline of agriculture and the disappearance of the small farmer under the stress of foreign competition may be studied in modern England as well as in ancient Italy. The exodus Nowadays an English farmer, under the same cir- to the cities cumstances, will often emigrate to America or to Australia, where land is cheap and it is easy to make a living. But these Roman peasants did not care to go abroad and settle on better soil in Spain or in Africa. They thronged, instead, to the cities, to Rome especially, where they labored for a small wage, fared plainly on wheat bread, and dwelt in huge lodging houses, three or four stories high.

We know very little about this poorer population of Rome.

1 Latifundia perdidere Italiam (Pliny, Natural History, xviii, 7).

They must have lived from hand to mouth. Since their votes controlled elections,1 they were courted by candiThe city mob dates for office and kept from grumbling by being fed and amused. Such poor citizens, too lazy for steady work, too intelligent to starve, formed, with the other riffraff of a great city, the elements of a dangerous mob. And the mob, henceforth, plays an ever-larger part in the history of the times.

Hellenic influence at Rome

We must not imagine, however, that all the changes in Roman life worked for evil. If the Romans were becoming more luxurious, they were likewise gaining in culture. The conquests which brought Rome in touch, first with Magna Græcia and Sicily, then with Greece itself and the Hellenic East, prepared the way for the entrance of Hellenism. Roman soldiers and traders carried back to Italy an acquaintance with Greek customs and ideas. Thousands of cultivated Greeks, some as slaves, others as freemen, settled in the capital as actors, physicians, artists, and writers. There they introduced the Greek language, as well as the religion, literature, and art of their native land. Roman nobles of the better type began to take an interest in other things than simply farming, commerce, or war. They imitated Greek fashions in dress and manners, collected Greek books, and filled their homes with the productions of Greek artists. Henceforth every aspect of Roman society felt the quickening influence of the older, richer culture of the Hellenic world. It was a Roman poet who wrote, "Captive Greece captured her conqueror rude." 2

Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus

60. The Gracchi

In 133 B.C., a year otherwise made memorable by the final subjugation of Spain and the acquisition of Asia, efforts began at Rome to remedy some of the disorders which were now seen to be sapping the strength of Roman society. The first persons to undertake the work of reform were the two brothers, Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus. The Gracchi belonged to the highest nobility of Rome. Their father had filled a consulship and a censorship and had cele2 Horace, Epistles, ii, 1, 156.

1 See page 155.

brated triumphs. Cornelia, their mother, was a daughter of Scipio Africanus, the conqueror of Hannibal. A fine type of the Roman matron, she called her boys her "jewels," more precious than gold, and brought them up to love their country better than their own lives. Tiberius, the elder brother, was only thirty years of age when he became a tribune and began his career in Roman politics.

Agrarian law

of Tiberius Gracchus

Defects of

the agrarian

law

Tiberius signalized his election to the tribunate by bringing forward his celebrated agrarian law. He proposed that the public lands of Rome, then largely occupied by wealthy men who alone had the money necessary to work them with cattle and slaves, should be reclaimed by the state, divided into small tracts, and given to the poorer citizens. By getting the people back again on the soil, Tiberius hoped to revive the declining agriculture of Italy. This agrarian law, though well intentioned, did not go to the root of the real difficulty - foreign competition. No legislation could have helped the farming class, except import duties to keep out the cheap grain from abroad. But the idle mob at Rome, controlling the assemblies, would never have voted in favor of taxing their food, thus making it more expensive. At the same time the proposal to take away part of the public domains from its possessors roused a hornet's nest about the reformer's ears. Rich people had occupied the public land for so long that they had come to look upon it as really their own. They would be very sure to oppose such a measPoor people, of course, welcomed a scheme which promised to give them farms for nothing. Tiberius even wished to use the public funds to stock the farms of his new peasantry. This would have been a mischievous act of state philanthropy. In spite of these defects in his measure, Tiberius urged its passage with fiery eloquence. But the great landowners in the Senate got another tribune, devoted to their interests, to place his veto1 on the proposed legislation. The impatient Tiberius at once took a revolutionary step. Though a magistrate could not legally be

1 See page 150.

Failure and

death of
Tiberius,

133 B.C.

removed from office, Tiberius had the offending tribune deposed and dragged from his seat. The law was then passed without further opposition. This action of Tiberius placed him clearly in the wrong. The aristocrats threatened to punish him as soon as his term of office was over. To avoid impeachment Tiberius sought reëlection to the tribunate for the following year. This, again, was contrary to custom, since no one might hold office for two successive terms. On the day appointed for the election, while voting was in progress, a crowd of angry senators burst into the Forum and killed Tiberius, together with three hundred of his followers. Both sides had now begun to display an utter disregard for law. Force and bloodshed, henceforth,

were to help decide political disputes.

Gaius Grac

tribune,

123 B.C.

Tiberius Gracchus, in his efforts to secure economic reform, had unwittingly provoked a conflict between the Senate and the assemblies. Ten years after his death, his brother, chus becomes Gaius Gracchus, came to the front. Gaius quickly made himself a popular leader with the set purpose of remodeling the government of Rome. He found in the tribunate an office from which to work against the Senate. After the death of Tiberius a law had been passed permitting a man to hold the position of tribune year after year. Gaius intended to be a sort of perpetual tribune, and to rule the Roman assemblies very much as Pericles had ruled the people at Athens.1 One of his first measures was a law permitting the sale of grain from the public storehouses to Roman citizens at about half the market price. This measure, of course, won over the city mob, but it must be regarded as very unwise. It saddled the treasury with a heavy burden, and later the government had to furnish the grain for nothing. Indiscriminate charity of this sort increased, rather than lessened, the number of paupers.

Having won popular support, Gaius was able to secure the additional legislation which he deemed necessary to carry out his brother's work. He reënacted the land laws for the benefit

1 See page 103.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »