To what degree did the

introduction of political
violence through the death of
Tiberius Gracchus play a role in
the imminent downfall of the
Roman Republic?
Although it is widely agreed upon that it was the combination of different social,
economic, and political issues which eventually brought about the demise of the Roman
Republic, the degree to which each complication contributed to this is mostly unknown.
Many modern-day historians argue and debate over what the leading cause for the
destruction of the Republic was. The concept of political violence as a historical
assumption of the systematic breakdown of Roman political structures is something
largely prevalent within works centered around the breakdown of the Roman Republic.
The idea that the violent death of Tiberius Gracchus and around 300 of his followers at
the hands of the senate was a significant event which may have precipitated the
downfall of the Republican political system is not far-fetched. (N.S. Gill, 2019). And
although it cannot be attributed to just one factor or individual, it is made clear through
varying historical sources such as Cicero, Plutarch and other modern historians like
Benjamin Straumann and Ernst Badian, that Tiberius Gracchus’ death and tribuneship
played a large role in the imminent downfall of the Republic.

During his time as Tribune, Tiberius Gracchus implemented various reforms that greatly
impacted the Roman Republic as a whole. The most notable of these reforms were
those of an agrarian nature. (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2020). At this time, it was
highly uncommon for the Roman Senate to address or debate social or economic
issues. So, in 133 BC when Tiberius Gracchus’ first move as a newly elected Tribune of
the Plebs was to create a bill which limited the amount of public land one person could
own, it understandably caused discontent within the Senate. The bill itself aimed to
restore the position of small Italian farmers by targeting the public land held illegally by
members of the Senate. (Russel M. Geer, 1939). Eminent Greek biographer Plutarch
confirms this, stating that “When Tiberius passed through Etruria and found the country
almost depopulated and its husband men and shepherds imported barbarian slaves, he
first conceived the policy which was to be the source of countless ills to himself and his
brother.” (Plutarch, Tiberius Gracchus, p. 161). Interestingly, Plutarch deems this
event to be the start of both Tiberius and his family’s demise. However, another
esteemed ancient philosopher, Cicero, alluded to the idea that it was not the land reform
which Tiberius so adamantly pushed which brought about his demise, but rather it was
the impeachment of his own colleague from tribuneship which “caused the downfall of
Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus,” as he had “[removed] one of his own colleagues from
office, because he [Octavius] had exercised his right of veto against Tiberius Gracchus.”
(Cicero, On Government, P.205). By this interpretation, Tiberius Gracchus is shown to
be a vindictive, callous tribune who resents any form of challenge against his authority.
History professor at the University of Texas, and a renowned scholar in the history of
the Roman Empire, Frank Burr Marsh, agrees with this approach, maintaining that
Tiberius Gracchus was “Constitutionally incapable of seeing both sides of a question, or
even of seeing that there were two sides.” (Frank Burr Marsh, A history of the
Roman World from 146 to 30 BC, 1939).
Tiberius’ impeachment of Octavius also had a considerable effect on not only the
Senate’s opinion on him, but also on the people’s opinion of him. As a result of this,
once his tribuneship came to an end, Tiberius turned his focus to once again to raising
public interest. So, when King Attalus III of Pergamum died and left his entire fortune to
Rome, the former tribune seized the opportunity. He planned to use the now monarch-
less kingdom’s wealth to fund his agrarian reforms. (The Brothers Gracchi: The
Tribunates of Tiberius & Gaius Gracchus, 2012). However, it was common at this time
for the Senate to handle all foreign affairs. So, when Tiberius unabashedly disregarded
this, once again blatantly ignoring senatorial tradition, and stated that he himself would
submit a proposal, the Senate was incensed. Senator after senator berated Tiberius for
his ignorance. Even Cicero, speaking from a senatorial viewpoint roughly 70 years after
Tiberius’ death, criticizes the politician’s decision, saying “I only wish that Tiberius
Sempronius Gracchus had possessed political intentions as good as his oratorical
talents.” (Cicero, Letters, p. 254). As a result of his deposition of Octavius, Tiberius
was now fearing for his life, as the Senate was openly threatening him. Esteemed
Greek historian Appian confirms this, writing “[his opponents said that] as soon as
Gracchus should become a private citizen he would be sorry.” (Appian, pp. 89). The
foreboding wrath of the Roman oligarchy had Tiberius once again pursuing the
sacrosanctity that came along with being Tribune, running for a second term, something
that, like many things Tiberius pursued, was unheard of at the time, and considered
outrageous. (Michael Burger, 2013). However, whilst Plutarch, Cicero, Appian and
Frank Burr Marsh were quick to name just one problem which brought about Tiberius’
death, leading ancient historian and professor at Harvard University, Ernst Badian offers
the possibility that it was “his unconstitutional behaviour” which “helped to precipitate
his downfall.” (E. Badian, Tiberius Gracchus and the beginning of the Roman
Revolution, 1972). Plutarch’s version of the events which followed Tiberius’ death
supports this emphatically, stating that “the Senate no longer opposed the distribution of
public land and, proposed that the People should elect a commissioner in place of
Tiberius.” (Plutarch, Tiberius Gracchus). Through this perspective, it is made clear
that instead of the Senate’s expression of severe displeasure being due to the reforms
which Tiberius was so adamantly pushing, it was the actions of the former tribune that
sparked displeasure within the oligarchy, subsequently alluding to the idea that it was
more likely the culmination of events fostered by Tiberius Gracchus’ flagrant negligence
towards senatorial tradition which ultimately brought about his demise.

The untimely death of Tiberius Gracchus was undoubtedly an event which shook the
Roman Republic to its core. The politician’s term as tribune was certainly memorable,
both to those who opposed him and to the plebeians whom he served. Tiberius’
tribuneship and consequent death is considered by many historians [Harriet I. Flower:
2009; Jurgen Von Unger-Sternberg: 2004] to be the beginning of the Roman Republic’s
downfall. Senior Fellow at the New York University Dr. Benjamin Straumann, writing for
the Oxford University Press opines that “long after Tiberius’ death, the unintended
consequences of his constitutional arguments and actions provided the motor propelling
the most important crises of the last century of the Republic and resulting in the
destructive momentum that ultimately deformed the Roman Republic decisively.”
(Benjamin Straumann, Oxford University Press, 2016, ‘Crisis and
Constitutionalism: Roman Political Thought from the Fall of the Republic to the
Age of Revolution’). This idea is emphatically supported by Cicero, whose belief was
that Tiberius’ “habit of disregarding legality” would spread to his followers and
“[transform] our empire.”, something which made the philosopher “anxious about the
survival of our country, which can only have permanent future existence if the
institutions and customs established by our ancestors remain intact.” (Cicero, pp. 184-
85). Tiberius Gracchus’ actions and the measures that he took to obtain success can be
seen to have had a significance on the Roman Republic that was longer lasting than the
impact that Tiberius’ death did. This idea is put forth by previously cited historian and
professor Ernst Badian, who in the same work stated that even Tiberius’ “noble allies,
[who were] giving timid support while he lived, hastened to approve of the manner of his
death. But his work could not be stopped.” (E. Badian, 1972). This alludes to the idea
that rather than the introduction of institutionalised violence being the event which more
effectively precipitated the downfall of the Roman Republic, it may have been Tiberius’
actions, namely those which broke senatorial tradition, which triggered the breakdown
of the Republic.

Even after the controversial death of Tiberius Gracchus, the example that Tiberius had
set by opposing the Senate and disregarding constitutional traditions had a lasting effect
on the Republic and can be seen repeatedly throughout the remaining years of the
Republican Era. Namely by opportunists who are now considered as key figures in the
eventual breakdown of the Roman Republic. From the esteemed Gaius Marius, who
held the office of consul seven times an unprecedented, record-breaking seven times
over the course of his political career, to probably the most notable figure in the
breakdown of the Roman Republic, Julius Caesar, who was made dictator for life and
whose death marked the end of the Roman Republic, it is made painfully clear that each
of these figures who were imperative in the breakdown of the Republic, were seen to
have demonstrated a single commonality with Tiberius Gracchus: a similar vindictive
ruthlessness towards the propulsion of their own political and personal agendas. (Gaius
Julius Caesar: Constitutional problems, 2020). It was this kind of unfaltering ambition
that fostered within each in each key individual a complete willingness, or even an
inclination, towards the shattering of any and all senatorial and constitutional norms that
might hinder them on their way to success.
Tiberius’ aim during his tribunal period was simple. He aimed at improving or even
solving the crisis of the Roman farmer, and his agrarian reforms were a simple solution
to this. However, although Tiberius’ reforms may not have been particularly
revolutionary, the measures that he took to obtain the outcome which he so desired
were. In his unrelenting ambition towards the propulsion of his own political agenda,
Tiberius did not hesitate to break any traditions that might constrain him. Similar
inclinations towards the infringement of senatorial and constitutional normalcies can be
seen repeated throughout the remaining history of the Roman Republic by key figures
such as Gaius Marius and Julius Caesar. As such, through the consideration of various
primary and secondary sources, it can be concluded that, although the introduction of
institutionalised violence through the death of Tiberius Gracchus may have had a
significant peripheral impact on the systematic breakdown of the Roman Republican
system, it is evident that the former tribune’s introduction of the standardized violation of
senatorial and constitutional traditions had a more effectively precipitated the imminent
downfall of the Roman Republic.

Appendix:
“When Tiberius passed through Etruria and found the country almost depopulated and
its husband men and shepherds imported barbarian slaves, he first conceived the policy
which was to be the source of countless ills to himself and his brother.” (Plutarch,
Tiberius Gracchus, p. 161).

“I only wish that Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus had possessed political intentions as
good as his oratorical talents.” (Cicero, p. 254).

“Lawlessness in individuals must be deprecated with equal determination.

take Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus for example. Let us suppose that, as time goes on,
this habit of disregarding legality begins to spread, and transforms our empire from the
rule of law to the rule of force....I am anxious about the survival of our country, which
can only have permanent future existence if the institutions and customs established by
our ancestors remain intact.” (Cicero, pp. 18485).

“Indeed what caused the downfall of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus,” as he had

“[removed] one of his own colleagues from office, because he [Octavius] had exercised
his right of veto against Tiberius Gracchus.” (Cicero, On Government, P.205).

“Tiberius Gracchus’ deposition of Octavius set in motion the constitutional conflict over
the limits of the People’s authority; and long after Tiberius’ death, the unintended
consequences of his constitutional arguments and actions provided the motor propelling
the most important crises of the last century of the Republic and resulting in the
destructive momentum that ultimately deformed the Roman Republic decisively.”
(Benjamin Straumann, Oxford University Press, 2016, ‘Crisis and
Constitutionalism: Roman Political Thought from the Fall of the Republic to the
Age of Revolution’).

“Gracchus, immensely popular. [He] was escorted home by the multitude as though he
were the founder, not of a single city or people, but of all the nations of Italy [his
opponents said that] as soon as Gracchus should become a private citizen he would be
sorry that he had done outrage to the sacred and inviolable office of tribune, and had
sown in Italy so many seeds of future strife.” (Appian, pp. 89).

“Tiberius Gracchus seems to have been a well-developed type of the doctrinaire

reformer. He saw a great evil, he thought he saw the remedy, and he was determined
to carry through his bill. All that we know of him goes to show that he was
constitutionally
incapable of seeing both sides of a question, or even of seeing that there were two
sides.” (Frank Burr Marsh, A history of the Roman World from 146 to 30 BC, 1939).

References:
Fife, S., 2012. The Brothers Gracchi: The Tribunates Of Tiberius & Gaius Gracchus.
[online] Ancient History Encyclopedia. Available at:
<https://www.ancient.eu/article/95/the-brothers-gracchi-the-tribunates-of-tiberius--g/>
[Accessed 12 June 2020].

Gill, N., 2019. How The Gracchi Brothers Tried To Change Ancient Rome. [online]
ThoughtCo. Available at: <https://www.thoughtco.com/gracchi-brothers-tiberius-gaius-
gracchus-112494> [Accessed 19 June 2020].

Encyclopedia Britannica. 2020. Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus | Biography, History, & Death.

[online] Available at: <https://www.britannica.com/biography/Tiberius-Sempronius-Gracchus>
[Accessed 19 June 2020].

Geer, R., 1939. Notes on the Land Law of Tiberius Gracchus. Transactions and
Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 70, p.30.

Burger, M., 2008. The Shaping Of Western Civilization, Volume I: From Antiquity To

Enlightenment. University of Toronto Press.

Livius.org. 2020. Gaius Julius Caesar: Constitutional Problems - Livius. [online]

Available at: <https://www.livius.org/articles/person/caesar/caesar-08/> [Accessed 19
June 2020].