Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 2:52 am Post subject: Questions
Why are the Gracchi (the two Gracchus brothers) so concerned with land reform? Why do they see a need for it? Why are others murderously opposed to it?
The Gracchi feel that the commoner's poor stance in financial world is due to rich's tremendous possion of land. This disproportionate situation in society leaves other's in a lower place in society, therefore in order to dispense equality, changes must be made. the reason for opposition would be the potential loss for the rich. Similar to previous president's low tax policy which appeals to the rich where as one who is unable to provide low taxes could threaten their wealth.
· What precedents are set by the events surrounding the Gracchi? What do you predict will be the outcome of these precedents? The Gracchi had presented a favorable option for the poor in Roman society. The lower classes have seen what is possible yet they be denied such advantages. This could possibly result in a revolt within Rome.
· If you were a senator at the time of the Gracchi’s deaths, would you propose a monument in their honor? Why or why not? If you did, what would it look like and where would you build it? Yes, their desire to support those with very little funds is an aspect that should be present throughout all leaders. My statue would be composed of bronze and placed in a close proximity to the Curia.
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 3:38 am Post subject: Questions
1. The Gracchi were so devoted to their cause because they felt it not only appealed to their sense of virtus, but it made political and militaristic sense to distribute land more evenly among the people of Rome, rather than having the power in the hands of a few. However, the rich, overcome by greed, were vehemently opposed to the law; they had nothing to gain from it, and they felt they had a right to their land that they had earned themselves.
2. Previous to the Gracchis’ idea of land reform, the Senate began to gain more and more power. Not actual power, but the kind of power Rome values in its government – indirect power. This showed an unequal balance of power among the branches of government. During the time of the Gracchi brothers, however, the power shifts all over the government; however, there is never an equal distribution in power anymore. This will most likely lead to an entire governmental collapse in the near future, where government ceases to be effective and just, and rebellion and continuous onslaught from their neighbors tears the country apart.
3. I would probably propose a monument in their honor. They were perfect Romans; just, audacious, and utilizing power when necessary to get their point across. On top of that, they never yielded to the opposition of the government; that is a testament to their belief in their policies. I would build the monument near the Temple of Diana by the Aventine Hill, which is where they made their last stand; and the monument would just be a plain monument with the text detailing the history that occurred there.
Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 5:12 am Post subject: Questions
1. They were so concerned with the land reform because they thought that the way the Roman government had been running was completely unfair. Since most of the governemnt was run by the wealthiest people in Rome that reflected in the way rich and poor people got treated. The rich had all the land and the poor had next to nothing. In order for Rome to still function they felt it was necessary to even out the land.
2. The senate, meaning the wealthy people of Rome were starting to gain way too much power. The Roman Republic was starting to go back to having all the power placed in just a few elite peoples hands instead of in the people of Rome. There movements were made to try and give the power back to the people. Making Rome have more equality.
3. I would make a monument for him because he really stopped Rome from heading in a bad direction and he did what was good for the greater amount of people. Thinking about the big picture and doing what was reasonable for everybody instead of just a small group of people. If I were a sentator though I don't think I would because wht he did actually took power away from the senate so if I were a sentaor I don't think I would like him as much as if I were one fo the poorer people.
i cant find the readings! can somebody tell me around where in the binder they are?
yar where the heck is it? next time can we have page numbers please?
I guess technically it's not really in the " A History of Rome" it's after all the maps in that section and past the punic war readings. It's right after page 209 (sack of corinth) the heading says " the new society" and under that in smaller letters it says "senate and nobles in charge."page 146. it has a big pic of Sarcophagus
1. the brothers thought it to be an unjustice that those who worked hard for rome, and were responsible for all the dirty work, did not share in the wealth of the ones in charge, and that for rome to be led fairly, land should be portioned equally.
2. The senates increase in power was just making the already wealthy even more saturated. this had to be stopped, and was argued against with the reform
3. From the senates point of view, i would act like a stubborn rich person, if it doesn't benefit in my favor i go against it. so if i was a senator, no. as a general opinion, they stood up for what they believed was right, and showed rome what real power was. that kind of heroism would definitly deserve a monument
1-They were so concerned with land reform because the Gracchi realized that most of the roman citizens were not nobels. by distrubuting more land they distribute more money and raise the vale of Rome, making the romans stronger. If the romans have a wealthier socity then thy would appeal more to tother cities they ask to join them, and it also streanghtens their relationships with current allies and cities they oversee. Others were opposed to this because the wealthy/nobels had nothing to gain, it was an unfair advantage to the poorer citizens.
2- The Gracchi set a precedent in the polotics of Rome becausetheir bill on land reform bypassed the senate going directly to the counsil. This threatend the senate's superiority and also worried other nobels because they wondered if this would affect their power aswell. This transaction then wet the precedent of being able to use tribunes as a way to start chnafw with out approbal, upsetting the usual republics ballance.
3- I would propose to build a monument because the Gracchis considered all romans in thier actions not just the nobles wich is something everyone can learn from and shoud keep in mind. I would also build ir by Avenitne hill and probably just have a normal monument discribing/representing thier acheavments and values
1. The two Gracchi brothers were concerned about land reform for various reasons. Fundamentally, they wanted to retrieve the public land for the poor. They felt this would address the injustices of their society. One injustice of their society was the wealthy having more power over the poor. This resulted with lower classes in extreme poverty. Government was "virtually run by a closed, club-like circle of about two thousand men belonging to fewer than twenty families."(146-147) so families that were not elite, basically were not well represented in government. Which stirred many problems because government made laws that favored the wealthy. The wealthy were opposed to land reform because they were greedy and they " fight and die to protect the wealth and luxury"(252) of the elite.
2. A precedent set by the events surrounding the Gracchi that stood out was their public approval. The fact that they had a lot of public support in the beginning, can give one a glimpse into the future where the Gracchi actually use that power to their advantage. For example, when Gracchus and his partisans used violence at the voting assembly.
3. Yes, I think I would. He embodied roman values (strength, action, etc) and fought for his ideals until his death. I would build it near-ish to the capitol and I think it would look like a farming tool or something that represented the land.
The Gracchi brothers were very concerned with land reform because they seemed to care more about the well being of the lass fortunate than the wealthier Romans. Tiberius thought that “men who should have been punished as lawbreakers, who should have been fined and made to surrender the land which they were illeagally exploiting, were granted compensation for quitting their unlawful aquisitions so that citizens in need of assistance could have them.” So they believed in taking possesions from those who did not deserve them, or unlawfully had them, and gave them to those who truly needed it by creating balance of land owenership. They highly favored the needs of the lower class over the needs of thei higher class Romans, which is hwy they were against it. People thought that by doing this, it was an insult to the senate, and that he was “doing outrage to the sacred.”
Following the decisions that the higher class Romans believed were outrageous, it is only natural that people would want to revolt and do everything in their power to prevent this from continuing. However, this would tear the nation apart city by city, causing the Roman people to be less trusting of their government officials and policies. Because I agree with the land reform that the Gracchi brothers created, I would make a statue in their honour because their efforts to create balance of the classes is highly commendable.
The gracchi are concerned with land reform because they have met and know the poor people and are appalled at the state in which they are living in. they want to reform land so the poor can live in comfort. the other government officials are opposed to this because redistributing land means taking some of their wealth and giving it away.
the precedents set by the gracchi's were that the land was to be redistributed amongst the poor and that the senate should not have as much power. i believe people would be able to live in better conditions with thse new laws. But the rich will eventually take back their land.
if i were a senator i would not want a monument put up for the brothers. they tried to take power away from the senate and tried to take money from the rich. me personally...i think there should be a monument because the had their heads in the right place and believed in helping the less fortunate when no one else did. but i don't believe a senator would believe the same thing.
1) The two Gracchi brothers were concerned about land reform because they wanted Rome to be shared. They wanted to open more public land for the poor because they didn’t like the fact that only the wealthy had certain advantages in the Roman society. They also didn’t want any injustice in the city and they thought that land reform would help. Some, however, were opposed to this idea, because this would give the less fortunate many advantages and there wouldn’t be much to gain for the rich.
2) The Gracchi brothers wanted to make Rome and its government more equal, because for one, the Senate was gaining too much power. They set a precedent in the politics of Rome, and this threatened the power of the Senate.
3) Yes, I would propose a monument in the Gracchi brother’s honor. I agreed with their ideas of land reform to make Rome a more fair place, even for those with less riches. I would want to put it near the capital where it would be seen so people would recognize what they did and tried to do.
1. The Gracchi were so concerned with land reform because they wanted ‘not wealth of money, but wealth of men’ and because they saw how unfair the lower class of Rome was being treated when it came to land, especially since in Rome land equals wealth. They saw a need for land reform because when passing through Etruria that the country had become depopulated and barbaric. Others were so opposed to land reform because they didn’t want to have to give up their land and power.
2. One of the precedents set by the events surrounding the Gracchi was a message to the lower class of Rome; that you can stand up against the upper class when faced with unfair treatment and make a difference. However, another message was that if you do stand up against the upper class there could be consequences, like losing your life. I predict that the outcome of these precedents will be that the both the rich and the poor will be more wary of each other. The poor will be more up to fighting for their rights and the rich will be more willing to do anything necessary to keep their wealth.
3. If I was a senator at the time of the Gracchi’s deaths, I would propose a monument in their honor, because they did a lot to help Rome without thinking so much about themselves, and also so that people would be reminded of what had been accomplished, the cost at which it had been accomplished, and what it is possible to accomplish. The monument would probably look like a statue of the Gracchi doing something to help or enforce land reform.
1) After the Punic War, Roman republic was multiple times larger than it was. The foreign land (especially the fertile land of northern Africa) then fell into the hands of a few rich patricians and turned into latifundia. Peasant farmers could not beat the price of latifundia’s mass produced products and had to sell their land to the rich men, who grew his latifundia larger and larger. Gracchi brothers thought these issues were ultimately weakening the republic, and therefore sought to reform. Tiberius Gracchus made a speech in front of the assembly before proposing the law, which prohibited any Roman to hold no more than 500 iugera of public land for himself and 250 iugera for each of his sons (up to two sons). He stated that “Romans possessed most of their territory by conquest, and that they had hopes of occupying the rest of the habitable world; but now the question of greatest hazard was whether they should gain the rest by having plenty of brave men or, through their weakness and mutual jealousy, lose to their enemies what they already possessed.” (254) The rich, of course, opposed such law, because the law would take their property away, which Romans valued very much. The rich complained; “some said they had paid the price of the land to their neighbors. Others said the graves of their ancestors were in the ground, which had been allotted to them in the division of their fathers’ estates. Others said that their wives’ dowries had been expended on these estates, or that the land had been given to their own daughters as dowry.” (253)
2)
The Gracchi brothers who were tribunes, therefore sacred and inviolable, because they were consecrated to the people and were champions of the people, were killed by the Senate. I predict that from that moment, the inviolability of the tribunes were only nominal.
3)
If I was a senator, I would not propose a monument in the Gracchi brothers’ honor, because they tried to take my property away. They can’t do that! The Senators rule the Republic, not the people.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
