Civitas popularis – Novae Athenae

[Alcsentre Calanice]

Civitas popularis – Novae Athenae

An alternate history of democracy
​

This is my first alternate history – I hope you don't mind the frequent mistakes (orthograph and history).

Gaius Sempronius Gracchus speaking

​

The scenario: What if the brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus had succeeded in transforming Rome's oligarchic regime in a more democratic/meritocratic republic? This not by obeying a certain plain, serving a clear defined ideology, but by triggering a real Roman Revolution which leads to the irreversible transformation of Roman society, military and politics. Which policy the Roman Republic would enact, how would the young democracy defend itself against the ancient oligarchs? In which direction the romanised world would develop?

Source of all excerpts: Anthology Of Roman History In Saxon Language – Editor: Magister Henrik Horatius Skreiber, Fredrikstatt, Nova Hibernia

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

I – Prologue

From: Constrictio historiae romanae – Marcellus Italicus, translated into Germanic by Alexander Deitholm

The Roman empire arount 130 BCE

​

Now, we will speak about the causes of the Roman Revolution and the tragic situation leading to this energic manifestation of the will and the aim of the Roman people, eventually liberating the energies leading the Roman people to the throne of the whole world.

The first great rebellion in Roman history is commonly set in the year 243 AUC 1) ), then the Roman aristocracy, the patricians, chased the despot Tarquinus who was actually an Etruscan marionet. The assembly of the possessing, the comitia centuriata, elected two consuls governing the state along with the senate. Thus, Rome was a republic of the wealthy citizen.

A great part of men (and naturally women and slaves) was indeed excluded from power. Especially the plebeians, a partly rich class of Romans, claimed access to the offices of the state and defence against patrician arbitrariness. Their fight for rights is known as the “Struggleof the Orders” – struggle's instrument was pression. The new oligarchy needed troops to combat against the Etruscan monarchies wanting to destruct the liberty of Rome. By resisting against enrolment in the legions, the plebs gained the right to elect the tribunes of the plebs (260 AUC 2) ), to stand as a candidate for the consulship (386 BC 3) ) and, eventually, to enact laws without the consent of the senate and the patricians (466 AUC 4) ). Patricians and rich plebeians formed now new ruling call, the nobilitas, dominating the politics.

Nonetheless, the third and most important development occurred after these preliminary processes. The cause was the Roman society itself: Rome needed violent expansion to survive. The senators needed money to finance opulent “electoral campaign” (to assert their influence); the upper classes needed new land and new slaves to enlarge they economical power; the more modest traders enjoyed the newly opened markets.

Meanwhile the peasants of Italy fought in foreign countries – in Africa, Hispania, Greece... During their absence farms at home went to ruin. Often they were bought up by senators using slaves instead of Roman citizen (and already having big parts of the public land, the ager publicus), and the landless farmers flocked to Rome where they were a potential support for political reformer. The problem was aggravated by the fact that only possessing citizen served in the legions (they had to pay for their equipment). Consequently, this crisis was menacing the empire itself.

Traditional Roman soldiers
​

1) 510 BCE
2) 493 BCE
3) 367 BCE
4) 287 BCE

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

II – Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus

From: Biographiae romanorum famosorum – Gaius Plinius, Translation: Marcus Comnenus

Cornelia with her sons Tiberius and Gaius

The family of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus was one of the mightiest in Rome. Tiberius was born in 591 AUC 1)) as the eldest son of the older Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, the consul of the years 567 AUC 2)) and 590 AUC 3)), and of Cornelia, the daughter of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the victor of Hannibal. Tiberius was married with Claudia Pulchra – no childrens were born out of this alliance.

Gaius Sempronius Gracchus, his brother, was born in 600 AUC 4)) and was going to play a great role in Roman politics – just like his Tiberius. Their sister, Sempronia, was the woman of Scipio Aemilianus, the glorious victor of the somber Carthage.
After some minor functions, Tiberius was elected questor of Spain. There, he organised the capitulation of a Roman army and therefore he searched a project restoring his reputation. He hence took part in Pulcher's reform “party” and decided to distribute the public land to the humble citizen; to liberate the Roman population out of their dependence regarding wealthy politicians and to remedy the army problem.

Tiberius finally became tribune of the plebs in 620 AUC 5)); Scaevola, one of his supporters, became consul. Tiberius affronted the senate by proposing the agrarian law without the consentment of this body. The law (Lex sempronia agraria) was specificating that no citizen would be allowed to possess more than 500 jugera (approximately 125 hectares) of the ager publicus and any land that they occupied above this limit would be confiscated by the state. Furthermore, he proposed that the fortune of Attalos III, king of Pergamon, should be used to finance the reform.
In the course of this another tribune of the plebs (Marcus Octavius) had to be removed from his office (the laws actually forbid this). To secure his reforms Tiberius was reelected for the year 621 AUC 6)) – he promised some popular reforms. This was the starting point of his revolution...

Some days before a planed legislative assembly, Tiberius had a nightmare showing his near death. The people of rome often camped around his house to protect him, but he lastly realised that he will need a real guard to protect him from his many enemies. To do so he paid some hundreds known fighters out of his own fortune.

1) 162 BC
2) 177 BC
3) 163 BC
4) 153 BC
5) 133 BC
6) 132 BC

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

III – The day of revenge

Historia omnis est historia pugnae classis.
“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
- Carolus Morus Treverus

During this assembly (in 620 AUC) Tiberius' opponents demand to arrest him because of an attempt to become king. After the consul declined such a demand, Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio and other senatorial ruffians stormed the capitol and tried to kill the Tribune – without taking into consideration his disciplined supporters. The attackers were drove back, Scipio Nasica was captured – enraged plebeians lynched him without a trial.

Hearing that some members of the upper classes had attacked their beloved one the masses of Rome started to plague real or supposed optimates. Nor the not existing Roman militia neither Tiberius' pleading could stop the furious mob. Only the beginning night achieved to stop the populace and to restore the order in the capital – the victims of this day were fervent members of the senatorial opposition like Octavius and Calpurnius Piso Frugi (one of the consuls).

A primitive drawing of the Curia Hostilia

The few senators supporting Gracchus (Gaius Sempronius Gracchus, Claudius Pulcher, Publius Crassus Mucianus, Gaius Papirius Carbo) – completed by the consul Publius Mucius Scaevola and some trembling conservatives – assembled in the curia next day. The popular decree appointing Tiberius dictator as “dictator legibus faciendis et populi placandae causa” (“dictator for the making of laws and for the reconciliation of the people”). This task was often compared to the office of the lawgiving Solon of Athens, the father of attic democracy.

Without having a concrete program and don't wanting to cause additional hostile reactions in the ranks of the senate, Tiberius hold a vague speech about the rule of law and the punition of citizen don't respecting this law. He proposed a reconciliation of the classes and promised to institute a well organised government.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

Interesting...just one nitpick-Tiberius (AFAIK) didn't propose granting the allies citizenship or granting the equestrians the privilege of being jurors. He was concerned solely with land reform IIRC. The jurors being controlled by equestrians and granting of citizenship to allies was put forward by Gaius.

If he does here though, then his support from the Roman masses will quickly evaporate for a time like it did with Gaius, because the masses didn't want the allies to be granted citizenship either.

Other than that though, I'm interested to see where this is going. Nice start.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

Interesting...just one nitpick-Tiberius (AFAIK) didn't propose granting the allies citizenship or granting the equestrians the privilege of being jurors. He was concerned solely with land reform IIRC. The jurors being controlled by equestrians and granting of citizenship to allies was put forward by Gaius.

If he does here though, then his support from the Roman masses will quickly evaporate for a time like it did with Gaius, because the masses didn't want the allies to be granted citizenship either.

Other than that though, I'm interested to see where this is going. Nice start.

Hm. I thought so too but master wiki said something else. I will change it.

 

[Xenophonte]

Interesting

Interesting. I was always curious to see a story with a pod focused on the triumph of the Gracchi. I'm looking forward to its development.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

Interesting. I was always curious to see a story with a pod focused on the triumph of the Gracchi. I'm looking forward to its development.

The main problem is that many people see in the Gracchi only two populares wanting to enlarge their personal power - this might be true in the case of Tiberius, but Gaius Gracchus had a real and profound political program.

Others try to make communist out of the Gracchi - this is wrong too.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

IV – The imperium's situation

Being the supreme magistrate of the Roman republic (a dictator hold the imperium magnum, had no colleague, was irresponsible for official actions and had even the authorisation to pass laws without the consentment of the assemblies), Tiberius had to deal with the various difficulties of administration and foreign policy.

An extract of the Liber annalis Romae – Collegium pontificum, Translation: Claudius Londonii


The public opinion of our Italian allies was poor for some decades; only Romans benefit of the agrarian law and hadn't the right to elect their own representants; though, they had to served in the legions and to contribute one half of the global army power.



After the Roman riots were known in Capua and Cumae (two subdued cities), a rebellion broke out there. They reclaimed the Roman citizenship and their own administration. A decree of he dictator Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus granted therefore some basic civil rights and the privilege to elect the prefects of their cities out of Roman candidates. Nevertheless, the situation remained tensed.


Most of the provinces accepted the new government fastly, excepted the governor of Africa, Lucius Cornelius, a convinced devotee of the senate and proprietor of some extended parts of the ager publicus. He propagated that Tiberius was a lying aspirant to tyranny and decided to withhold the grain destined to feed the city of Rome. Thus, Tiberius Gracchus send Scipio Aemilianus to reconquest the vital province.


The Ptolemaic empire, the second important grain supplier and ally of the Roman republic in the east declared his independence: “Rome is splitted into three parts: Africa, the oligarchs and the democrats – a real stasis. We have to use this opportunity regaining our autonomy”, said the king Ptolemy VIII (he was himself fighting against his sister and wife Cleopatra III).


Attalos III, the king of Pergamon, died in this year and bequeathed his kingdom to the Roman republic. Because the republic were slow in securing the new province, Aristonicus, who claimed to be the illegitimate son of an earlier Pergamene king proclaimed himself ruler and tried to conquest his realm.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

Hmm, I expect those who fled the city will be returning soon to try and take back the city? I'm not entirely convinced Aemilianus will be on Gracchus' side here, but I can see him being pragmatic and perhaps joining Gracchus if only to try and moderate him and mediate.

I like where this is going.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

Hmm, I expect those who fled the city will be returning soon to try and take back the city? I'm not entirely convinced Aemilianus will be on Gracchus' side here, but I can see him being pragmatic and perhaps joining Gracchus if only to try and moderate him and mediate.

I like where this is going.

Yes, Scipio Aemilianus is an uncertain point. On the one hand, he was an aristocrat and senator. On the other hand he wasn't really opposed to the agrarian reform (his friend Laelius Sapiens had some reform ideas).

Also a civil war like Sulla against Marius isn't really possible to this time. The soldiers are peasants forced to fight a guerilla war in Spain. They have no really link to Aemilianus; he can't use them to gain power like Ceasar will do it with his army of full time soldiers.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

No doubt a civil war like the sullan ones are out of the question. Though it isn't inconceivable the exiles could gather a band of supporters and perhaps do the unthinkable and promise the allies citizenship for their support-not necessarily intend to follow through with it though.

Though this is just me thinking out loud, I'll try and refrain from doing that since the way you are taking this is quite well done and thought out.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

V – Do we want a democracy?

I behold, and within my heart deep sadness has claimed its place,
As I mark the oldest home of the ancient Ionian race Slain by the sword.
- Solon the lawgiver

While the African campaign was prepared, Tiberius had to think about the reform itself. We way to enact it was secured – now he had to made some tangible ones. There was the problem – nor a political program nor a special manifesto specifying the needed moves existed. Additionally, the Gracchi were under pressure because Tiberius was only dictator for six months; after that, the state would again be in the hands of the oligarchy.


And – we must repeat it – Tiberius himself was an aristocrat seeking to securing his power and the power of his family. He recognised the potential of the agrarian question, but never really attempted to help the people out of his one conviction. Only Gaius, surely more farsighted and idealistic than his older brother, could remedy this problem and remove this lack of ideology. In these times of incertitude, a conversation took place, changing the way of history:


An extract of the novel Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus – Lucius Apuleius Madaurensis, Translation: Marcus Comnenus


A night in Rome; a spacious room, some oil lamps, on the table some papyrus rolls (works of Herodotus, Aristotle and Polybius); Tiberius is reading, Gaius is entering the room.


T: Oh brother! Do I really want a change? Do we want a modification of our government, of our constitution? Our commonwealth is more than perfect! Polybius says that only a mixed government is efficace! We have one! Why should we change it?


G: Actually, dear Tiberius, our republic is imperfect; Polybius doesn't agree – and? You are a politician and not a historian like him. You know who rules our city – 300 old men in a curia over there. There is no equilibrium between the consuls, the senate and the people. The senate controls the magistrates, the people, he even controls himself!


T: So what? Our system was founded in the rebellion against the despotic kings; we triumph over the Etruscans, the Italics, the Greeks, Carthage – our system helped us to do so; our senate led us to victory!


G: This isn't anymore the society of Scipio Africanus and Hannibal. A great number of poor is menacing the senate; in addition, they aren't able to fight for our growing empire. A great number of knights – banker or land owner – attempts to become something in our order. Meanwhile, the senate doesn't see the danger and is obstructing all reforms!


T: What do you want, Gaius? A platonic republic? An ideal regime? We can't destroy the deeds of our ancestors; we have to respect the mos maiorum. Do we really want a total democracy?


G: Not a new Athens, not an unlimited democracy is my aim! I only aspire to restore the balance in our country; not to much power for the rich senators, not to much for the poor masses – Aristoteles said that this is the best regime, a real politeia. The knights, the well educated and temperated citizen, will be the foundation of this reformed republic.


T: But how Gaius, how? This is theory! I need practical measures – I can't enact the Politics of Aristotle as our law.


G: Look at Solon, the Athenian lawgiver. He was a wise man, searching the third way of moderation. Before his reforms, Athens was a city governed by the areopagus and the nine mighty archons. The archons and thus the areopagus were elected by the assembly of the citizens – this assembly was in turn controlled by the rich and the areopagus.

T: And he did what?


G: Solon reformed the economy by limiting the possession of land and cancelled all debts. Too secure his work, he introduced a timocratic political order by admitting even the poor in the assembly and instituting a popular court consisting of all citizen. The upper and middle classes were granted access to the offices which were chosen by lot out of elected candidates. The assembly itself was advised and assembled by a council of 400.


Rome is an oligarchic republic now, as Athens was before Solon. The senate is our areopagus; the consuls are our archons; the comitia are our ecclesia. But we have the power to change it, to make a politeia out of this fossilised body that is our republic.


T: So what do you propose?


G: Firstly the completion of the agrarian reform. Secondly an army reform replenishing the ranks of the legion. Thirdly an ambitious constitutional reform: an egalitarian people's assembly, the opening of the offices of magistrate to more than only the richest one, the creation of a counterpart of the senate, consisting of knights along with the formation of a court dominated by knights.


T: This might be a solution...

 

[DominusNovus]

I'm curious about many of these reforms...

- Most offices were open to Plebeians by the time of the Gracchi.
- How were the Tribunal Assembly and the Plebeian Council not egalitarian?
- Given that the Tribune of the Plebs is endowed with the authority to stop every single action taken by the government, and is elected solely by the plebeians, how is that not an inherently democratic feature of the government?

Not that I maintain that the Republic didn't need reform, I'm just not really sure where you're thinking of going here.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

I'm curious about many of these reforms...

- Most offices were open to Plebeians by the time of the Gracchi.

That's completly right; I even wrote it in my second post. But they were only open to the knights - I think about a reform opening some minor offices even to the members of the second classis of the comitia centuriata.

- How were the Tribunal Assembly and the Plebeian Council not egalitarian?

They are more or less very egalitarian. But the comitia centuriate was an oligarchic assembly - the poor citizen were actually excluded. It's not the comitia tributa which needs a reform - it's the whole system. The prerogatives of the centuries have to be transfered to the tribes.

- Given that the Tribune of the Plebs is endowed with the authority to stop every single action taken by the government, and is elected solely by the plebeians, how is that not an inherently democratic feature of the government?

What is a "plebeian"? Gaius Marius was a plebeian - a rich one. If I mention "rich" and "poor", there is no real link to "patrician" and "plebeian".

Also, to become a Tribune, you needed a large amount of money for your electoral camaping - and because most of the Tribunes were questors before, a census of a knight.

Not that I maintain that the Republic didn't need reform, I'm just not really sure where you're thinking of going here.

I'm searching a possibility to avoid the marian reforms and thus the civil war and to let Rome slowly evolve into a democracy.

 

[DominusNovus]

They are more or less very egalitarian. But the comitia centuriate was an oligarchic assembly - the poor citizen were actually excluded. It's not the comitia tributa which needs a reform - it's the whole system. The prerogatives of the centuries have to be transfered to the tribes.

First of all, the fact that the Comitia Centuriata was more oligarchic than the other assemblies does not detract from the fact that the others weren't. However, that assembly did not exclude the poor, it just excluded the citizens that were ineligible for military service. It was the expansion of that body of citizens that caused much of the instability in the late Republic. The poor were absolutely included in the Comitia Centuriata, as the Proletarii. However, they were under-representated within that assembly, being entirely contained within one century out of 170 voting centuries (each century having one vote, of course).

Also, to become a Tribune, you needed a large amount of money for your electoral camaping - and because most of the Tribunes were questors before, a census of a knight.

Doesn't matter, they were still beholden to their constituency. The problem is not that the rich dominated the higher magistracies: that is inevitable in most societies, and most certainly in a pre-industrial society, where only the rich have the luxury of an education to prepare them for such responsibilities.

I'm searching a possibility to avoid the marian reforms and thus the civil war and to let Rome slowly evolve into a democracy.

Moderate the powers of the Plebeian Tribune, so as to not be able to totally derail the machinery of government (remember that the Principate derived is powers from being voted Tribunal authority).

Reorganize the Centuriate Assembly so that the voting centuries are not as heavily skewed in favor of the highest classes. Also, randomize the voting order, like the Tribal Assembly. Reforming this assembly will make any concerns about the Marian reforms moot.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

First of all, the fact that the Comitia Centuriata was more oligarchic than the other assemblies does not detract from the fact that the others weren't. However, that assembly did not exclude the poor, it just excluded the citizens that were ineligible for military service. It was the expansion of that body of citizens that caused much of the instability in the late Republic. The poor were absolutely included in the Comitia Centuriata, as the Proletarii. However, they were under-representated within that assembly, being entirely contained within one century out of 170 voting centuries (each century having one vote, of course).

I wrote "the poor citizen were actually excluded." Officialy, the poor citizens could vote. But this is theory. Practically, they were excluded. The Proletarii actually never voted - and this is an exclusion.

Moderate the powers of the Plebeian Tribune, so as to not be able to totally derail the machinery of government (remember that the Principate derived is powers from being voted Tribunal authority).

I thought of it. But this is impossible in this situation, because Tiberius is a Tribune and he don't want to restrict his one power. Maybe a later reform will resolve this.

Reorganize the Centuriate Assembly so that the voting centuries are not as heavily skewed in favor of the highest classes. Also, randomize the voting order, like the Tribal Assembly. Reforming this assembly will make any concerns about the Marian reforms moot.

This is "an egalitarian people's assembly". But thanks. I will need the ideas.

 

[DominusNovus]

It really doesn't seem like you're proposing reformation of the Roman Republic, but an outright Revolution.

 

[Alcsentre Calanice]

It really doesn't seem like you're proposing reformation of the Roman Republic, but an outright Revolution.

And? The reform was blocked by the senate in OTL. An ATL can resolve it by violently dispersing resistence agaisnt the needed reform. Or such a reform or the civil war and military dicatatorship of Sulla, Ceasar, Augustus until 1453.

 

[Xenophonte]

Is Alive

Any Updates on this thread?