THE ROMAN REVOLUTION I: Events and Issues
to 80 B.C..
- The Reform of the Roman Army
- The demands of empire created the need for a
standing army and for a professional corps of officers.
- Traditionally, the Romans employed a
citizen militia. The right to vote was tied with the responsibility to
serve in the army. This militia had conquered the Mediterranean world.
To conquer is one thing, to hold is another. The core of the army was
the peasant farmer but such individuals could not afford to remain in
continuous service. There was however a large number of property-less
Roman citizens who, though not liable for service, might be so employed.
- Marius, to meet the dangers of the German
advance in 104, enrolled these proletarians and they continued to be
used thereafter.
- Problems
- These men had nothing to lose; were
prepared for revolution.
- As professional soldiers, they demanded
both salary and bonus after service. They were dependent on commander
to achieve it.
- This professional army increasingly owed
its allegiance to its commander and not to the state.
- Need for an experienced corps of commanders
- Traditionally a dilemma for Romans as
military leaders achieved that rank by being elected to office. Many
disasters. Dictatorship no longer possible; appointment of a commander extra
ordinem.
- The Constitutional Problem of the
extraordinary command
- The position was outside the constitution
and had no normal constraints on behavior.
- In fact, the office was usually given be
the assemblies in defiance of the wishes of the senate (the senate
traditionally had the responsibility for assigned "provinces"
and commands).
- In sum, the combination of the
extra-ordinary commander and the new professional army and the dynamic
patronal relationship between the two constituted an important ingredient
in the civil wars of the period.
- The "optimates" and the "populares"
- These are not political parties in the
modern American sense nor do the terms describe an alignment of the
senate vs. the people. They have no underlying ideological basis.
- Some vocabulary...
·
factio: a clique of leading men who had common designs
for their own advantage in the state.
·
partes: the divisions in the elite. The two groups are
called the optimates and the populares.
- The differences between the two partes:
- Not an alignment of senate against people,
but a struggle between two groups of men of noble and senatorial rank.
- Essentially the difference lay in the
instrument of legal power. The optimates controlled the senate
and the higher magistracies and pursued their goals by traditional
means (senatus consulta and decrees). The populares, in
contrast, would have preferred the prestige of being optimates, but,
frustrated in their bid for advancement in the traditional manner,
turned instead to the people and obtained commands and powers by laws/leges
without the approval of the senate.
- The propaganda:
- To some, the optimates were the
defenders of the constitution, of law and order, and of tradition. They
were boni="good men". To others they were ruthless
reactionaries willing to defend property, privilege and the status quo
at any cost.
- To some, the populares were selfless
reformers who understood the new demands on the state; to others they
were unscrupulous politicians with no sense of the traditional
constitution that had made Rome great. They were interested simply in
personal power; were potential tyrants/monarchs.
- Each side claimed to be "liberating
the state from tyranny". RC I, 269-75.
- The Issues:
- The prize was not simply the annual
magistracy (especially the consulate) but the opportunities that offices
provide to exploit the wealth of a might empire.
- Programs
- state subsidy of grain and bread for urban
mob (only comprehensible if the mob controlled the assemblies),
- agrarian laws: land for the poor,
- extension of citizenship: provides new
clientele but endangers an older one,
- defense of private property (often conflicts
with (b.),
- sound government (especially toward
subjects of Rome).
- The Italian Question: The incorporation of Rome and Italy
politically was an important step in the transition from city-state to
world-state; ultimately it generated a state that transcended linguistic
and cultural differences.
- Background
- Italy consisted of a numerous communities
(urban plus supporting rural areas). Some of these communities enjoyed
full Roman citizenship, others had a half citizenship called the ius
Latinum or "the rights of Latins" (important commercial,
connubial and residential rights but not suffrage), a third group had
only allied status ius Italicum. The latter were nominally
independent states, but owed military service for the common defense.
The situation in 133:
- Allies provide troops but not taxed;
autonomous except in foreign policy.
- Provinces consist of subject allies who
are taxed and autonomous in all but foreign affairs and usually did not
provide troops. Increasing number of Romans and Italians (veterans)
settle and form communities of citizens with no official status.
- Rome had conquered the Mediterranean world
both with her own and with Italian citizen militias. The latter had
fought willingly enough against external enemies (Carthage), but now the
acquisition of empire seemed to benefit only Rome; they had shared the
dangers, but were denied the profits.
- Allies complained of the increasing
arrogant behavior of magistrates.
- Gracchus had proposed to extend Roman
citizenship to all with the Latin right and to give the Latin right to
all Italians. This was a sensible solution and eventually the one that
was adopted.
- The problem was aggravated by the
unfulfilled promises of the populares. Bills had been proposed and
defeated in 125, 122, and 91.
- Opposition
- There was legitimate concern about whether
Rome could absorb so many at one time (it would double her citizen body)
and retain her identity.
- Urban population opposed because it perceived
that it would mean a dilution of benefits they increasing enjoyed
through the largesse of the populares.
- The optimates opposed because they
feared the disruption of the traditional system; one man would acquire
too great a clientele and threaten the constitution (and their
privileged position).
- Resolution: Bear in mind that the Romans did
have a generous tradition on citizenship.
- Social War fought between 90 and 88. The oath
of the allies; Italian bull
gores Roman wolf
- Rome wins by selectively distributing
citizenship to some of the Italians and breaking the strength of the
movement.
- Note that the Italians created a
constitution modeled after that of Rome...they were ready to be
absorbed.
- The internal problems were overcome by
allowing a number of magistrates to sponsor the necessary legislation,
thus diluting the danger of excessive clientele.
- The effects: census data: citizens in 115 =
395,000; 96 = 470,000; 81 = 910,000
- Enfranchisement --the theory. Incorporation by communities was
the usual method
- It violated the ancient concept of the
autonomous city-state..
- The basis of municipal life was the charter
that spelled out the powers of the community but always allows for appeal
to Rome. The charter was fairly standard. (RC I, p.445ff.)
- The crucial principle is the notion of dual
citizenship.
- How the concepts of Status and Rank were
used in this case. The more Romanized a community was the easier and less
expensive it was to govern. Hence, the Romans provided incentives for
subjects to become Romans and to move up the scale.
- Capitulant: lowest status, after conquest;
no individual or community rights
- Ally: dependant subject state
- Latin right: half citizenship
- Municipium: full citizenship
- Colony: full citizenship but more prestige.