In the long period between Gaius Gracchus and Marius, the Populista had retreated considerably

2022-06-25 0 By

In the long period between Gaius Gracchus and Marius, the Populista had retreated considerably.Dissatisfaction with senatorial politics may be as strong now as it was then;But the hopes which had formerly attracted men to be the most faithful followers of the Gracchus were now regarded as fanciful, and doubts arose in the minds of many that most dissatisfied persons would not conform to the object of the Gracchus movement.During twenty years of persecution and turmoil, much of the fresh enthusiasm, rock-solid faith and pure moral effort of the early days of the revolution has been worn away.But if the Populist party is no longer as it was under Gaius Gracu, it is only natural that its leader after him should now reside in the party as gaius Gracu did in the party.Until a man rises again, as Gaius Gracchus did, to seize the position of head of state, the leader must be a mere handful of men;Either they are political novices, who have given vent to their youthful passion for rebellion, who have become passionate radicals and pleasing orators, who have been formally recognized, and who have retreated in a more or less artful manner to the ramparts of government;Otherwise they have nothing to lose, nothing to lose, and often nothing to gain or lose in respect of honour, because of private hatred, or even because they like to make a noise, they set themselves up to obstruct and disturb the government.In the former category, for example, gaius Memius and Lucius Crassus, the great orator, first won oratory crowns in opposition and then exploited them to become ardent government parties.But about this time the most famous leaders of the Populists were of the latter kind.To this class is Gaius Servius Glaucia, or What Cicero calls Hypopolus of Rome, a vulgar man of the lowest birth, with the most shameless of public eloquence, who, by his acerbic humor, was so touching that he was even feared by the superhuman;His companion, Lucius Apeleus Saturnin, was superior to himself, and even according to his enemies, a passionate and moving orator, at least not swayed by a base selfishness.When he was quaestor, the Senate had decreed that the commissariat should be taken away from him, not because of his malfeasance, but because the popular office of the time should be given to a leader of the government, Marcus Scholus, rather than to an unknown boy who was not a member of the family.This insult made this ambitious and enterprising man go over to the opposition, and in 651, 103 BC, when he became a pleb Tribune, he avenged his earnings with interest.There was one scandal after another then.He published in the marketplace that Mithradates’ emissaries had bribed Rome — a revelation so damaging to the Senate that it almost cost the daring Tribune his life.When Quintus Meterus of Numidian stood for the office of praetor in 652, 102 BC, Satunin incited a revolt against him, and besieged him at Capitore, till the knights delivered him without bloodshed;The censor Meterus’s revenge, which was expelled from the Senate by Gasatunin and Glaucia in the name of infamy while revising the names of the senators, failed only when meterus’s colleagues were negligent.Satunin was the mastermind, and in spite of the fierce opposition of the government party, he passed the case through the special tribunal for the trial of Capio and his Allies, and in 652, 102 BC, he had a fierce dispute over the re-election of Marius as consul.It is true that Saturnin was the most vigorous opponent of the Senate, and the liveliest and most eloquent leader of the Pleurotus since Gaius Gracchus;Of course, his violence is beyond the predecessors, he is always ready to go down the street, to fight instead of words to refute the enemy party.So did the two leaders of the so-called Aam aadmi party, who now acted in concert with the victorious general.Of course, the interests and purposes of both sides coincide;Even when Marius was a former candidate, at least Satunen had supported him very firmly and effectively.They agreed on their plans for 654, the first 100 years: marius for the sixth consul, Satunin for the second Tribune, and Glaucia for the second consul, in order that with these offices they would be able to carry out their planned political revolution.Glaucia was the less harmful; the Senate acquiesced in his nomination, but did its utmost to prevent marius and Satunin from being elected, or at least to make Marius consul with quintus Meterus, his staunch adversary.All means, legal or otherwise, were employed by both parties, but the Senate could not do it in the bud.Marius was not ashamed to solicit votes from his relatives, even, it is said, to buy them;Indeed, at the time of the election of the Tribunes, nine men were declared on the list of the Government, and quintus Nunius, a man of the same color, who seemed assured of the tenth seat, was struck down by a mob, most of whom, it is said, were marius’ retired soldiers.So the plotters got what they wanted, but with extreme violence.Marius was elected consul of 654, the first 100 years, Glaucia was elected deputy consul of the same year, and Satunin was elected pleb Tribune of the same year;It was not Quintus Meterus who took the second office, but an insignificant Luchius Valerius Flaccus;The unionists were now in a position to carry out the second step of their plan, completing the work which had been interrupted in 633, 121 BC.Let us recall what Gaius Gracchus pursued and the means by which he achieved it.His aim was to break the oligarchy both inside and outside;Therefore, on the one hand, he wanted to restore the authority of the senate, which was completely attached to the Senate, to its inherent supreme power, and to transform the Senate from a governing body into a deliberative body;The aristocracy, on the other hand, divided the state into three classes, citizens of autocracy, Italian Allies, and vassals, and he wanted to abolish these three classes by bringing into line the differences which were incompatible with non-oligarchy.The tripartite incorporated these ideas into the colonial law, a law of which Satunin, in his former office as plebiscite (651, 103 BC), had instituted, and now another (654, 100 BC).As early as 651, that is, 103 BC, the Carthaginian allotment was resumed, chiefly for the benefit of Marius’ soldiers, not only citizens, but also men who seemed to be allied with Italy. Each of these old soldiers was granted a hundred jugs of land in the Province of Africa, about five times the average share of Land in Italy.Now for Rome, Italy’s migration plan, they not only request the provinces have disposable land as far as possible, and taking advantage of a legal excuse – that is, the Romans conquered the small both in the department, said according to law, all the land according to all the department should be the Romans all – requirements outside the Alps are still in the independence of the Celtic tribes in all the land.Gaius Marius was called to preside over the division of the fields and such other arrangements as seemed necessary therefor;If the property in the Temple of Torosa has been or will be restituted by the guilty noble, the new recipient shall be divided into the subsidy.This law not only restores to a great extent the plans of conquest beyond the Alps and beyond, which Gaius Gracchus and Fragus had devised;Moreover, although it was difficult to realize the demand of the Italian to be on an equal status with the Romans, it could not be denied after all. The present law enabled the Italians and the Romans to participate in the immigration together, and undoubtedly stipulated that all the new civil societies were all citizen colonies, which was the preliminary step to meet the Italian demand.But most important of all, if this law were passed and Marius was ordered to carry out the vast plan of the grant of land on his own, he would in effect be king of Rome until it was carried out, and because it was so infinite, he might remain king for the rest of his life.So we can assume that Marius would like to be elected consul every year, just as Gracchus was elected Tribune every year.In general, however, gaius Gracchus and Marius, though in other respects identical in their political positions, differed greatly from each other in that the former was a mere citizen and the latter a soldier;The personal circumstances of the two men as heads of state account for part of the difference, not the only one.This was the nature of the object which Marius and his comrades had conceived of themselves;The next question was by what means they planned to break the resistance of the government party, which was expected to be stiff.Gaius Gracchus’ struggle had borrowed the power of the capitalist class and the proletariat.Both were certainly courted by his heirs.On the one hand, the Standing Committee for the punishment of extortion by state officials in the provinces, which was of particular importance to merchants, glaucia, passed a more severe ordinance, probably this year;On the other hand, as far as 651, 103 BC, a special tribunal was undoubtedly established, at the suggestion of Satunin, concerning the embezzlement and other malfeasance of the Simbury tribe in the period of their rebellion in Gaul.Moreover, the capital’s distribution of grain to the proletariat, at which the proletariat had to pay less than the cost, i.e., 6.50 cents per grain, was now reduced for their benefit to five-sixths of a grain per grain, which was merely an “admission fee.”But though they were not contemptibly allied with the knights and the proletariat of the capital, the real power of the Triumvirate in carrying out its policy was not in either, and it was for this reason that the colonial laws were so excessively applied to the former soldiers of Marius’s army.