Land reforms of the Gracchi brothers. Gracchi reforms

In the 30-20s, 2 tbsp. BC, it was headed by the brothers Gracchi, who sought through democratic reforms aimed at redistributing the state land fund to achieve the revival of the free Roman peasantry.

1. Background of the Gracchi movement

An alarming symptom for the ruling class of the Roman Republic was the weakening of the military power of Rome as a result of the landed peasantry. According to the qualification of 154 BC. the number of adult males fit for service in the legions, i.e. those who had landed property and Roman citizenship amounted to about 324 thousand, and after the qualification of 136 BC. e. - already about 318 thousand. According to the qualification principle of recruiting the army, citizens who lost their land were dropped out of the military contingents. The size of the army and its combat effectiveness fell. Rome was losing the character of the ancient policy, in which the overwhelming majority of citizens were agricultural warriors. The power of Rome, its power over the population of the conquered territories and the further expansion of these territories were threatened. Among the poor, discontent was brewing, which could always turn into open indignation. Sicilian uprising of 132 BC showed that in the event of such an indignation, the free poor could easily find themselves in the same ranks as the rebellious slaves.

All this caused serious concern among the ruling elite. The far-sighted part of the nobility was especially alarmed. In one of the aristocratic circles, grouped around Scipio Aemilian, the idea arose of the need for a broad agrarian reform aimed at restoring peasant land ownership, reviving the peasantry, and, consequently, the army. Together with the lands that were privately owned, extensive areas of "public arable land" (ager publica) still continued to exist in Rome. In the middle of the II century BC. most of these lands were occupied by wealthy nobles who made extensive use of the labor of their many slaves. Members of Scipio's circle proposed that this land be redistributed: partly withdraw it from large owners, since the state retained the right to dispose of these land funds, and then distribute this land in small plots among the land-poor or completely landless peasantry.

The glorious conqueror of Carthage, Scipio Aemilian, considered the situation hopeless and assumed the decline of Rome. It was said about him that, as a censor, he ordered prayers not for the expansion of the borders of the state, but for its existence. But neither he nor his contemporaries dared to make any changes in the fatal structure of citizenship.

Roman nobles, having possessed public lands from generation to generation for many decades, were accustomed to look upon them as their own property, for any attempt at agrarian reform could not but encounter their fierce resistance.

2. Tiberius Gracchus

The struggle for the reform was led by a member of the circle of Scipio and his relative - Tiberius Gracchus. He belonged to a noble plebeian family of Sempronius. The ancestors of Tiberius more than once occupied the leading magistracies. On his mother's side, he was the grandson of Scipio Africanus, the conqueror of Hannibal at Zama. Early embarking on the path of military and political activity, Tiberius advanced during the siege and assault on Carthage, and then in the Numantine war. It was said that Tiberius, when he went to war, was impressed by the sight of Etruria, where instead of free Roman farmers, he saw only slaves working in the fields or grazing cattle in the pastures of their owners. He was strongly influenced by his close friends - the rhetorician Disfan from Mitylene and the stoic Blossom from Cum. They introduced him to the ideas of reviving the policy of free, equal citizens owning inalienable land allotments that had once inspired the popular leaders and reformers of Hellenistic Greece.

Tiberius was elected tribune of the people for 133 BC. Upon assuming this position, he, referring to the ancient law of Licinius and Sextinus, put forward his project of establishing a restrictive norm for tenants of state land, seizing their surplus land and redistributing these surpluses among landless and landless Roman citizens. According to this bill, the head of the family could own no more than 500 yugers of state land, for each adult son, another 250 yugers were added, but in general no more than a thousand yugers per family. The land confiscated from large owners in excess of this norm was to be divided into plots of 30 yugers and given to poor citizens for eternal and inalienable lease use. To carry out this reform, Tiberius proposed the creation of a special commission of three people authorized to resolve all issues related to the seizure and distribution of land.

After putting forward his bill, Tiberius attempted, as Appian reports, to appeal to the senate.

“The Romans,” he said, “have conquered most of the land and own it, they hope to subjugate the rest of it. [ When? ] the decisive question arises before them: will they acquire the rest of the land due to an increase in the number of combat-ready people, or what they own, the enemies will take away from them due to their weakness.

But the plebs warmly supported Tiberius. The bill of Tiberius became the banner around which the small landowners united to fight against the big slave owners. From all over Italy, peasants flocked to Rome to take part in the vote. Tiberius, who at first thought only about maintaining the military power of Rome, by the logic of events turned into the leader of a broad popular movement. In heated words, he presented to the people's assembly the share of the peasants:

"Wild beasts in Italy have their holes, pits and lairs, but the people who fight and die for Italy have nothing but air and light. With their women and children, they roam without protection and without a roof over their heads. When the generals in in battles they encourage soldiers to fight in defense of home altars and ancestral graves, they tell a lie: of all the Romans, no one has a home altar or an ancestral grave! They fight in defense of the wealth and luxury of other people; they are called masters of the world, but they not a piece of land in the property! "

The plebs pushed the moderate and cautious Tiberius onto the path of decisive action. The Senate, as a representation of the nobles, decided not to allow reform and added a second tribune, Mark Octavius, to speak out against Gracchus. Octavius, who himself had public land in the state, declared his "veto" against the reforms. Tiberius put the question to the vote: "Maybe one who goes against the interests of the people can be a people's tribune?" The assembly unanimously gave a negative answer, and one of the freed slaves exacted Octavius ​​from the rostrum. This was an unprecedented case: under the unwritten but steadfastly enforced Roman constitution, no magistrate could be removed from office before the expiration of his term. Having demonstrated that the constitution can be violated with impunity, Tiberius began a hundred-year period of civil strife in the Roman Republic, ending with the liquidation of the republican system.

After the elimination of Octavius, the bill of Tiberius was adopted by the popular assembly. He himself, his younger brother Guy and his father-in-law Appius Claudius were elected to the agrarian commission. Soon Tiberius directly encroached on the prerogatives of the Senate, passing through his head in the popular assembly a law on the use of income from the province of Asia to help those receiving allotments.

Overcoming the fierce resistance of large landowners, the commission vigorously carried out the reform. But time passed, and the deadline was approaching, the end of Tiberius's summer term as tribune. Understanding well the importance of his power as a tribune for the further implementation of the reform, Tiberius, contrary to custom, re-nominated his candidacy for this magistracy for the next, 132 Nobile, they were already preparing to deal with the hated leader of the plebs, when he became a private person, now they concentrated all efforts to prevent the re-election of Tiberius. Accusations of violating ancient state institutions, striving to seize sole tyrannical power, and so on fell on him.

On Election Day, the enemies of reform armed their clients and admirers to forcibly prevent the vote. The position of Tiberius was complicated by the fact that many of the peasants currently engaged in agricultural work could not get to the elections in Rome. At a meeting of the Senate, one of the senators - Scipio Nazik - called Tiberius a tyrant and called on the consul to save the republic. When the consul declared that he would not start a domestic war, Nazik shouted: "When the consul betrays the republic, then whoever wants to defend rights, let him follow me." A crowd of senators with pieces of broken benches rushed into the street into the crowd of people. Everyone started to run away in fear. Someone seized Tiberius by the toga, and in his tunic he fled. Dear someone kicked him from the bench, he fell, and then he was finished off. Up to 300 of his associates fell, killed with circles and stones. The bodies of Tiberius were not allowed to be buried, but with other corpses he was thrown into the Tiber. Of the surviving Grachians, many were expelled from Rome. Blossom fled to Sicily, took an active part in the uprising and died after its defeat.

But the Senate did not dare to openly liquidate the agrarian commission. She continued her activities after the death of Tiberius (replenished with new members). In general, over the 15 years of its activity, about 80 thousand people received land plots. But the opponents of the reform hindered the work in every possible way. The age of possession and the lack of documents often made it impossible to determine which plots belonged to the owner on the basis of private ownership and which due to occupation. On this basis, endless litigation and conflicts arose, which the commission must sort out.

3. Gaius Gracchus

For the first time in connection with the agrarian reform, the question of the Italics arose with all its urgency. According to the law of Gracchus, state lands were taken away from the Italian allies of Rome, and they could not receive plots distributed only among Roman citizens. This manifested a certain limitation of the Gracchian movement. Despite the fact that the Italians participated on an equal basis with Roman citizens in all the wars of Rome, the advantages of Roman citizens did not apply to them. Rich Italians sought to obtain Roman citizenship in order to participate on an equal footing in the exploitation of the provinces, Roman citizenship would give poor Italians the right to land allotments and somewhat protect them from the arbitrariness of the Roman authorities.

As the struggle for reform intensified, some of its former supporters from among the nobility began to move away from it. Among them was Scipio Aemilianus. The dissatisfaction of the Italians gave him a reason to slow down the activities of the agrarian commission, for his proposal to resolve cases of disputed land was transferred to the consuls.

In 125 BC. the consul Flaccus, a supporter of the Gracchus reform, proposed to compensate the Italics by granting them Roman citizenship, but this proposal met with such a storm of indignation in the Senate that Flaccus did not even dare to put it to a vote. The failure of the Flacca project sparked an uprising in the Italian cities of Asculi and Fregella.

In this tense situation, the supporters of the agrarian reform managed to get the brother of Tiberius Gracchus - Gaius, who had a brilliant oratorical gift and extraordinary abilities as a statesman, into the people's tribunes in 123. Guy served as a people's tribune for two years and during this time not only restored the agrarian law of Tiberius, but also carried out a number of other important events.

Taking into account the experience of Tiberius, he sought to oppose the senate with a wide bloc, in which not only the rural, but also the urban plebs and horsemen played a large role. The peasantry, scattered in the region, far from Rome, no longer played an important role in the assembly, and the vote was usually decided by the urban proletariat. Therefore, for example, he passed the Corn Law, lowering the price of bread to 6 1/3 ass per fashion, which was about half the usual price. He demanded that the plebs be admitted free of charge to theatrical performances. By passing these laws, Gaius Gracchus managed to significantly increase the number of his supporters.

At the same time, Guy tried to get himself the help of powerful capitalists - equity (horsemen). Another law of Gaius gave to the Roman horsemen the collection of taxes and duties established for the province of Asia. In order to protect the tax-farmers from prosecution, the courts for dealing with cases of abuse in the provinces were taken away from the senators, and transferred to the horsemen, from whose ranks the big tax-farmers came out. The Asiatic Farming Act was also beneficial to many more or less wealthy plebeians who took part in farming societies. In order to increase the income of representatives of these circles, Gaius Gracchus outlined a plan for the extensive state construction of roads and public buildings, to which contractors with their slaves were involved; building work could also bring income to the free poor. By doing this, he undermined the authority of the Senate and, besides, he attracted equity that could help him both with their money and influence.

Thanks to those laws of Guy, the voices of both the capitalists and the proletariat are ensured at the people's meetings, and then they will operate their influence. "When the people accepted these rights," writes Plutarch, "Gaius received almost monarchical power for himself. So the senate was subordinate to him." He made full use of his tribune rights, so that with his "veto" he could eliminate all sorts of orders of officials and at the people's assembly sympathizing with him he could pass all sorts of laws. unhindered became a second tribune, because no one dared to speak against him.

Then Guy began to carry out his main plan - the restructuring of the Roman state and citizenship. His initiative went in different directions. So, he reorganized the division of citizens into centuries, eliminating senators from the centuries of cavalry. Spent new law on military service, ended the state obligation to deliver clothes to soldiers, forbade the recruitment of young people under 17 into the army. Settled the division of provinces among the consuls. Reforming in the image of the state of public tribute. Started building new roads. He began to besiege new colonies, both in Italy and in the provinces. Fumbling the agrarian laws of Tiberius. He himself introduced all the adopted laws into life, he himself looked after everything and managed everything.

"Although there were so many great works, he did not know fatigue, he performed everything with extraordinary speed and robotism, so that even those who hated him and were afraid of him were surprised at his talents, with which he did everything and vikinchuvav" Plutarch.

Finding new land funds to provide allotments to the poor, Gaius Gracchus first thought of resorting to the colonization of the provinces. He passed a law on the establishment of a colony on the site of the destroyed Carthage, where 6 thousand people were to receive 200 yugers of land to organize strong farms. This measure was supposed to help strengthen Roman influence and power in the provinces, and at the same time defuse the tense situation in Italy.

The split among the supporters of Gracchus was intensified by the speech of the protege of the nobility, tribune Livius Drusus, who put forward a deliberately impracticable, demagogic proposal to establish 12 colonies in Italy itself, which suited the poor more than leaving for a distant African province. Soon after Gaius Gracchus returned from Africa, where he went to set up a new colony, meaning to get a third tribunate, the unfaithful people turned away from him, and his opponents launched a decisive offensive. The meeting reached the point of armed struggle, and the Senate declared a state of emergency in Rome. Like 11 years ago, Rome witnessed a bloody clash, and once again the Gracchians were defeated. Gaius Gracchus and his supporters fortified themselves on the Aventine Hill, but an army was sent against him and a siege began. The senators, some of the horsemen who joined the Senate, and hired Cretan riflemen opposed the Gracchians. Guy got out of the Aventine and tried to escape across the Tiber. But when he saw that his enemies were pursuing him, he ordered his faithful slave to kill himself. A large reward promised by the Senate was paid on his head. Then the pogrom of his supporters began - up to 3000 of them were killed, their bodies were sunk in the Tiber, their property was confiscated, and women were not allowed to wear mourning. On the site where the domestic struggle broke out, the Senate ordered the construction of a sanctuary of the goddess Concord.

4. Results of the Gracchi movement

The struggle, led by the Gracchi, ended in failure. The results of this struggle showed that the preservation of stable small landownership - one of the foundations of the republican system - in the conditions of developed slavery, rapidly growing monetary relations and usury had become impossible. In this regard, the role of the rural plebs in the political life of Rome is becoming less and less significant.

Due to the victory of the Senate, the reforms of Gaius Gracchus fell. Before the agrarian law was demolished. Decree from 119 BC. it was decided that the state land was in the hands of private rulers, passes into their ownership. Thus, the nobility secured all those public lands that the Gracchi wanted to transfer to the people. The peasantry made little use of the allotment of soil. At first, the decree obliged that lands obtained by the power of agrarian laws should not be freely sold to anyone; the peasants are obligated to protect them and not to leave their dwellings. It seemed that by doing this the peasantry would come to prosperity and become a strong stratum. But in reality it turned out that the peasants could no longer be saved from their decline. The new settlers from the urban proletariat had already lost the habit of farming.

The broad colonization projects advocated by Gaius Gracchus also fell. Only in some areas were formed colonies intended for Roman settlers. After the suppression of the Gracchians, the movement for agrarian reform temporarily subsided partly because many had already received land, partly due to subjugation and turned into a province of part of transalpine Gaul, where in 118 BC. The colony of Narbonne was founded. A new field of activity opened up here for many Romans and Italics, who quickly filled this area, which was soon completely Romanized.

A number of further agrarian laws, the result of which was summed up by a law issued in 111 BC. That is, nullified the results of the Gracchi reform. This law declared Italian and provincial lands occupied by private individuals to be private property, and allowed the sale of allotments distributed by the agrarian commission of the Gracchi. The result was an even greater concentration of land in the hands of a few. Already in 104 BC. the tribune of the people, Marcius Philip, declared that no more than 2,000 families in Rome had at least some kind of real estate. A huge mass of landless peasants turned into clients of the nobles, receiving from them small plots of land for paying part of the harvest and performing various duties. Since most of the state land of Italy passed into private hands, it was necessary to find new ways to solve the agrarian problem. The question of the Italians also remained unresolved.

But the Senate was not led to repeal Guy's really harmful laws on the distribution of bread in cities on equity courts. The free distribution of bread became the privilege of the Roman proletariat, which could no longer be eliminated, since a revolution would come in Rome. This harmful custom was supported by various ambitious figures, thanks to which they obtained the favor of the people for their own purposes. This "number of grain law" to a large extent also undermined the agrarian reforms, because the inhabitants of the villages moved to the city, hoping to find easier living conditions here than on arable land. On the other hand, the equity retained the rights of judges - a privilege that allowed them to cover up the abuses that were tolerated in the provinces.

The content of the struggle that unfolded in the Roman Republic after the suppression of the Gracchi movement was that the large slave owners strove for the very development of private property and sharply opposed all its restrictions. Objectively, it was a struggle for the broad development of the slave-owning mode of production, which turned out to be incompatible with the predominance of small peasant farms. But, since with the development of large-scale private landownership and the dispossession of land, the peasants became slaves, the political rights of the broad sections of the population were more and more curtailed, this was at the same time the struggle of large slave owners against slave-owning democracy, which was possible only in the conditions of the ancient policy, consisting of citizens, is, together with those landowners. Outwardly, this struggle was expressed in complex clashes between optimates (i.e., the best) and populares (i.e., people), as adherents of the nobility and supporters of the plebs began to call themselves.

The Equity state moved once in one direction, once - in the second. Equity social competitions often followed the same paths as nobles. But because the nobility did not want to allow equity in power, they were forced to go hand in hand with the popular. However, more than once the radicalism of the masses frightened them, and they were ready to compromise with the Senate.

1. Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

1.1 Election of Tiberius Gracchus as tribune of the people. agricultural law. Death of Tiberius

1.2 Tribunate of Gaius Gracchus. Agrarian, grain and judicial laws

1.3 Guy's death. The fate of the Gracchi reforms

2. General Imperial Legislation of Medieval Germany

2.1 Maintenance of "Zemsky peace"

2.2 "Caroline"

3. The evolution of English case law in the XVII-XIX centuries.

3.1 Common law

3.2 Equity

4. Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal

4.1 World economic crisis 1929-1933 and its implications for the US

4.2 Program of the New Deal, its implementation, results

Bibliography

1. Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

1.1 Election of Tiberius Gracchus as tribune of the people. agricultural law. Death of Tiberius Gracchus

The Gracchus brothers were the sons of Tiberius Gracchus, a censor, twice consul and twice triumphant, and Cornelia. Fate decreed that out of their twelve children, three survived - Tiberius, Gaius and their sister, who married Scipio the Younger.

As a young man, Tiberius took part in the Third Punic War, being in the retinue of his brother-in-law Scipio Aemilianus. Proximity to the Scipio group (Gaius Lelius and Polybius accompanied Scipio to Africa) could not but influence the formation of the political views of Tiberius. Under Carthage, the young Gracchus showed great courage and gained wide popularity in the army. In the same period, Tiberius married the daughter of the Senate Appius Claudius.

In 137, Tiberius became a quaestor in the army of Mancinus, who besieged Numantia. The refusal of the Senate to recognize the treaty actually concluded by Tiberius was his first clash with the senatorial oligarchy. In practice, he was able to verify the imperfection of the Roman state machinery and in the depravity of the ruling clique.

In the summer of 134, Tiberius put forward his candidacy for the people's tribunes for 133. The elections were accompanied by passionate agitation for agrarian reform. Tiberius, long established as a reformist, was elected unanimously. Having taken office on 10 December 1 134, he immediately introduced his agrarian bill. The first point represented the development of the old law of Licinius and Sextius. Each owner of state land (ager publicus) was allowed to keep 500 yugers as his property. If he had sons, then each was entitled to 250 yugers, however, with the limitation that one family could not have more than 1,000 yugers (250 hectares) of state land. The second paragraph stated that the surplus of state land should be returned to the treasury and small plots were cut from them, which were distributed to poor citizens for hereditary lease. These plots were not allowed to be sold. The third paragraph of the bill provided for the formation of a plenipotentiary commission of three persons, which was entrusted with the implementation of the agrarian reform. The commission was to be elected by the people's assembly for 1 year with the right of subsequent re-election of its members. The reform provoked fierce resistance from large landowners and the majority of the Senate, and Mark Octavius, one of the people's tribunes and friend of Tiberius, under pressure from the Senate, opposed Tiberius and imposed a tribune veto on his bill. Among the tribunes of the people, power is on the side of the one who imposes the prohibition, and even if all the others agree with each other, they will not achieve anything as long as there is at least one who opposes their judgment. Octavius ​​was adamant. The next day, when the people again filled the square, the law was approved and the people choose three to delimit and divide the fields - Tiberius himself, his father-in-law, Appius Claudius, and his brother, Gaius Gracchus.

Tiberius sought the re-post of tribune - according to the law of 342, this was allowed only after 10 years. On the day of the election, the people gathered on the Capitol, Tiberius moved there to the Temple of Capitoline Jupiter (the meeting took place on the square in front of him). The atmosphere of the meeting heated up. there was an armed clash between supporters and opponents of Gracchus, the senators went straight to Tiberius. All the defenders of Tiberius scattered. Tiberius also ran, but slipped and fell. He tried to get up, but Publius Satureus, one of his comrades in office, was the first to hit him on the head with the leg of the bench, and Lucius Rufus claimed the second blow.

In this clash between supporters and opponents of Gracchus, more than three hundred people died. Despite the requests of brother Gaius, the enemies did not allow him to take the body and bury it at night, they threw Tiberius into the river along with the other dead. they expelled the friends of the slain without trial, others were seized and executed.

Under the circumstances, the Senate considered it necessary to calm the people, and therefore no longer objected to the division of the land.

1.2 Tribunate of Gaius Gracchus. Agrarian, grain, judicial laws

In 124, exactly 10 years after his brother, Gaius Gracchus put forward his candidacy for the people's tribune for 123.

The most important events of the first tribunate (123) were three laws: agrarian, grain and judicial. The agrarian law basically repeated the law of 133, but with some additions and improvements. In addition, he restored the activities of the agrarian triumvirs to their former extent. The content of the grain (lex frumentaria) law is as follows: it established the sale of grain from state warehouses at a reduced price compared to the market price. The significance of the Corn Law was very great. Even if the state price of grain did not differ too much from the market price, nevertheless the law guaranteed the poorest population of Rome from constant fluctuations in the price of bread. In this way, state regulation of prices was first introduced in Rome, which alleviated the situation of the poorest strata. Even more important was the fact that the Corn Law served as the starting point for the later organization of state distributions to the poorest urban population.

The judicial (lex iudiciaria) law concerned the composition of the permanent judicial commissions, in particular the commission on cases of extortion of provincial governors. Here the tradition diverges. According to Livy, Gaius left the courts in the hands of the senate, but increased the number of senators by adding 600 new equestrian members to them. According to Plutarch, "Gaius added to the senators-judges, who were 300, the same number of horsemen and, thus, established a mixed court of 600 judges." Another version of the tradition, presented by Appian, Cicero, Diodorus, and others, diverges from the first. According to this version, the judicial commissions were generally taken out of the hands of the senators and completely transferred to the equestrians. Livy and Plutarch reflect the initial draft of the law introduced by Gaius in the first period of his activity, when the opposition of the Senate was not yet too open and Gaius intended to limit himself to a relatively moderate reform. But after he met the open opposition of the nobility, he gave the judicial law a more radical character. Guy wanted to put an end to the abuses committed by the provincial governors: they felt completely unpunished while the courts were in the hands of their classmates. Now the court was transferred to the horsemen, and thus real control was established over the activities of the governors. Thus, the judicial law was a heavy blow to the nobility and significantly raised the political authority of the right wing of democracy - horsemanship.

Guy introduced two more bills: first, if the people reject executive from power, no position can be given to him in the future, and secondly, the people are given the right to judge an official who expelled a citizen without trial. Among the laws that he proposed, pleasing the people and undermining the power of the senate, one concerned the withdrawal of the colonies (lex Sempronia) and, at the same time, provided for the division of public land among the poor. Along with the listed events of the first year of the tribunate, several more laws should be noted, which, apparently, also fall on 123. First of all, the military law (lex militaris). He forbade calling citizens to military service before they reached the age of 17 and prescribed to supply soldiers with clothing at the expense of the state, without deducting, as was the practice before, its cost from military salaries.

Also bills - on new colonies, on the construction of roads and grain barns. He invested most of his care in the construction of roads, meaning not only utility, but also convenience and beauty.

At the next consular elections in 122, Phaniius won, thanks to the support of Gaius. And Guy, for the second time, was re-elected as a people's tribune (between the speeches of Tiberius and Gaius Gracchi, a law was passed according to which, if after voting fewer candidates were elected than necessary, then the people elected whoever they wanted to the vacant seats, without restrictions, people's tribune) . The hatred of the senate becomes open, and therefore strengthened the love of the people with new bills, proposing to remove the colonies in Tarentum and Capua and to grant the rights of citizenship to all Latins. Tribune Rubrius, proposed to repopulate Carthage destroyed by Scipio. The lot fell to Guy to lead the migration, and he sailed to Africa. Having arranged everything there and completed it within seventy days, he returned to Rome.

1.3 Guy's death. The fate of the Gracchi reforms

Guy did not receive the post of tribune for the third time, although the vast majority of votes were cast for him: in announcing the names of the elected, his associates resorted to criminal deceit. The enemies, having put Opimius as consul, immediately began to petition for the abolition of many of the laws of Gaius Gracchus and attacked the orders made by him in Carthage. The popular assembly, which was supposed to decide the fate of Junonia, gathered on the Capitol. On the same day, Opimius appointed a meeting of the Senate. But it came to armed struggle in the squares and streets of Rome. Supporters of Gracchus occupied the Aventine. Sent to the Senate younger son Fulvia, Gaius' friend for negotiations. But nothing came of the last attempt to avoid bloodshed. Young Flaccus was arrested, and the consul Opimius ordered his armed forces to attack the Aventine. The resistance of the Grachians was quickly broken. Guy did not participate in the fight at all, he went to the temple of Diana and wanted to commit suicide, but two of his most faithful friends, Pomponius and Licinius, restrained him and persuaded him to flee. The enemies rushed after them and overtook the fugitives. Gaius was accompanied by only one slave, named Philocrates, he managed to get to a small grove dedicated to the Furies, and there Philocrates killed him first, and then himself. The heads of Gaius Gracchus and Fulvius Flaccus were cut off and brought to the consul Opimius, their corpses were thrown into the Tiber. Wives were forbidden to mourn their husbands, and Licinia, the wife of Gaius, was even deprived of her dowry. The total number of Gracchans who died that day and later reached 3 thousand people. Key events and the laws of Gaius Gracchus firmly entered life, as they met urgent social needs. The courts remained in the hands of the horsemen for a long time; further development in the direction that was planned by Gaius. Held up and new type colonies outside of Italy. In Junonia, colonists actually remained, although the colony as such was abolished by law of Minucius Rufus. The situation with the agrarian reform was more complicated. But it was also changed and in 121, the hereditary lease and inalienability of the Gracchan plots were canceled. Then the agrarian commission was abolished (probably in 119). At the same time, it was established that state lands were not subject to further redistribution and that plots of state land, within the framework of the legal norm, in the hands of possessors, were theirs. full ownership. However, such plots were subject to a special tax. The sums received from here were subject to distribution to the people. In 111, this last restriction on private property was also abolished. According to the law of the tribune of the people Spurius Thoria (lex Thoria), which summed up the previous legislation, all former public lands, whether they were small plots received under the lex Sempronia, or large plots within the limits established by the same law (500-1 thousand yugers), were declared private property, not subject to further redistribution or taxation. In the future, private individuals were prohibited from occupying public lands, which were exclusively to be leased by the censors or serve as public pastures. To appease the small owners, a very low maximum was set for free use of the pasture: 10 heads of cattle and 50 heads of small livestock. Thus, the final result of the agrarian reform was the complete triumph of private ownership of land.

2. General Imperial Legislation of Medieval Germany

2.1 Maintenance of Zemstvo peace

The Reichstag of Worms in 1495, which proclaimed the "eternal zemstvo peace" (prohibition of private wars), established the imperial supreme court for the affairs of imperial subjects and subjects of individual principalities (Reichskammergericht). Members of the court were appointed by electors and princes (14 people), cities (2 people), and the chairman - by the emperor. It was decided to divide the empire into 10 districts, headed by special guardians of order from the princes, who were supposed to carry out the sentences of the court. They were provided with military contingents for this. In addition, a special tax was introduced for the needs of managing the empire - the "general imperial pfennig". However, a significant part of these measures was never carried out. Initially, the power of princes in individual lands (principalities) was limited by the activities of meetings of local officials (landtags) - class representations of the clergy, nobility and townspeople; in some lands, these assemblies also included representatives of the free peasantry. In Landtags, zemstvo ranks usually formed three chambers (in some lands there were two chambers - the clergy and the nobility sat together). The plenipotentiaries received instructions from their constituents that were in the nature of mandatory mandates. When the commissioners did not find instructions in the instructions on how to resolve a particular issue, they turned to their constituents for appropriate instructions.

The competence of the Landtags was different in different periods. The Landtag was considered the supreme court of the principality until the formation of special courts. Subsequently, the jurisdiction of the Landtags passed to the latter, and then the Landtags in a number of lands became the court of appeal in relation to these courts. The Landtag also resolved issues that were not within the competence of the courts (for example, political ones). Landtags intervened in the administration of the state, influencing the formation of the composition of the princely councils or the appointment of senior officials. The competence of the Landtags included the election of a sovereign in the event of the suppression of the ruling dynasty, the administration of certain functions in the field of foreign policy (for example, in a number of German principalities, the consent of the Landtag was required to declare war), some church affairs, police matters (monitoring the good quality of minting coins, protecting forests and etc.), military affairs. The most important right of the Landtags was the right to vote taxes. As the needs of the state increased and the domains decreased, the princes had to turn more and more often to the Landtags for monetary subsidies. The Landtag issued funds for the maintenance of the troops, which opened up the possibility of interfering in the management of the army, the construction of fortresses, etc. Thus, the Landtags to a certain extent limited the power of the princes and were, in essence, more class-representative bodies than the Reichstag.

2.2 "Caroline"

One of the most important sources of German law is the Caroline, adopted in 1532 and published in 1633. It got its name in honor of Emperor Charles V (1519-1555). Being the only all-imperial law of fragmented Germany, "Caroline" was intended to streamline criminal proceedings in local courts. The first part of it is devoted to the stages of the trial, and the second acts as a criminal code. The code was generally recognized as a source of law in all lands. "Carolina" did not classify the corpus delicti, but only listed them, arranging them in more or less homogeneous groups. It provides for a rather numerous range of crimes: state crimes (treason, rebellion, violation of the zemstvo peace, rebellion against the authorities); against a person (murder, poisoning, slander, suicide of a criminal); against property (arson, robbery, theft, appropriation); against religion (blasphemy, witchcraft, blasphemy, violation of an oath, forgery of coins, documents, weights and measures, objects of trade); against morality (incest, rape, adultery, bigamy, violation of marital fidelity pandering, kidnapping of women and girls).

The general concepts of criminal law known to Karolina include intent and negligence, circumstances excluding, mitigating and aggravating liability, attempt, complicity. Released from liability:

for murder - insane;

· for theft children under 14 years old - flogging, not death.

Circumstances exempting from liability: in case of murder - the necessary defense (attack with a deadly weapon + the inability to evade it). The killer had to prove it.

Extenuating circumstances:

lack of intent

age up to 14 years;

Committing a crime in the line of duty.

Aggravating circumstances:

committing a crime against a person of a particularly high position;

The presence of "malicious intent".

Aiding:

help before committing a crime;

assistance at the time of the commission of a crime - co-crime (the same punishment);

Assistance after a crime.

The purpose of punishment is deterrence. Punishments:

death penalty (simple - beheading with a sword; qualified - everything else);

self-mutilation and corporal punishment;

disgraceful punishments;

expulsion from the country

fines.

During the period of early feudalism in Germany, an accusatory (competitive) process was used. There was no division of the process into civil and criminal. Carolina retained some features of the repeal process. The victim or another plaintiff could file a criminal claim, and the accused could challenge and prove its inconsistency. The parties were given the right to submit documents and testimonies, to use the services of lawyers. If the accusation was not confirmed, the plaintiff had to "compensate for damages, dishonor and pay legal costs." In general, the main form of consideration of criminal cases in Carolina is the inquisitorial process. The charge was brought by the judge on behalf of the state "on duty". The investigation was conducted at the initiative of the court and was not limited by time. The following courts can be distinguished:

· Court of the feudal lord - at first - only serfs, then - the entire population of the territory;

· Church Court - extended to the clergy and some other categories of people, for all - cases of marriages, spiritual testaments;

· City courts had different arrangements: judge + assessors (sheffens) or city council;

· Court of the prince (head of the district) - the lowest court.

The institution of the message (Aktenversendnung) is spreading. When the court could not find an appropriate rule, he wrote a letter to the nearest university to the Faculty of Law, where the professors made a decision that was binding on the judge. The court consisted of sheffens or lay judges, a judge, and a scribe. Preference was given to persons of noble origin and learned people. The process was divided into three stages: inquiry, general investigation and special investigation. The process began on the denunciation of the victim, his testimony was accurately recorded. Requirement to plaintiffs: presentation of direct evidence of a crime, entailing punishment. The accused was imprisoned regardless of guilt. The plaintiff could also be placed in jail if he did not provide the appropriate bail, recognized by the judges and the chiefs as sufficient in the absence of evidence.

All this was done in accordance with a civil law injunction, in order to pay the costs incurred, as well as dishonor, damage, if the plaintiff fails to prove a criminal charge or his rights, or if, within a certain period appointed by the court, he fails to present such evidence and suspicions that the court considers it sufficient if the plaintiff loses the case for other reasons.

The next step is interrogation under torture, which is used only when direct evidence of a crime is obtained. The presence of circumstantial evidence does not lead to the use of interrogation under torture. For sufficient evidence, two good witnesses are needed. The main event, proven by one witness, was considered half-proof. Final conviction for criminal punishment must be based on one's own confession. Only what was said by the suspect after the torture is taken into account and recorded. The guilty person, who will be subjected to criminal punishment by the verdict of the court, is warned three days in advance (so that there is time to think about sins). If requested, the plaintiff or the defendant may have a god in the composition of the court. The latter, by virtue of his oath, had to uphold justice. The final verdict is in writing.

3. The evolution of English case law in the XVII-XIX centuries.

3.1 Common law

After the revolution in England, the case law developed in the previous era in the general system of royal courts (“common law”) and in the court of the Lord Chancellor (“justice”) continued to operate. "Common law" contributed to the strengthening of royal power in England, assimilated by him by the 17th century. the principle of precedent (staredecisis) became an unexpected obstacle to the further strengthening of absolutism.

For the development of judicial practice and strengthening its role, it was important that already at that time professional lawyers sat in the royal courts. Their common position was the expression of professional opinion. The common law was originally formed as the "law of lawyers". E. Jencks notes that it is impossible to determine exactly how the common law came about. "In some way which cannot be precisely determined, the King's Judges, meeting between their tours in London to hear cases in the Centralized Crown Courts... and Westminster, came to an agreement on the need to merge the various local customs into a common or single law, which could be applied throughout the country ».

3.2 Equity

In the Middle Ages, the greatest competition to common law was the law of justice, which developed in the chancellor's courts. The "law of justice", which, unlike the "common law", was not bound by precedent, carried the beneficial influence of Roman law and was imbued with the spirit of entrepreneurship, became the main pillar of the judicial policy of the king and the object of criticism from the revolutionary camp. This seemingly paradoxical fact was explained by the fact that the chairman of the justice court - the Lord Chancellor - was at the same time the highest judicial officer of the king. He was just an executor of the royal will.

The law of equity developed institutions previously unknown to English law. For example, the right of trust property, which began to be applied in a wide variety of situations. The introduction of this institution was a legal justification for the right of a married woman to use property separately with her husband (according to common law, the wife's personal property passed to her husband). The Institute revised the issue of mortgages and secured the right to redeem mortgages. Movable property also received protection, the transfer of property was ensured under a sale and purchase agreement.

These systems still constituted the backbone of English law and for a long time greatly surpassed statutory law in their weight and importance, even after its renewal by revolutionary legislation. After the revolution, as before, the English legal system was far from being internally consistent and harmonious. It clearly revealed at least two contradictions. The first is the contradiction between two branches of case law: “common law” and “equity”. The second is the internal contradiction inherent in case law, namely: the contradiction between the principle of precedent and judicial lawmaking (judge-madelaw). In the traditional confrontation between law and justice, “common law” in the post-revolutionary years generally prevailed. The growth of the authority of the “common law” was facilitated by the conflict that arose in the pre-revolutionary period between the two rival systems of the royal court. Parliamentary opposition to the chancellor's court intensified after the sensational trial of a certain Gleville in 1615. In this case, Lord Chancellor Enesmer, in accordance with the principle of "fairness", revised the decision of the "common law" court, issued by the chief judge of the court of general litigation E. Cock, on that on the basis that this decision was based on evidence, the falsity of which was not known to the court during the consideration of the case. In connection with the unusual clash of jurisdiction between the two courts, the king created a special committee chaired by F. Bacon. The latter supported the right of the chancellor's court to enforce its decisions even if they were in direct conflict with the results of a "common law" dispute. This decision represented a sensitive blow to the prestige of the “common law”, prompting reciprocal criticism from the political opposition of the chancellor's court. Parliamentarians complained that "justice" was a swindling thing, that it "depended on the length of the Lord Chancellor's leg." Although during the revolution the attempts of Parliament to abolish the court of the Lord Chancellor were not successful and the dualism of the judicial system in England was preserved, the revolution left a noticeable mark on the activities of this judicial body. Given the mood of influential circles of society and their desire for a stable legal order, from the end of the 17th century. the Lord Chancellors are more flexible in their court. They try not to repeat the sharp conflicts of the "justice" system with the "common law". Thus, the Lord Chancellor Nottingham, who is called in England the “father of modern justice”, declared that justice should “be determined by the rules of science”, that “the condition of people should not be allowed to depend on the whim of the court”. This line of strengthening the legal principles in the chancellor's court led to the fact that in the XVIII century. the system of "justice" begins to solidify, obeying the rule of precedent and acquiring the same formal procedure as the system of "common law". But in the 18th and 19th centuries in the system of "justice" law did not cease to develop. So, for example, the inconsistency of the revolution of the XVII century. in the question of property, the preservation of the old feudal structures of property, restrictions on the disposal of so-called "real" things led to the further development of the institution of "trust property" (trust). This institution was notable for its considerable complexity and conventions, but it made it possible to circumvent a number of embarrassing formalities of the “common law” and expand the possibilities, the real powers of the owner in the disposal of his property. At the same time, the chancellors managed to bring the construction of “trust property” closer to the construction of property under “common law”. However, even in the 19th century the procedure of "fairness" caused great criticism on the part of English entrepreneurs. Consideration of cases in the chancellor's court, due to its overload, was extremely protracted and slow. The dual system of case law required the business world, which uses the services of highly paid lawyers, in addition, and additional costs. A somewhat different path at the same time was taken by the “common law”. Here, after the revolution, in essence, the opposite process is observed: a departure from the rigid principle of precedent towards an increase in judicial law-making. The judges of the “common law” understood that their claim to a leading role in the legal system could be justified if they freed themselves from a number of old, obviously outdated rules and were more responsive to the needs of capitalist development. This trend became especially clear under Chief Justice Mansfield (1756-1788), who developed a number of quite modern and convenient doctrines for judicial practice. No wonder in English literature he is called "the first judge who spoke the language of living law." Without formally breaking with the principle of precedent, Mansfield at the same time made significant changes to the “common law”, guided by the idea of ​​“justice” and “common sense” that is unusual for this system. For example, when considering cases of wills, he broke with the inherent "common law" absolutization of the external form, which predetermined the outcome of the case. He began to give preference to revealing the true will of the testator, arguing that “the legitimate intention, if it is clearly expressed, should correct legal sense terms carelessly used by the testator”. Also in the field of contract law, Mansfield, in accordance with the new ideas about the contract, gave decisive importance to the "true intentions" and will of the parties. Mansfield put an end to the existence of a special merchant (commercial) law, which had developed back in the Middle Ages, and merged it with a single system of “common law”. This made the "common law" more convenient and closer to the fundamental interests of entrepreneurs, and raised its authority in English society. Finally, he simplified the very system of considering cases in the “common law” courts, laying the foundations for the modern judicial process: he expanded the right of the parties to present evidence, introduced an appeal, etc. Thus, in the process of its evolution, “common law” acquired such important qualities, like stability and flexibility. In connection with the final establishment of the principle of precedent in the XVIII-XIX centuries. it as a source of law begins to solidify and give way to legislation. An important stage in the finalization of English case law was the second half of the 19th century, when the parliamentary system was finally established in England, which required the strengthening and simplification of the legal system. Despite the fact that after the judicial reform of 1873-1875. (Union common system royal courts with the court of the Lord Chancellor into a single High Court) and to date, “common law” and “law of equity” act as a single judicial case law, a complete merger of these two systems has not happened. The merger affected to a greater extent the judicial-organizational and procedural norms. As for the norms of substantive law (for example, trust property, etc.), they are still clearly distinguished by practicing lawyers and judges themselves. Thus, by the second half of the XIX century. basically completed the reform of the highest judicial bodies, as well as the formation of the very fundamental doctrines of the English legal system: the doctrine of judicial precedent and the doctrine of the “rule of law”. The first of these meant that the decisions of the Court of the House of Lords, Court of Appeal, superior courts are binding, constitute a precedent to be followed by those courts themselves and all lower judiciaries. In English jurisprudence, it is believed that the principle of mandatory precedent applies only to that part of the judicial opinion that directly substantiates the decision in the case, while other arguments of the judge are not recognized as binding. In the event of a discrepancy between the precedents of common law and the law of equity, priority must be given to the latter. The doctrine of the “rule of law” has been derived in English jurisprudence since the time of E. Cock, who, as noted above, already has thoughts that the “idea of ​​law” itself, which is “discovered” primarily in judicial practice, should stand above any law . The doctrine of the "rule" or "dominion" of law has become the English equivalent of the broader concept rule of law. The development of judicial law, due to the rigid connection of judges with the precedents of higher courts, now largely depends on the position of the House of Lords, which heads the judicial system in England. In the modern period of the history of case law, the question arises with great acuteness of the extent to which the House of Lords itself is obliged to follow its own decisions. For several decades (since the famous "tramway case" of 1898), the House of Lords categorically refused to change the precedents worked out earlier. She proceeded from the fact that she should follow her own decisions, and only for legislature retained the right to set aside precedents. This position of the lords led to a significant limitation of judicial rulemaking, which in the XX century. was mainly related to the interpretation of laws, and not to the establishment of new legal norms. In practice, this meant that from the end of the XIX century. further development of law was carried out in England no longer through judicial rule-making, but through the adoption of new written laws.

4. Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal

4.1 World economic crisis 1929-1933 and its implications for the US

In 1929, the world economic crisis broke out, which lasted until 1933. The economic crisis, which exacerbated all capitalist contradictions, led to a deep political crisis in the United States. It covered the banking system, industry, and agriculture. In this situation, in November 1932, regular presidential elections. Democratic leader Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) won the election. On March 9, a special session of Congress was convened and within 100 days (3 months) the foundations of the New Deal policy were laid. He got 70 legislative acts passed by Congress aimed at improving the industry, Agriculture, trade, monetary system. Measures the essence of which was to carry out state-monopoly regulation of the economy. In the implementation of the "New Deal" there are two stages: the initial - from 1933 to 1935. and the second stage - from 1935, when shifts to the left became apparent. First of all, the rescue of the banking and financial systems began. For their recovery, it was forbidden to export gold abroad; the exchange of banknotes for gold was stopped. All banks in the US were closed. The unanimously adopted Emergency Banking Act provided for the resumption of the function and the receipt of government credits (loans) from the Federal Reserve System. For increase financial resources state and expansion of its regulatory functions during this period, the United States abandoned the gold standard, withdrew gold from circulation and devalued (depreciated) the dollar. Thanks to the devaluation of the dollar, the distribution of income has shifted in favor of industrial rather than loan capital. Thus, massive bankruptcies in the credit sector were prevented, the debt of the monopolies to the government was reduced, and the export possibilities of the United States were strengthened. To stimulate small shareholders and depositors (private funds), a bank deposit insurance corporation was created, and measures were taken to protect deposits from risk due to stock exchange speculation. The introduction of state insurance of deposits (deposits) contributed to the prevention of bankruptcies and increased the confidence of depositors.

4.2 Program of the New Deal, its implementation, results

In June 1933, the National Industrial Recovery Administration (NIRA) was created, which began to carry out forced cartels based on "codes of fair competition." In accordance with this, in American industry, divided into 17 groups, monopoly prices were established, the terms of trade credit were determined, the volume of production was determined, and sales markets were distributed. The main condition of the "codes of fair competition" was the prohibition to sell goods below the prices set by them. The law provided for the establishment of a minimum wage, a maximum working day, the conclusion of collective agreements, the right to form trade unions, and the provision of assistance to the army of millions of unemployed. Despite the fact that at first NIRA was received with enthusiasm by American business circles, by the autumn of 1934, they, dissatisfied with excessive regulation and centralization, began to raise the issue of revising this law, especially since from March to July 1933, industrial production went up sharply. In order to prevent the radical development of the New Deal, they created a special organization, the League of American Freedom.

To overcome the agricultural crisis, the Farmer Relief Act was passed in May 1933 and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA) was established. To overcome the agrarian crisis, the law provided for measures to increase prices for agricultural products to the level of 1909-1914, and also established the volume of production. Farmers were encouraged to reduce the area under crops. The actions of the Roosevelt government in the field of agriculture contributed to its concentration and the ruin of small farmers. Emergency measures have been taken to finance state farm debt.

The beginning of Roosevelt's activity coincided with the end of the global economic crisis. Other countries emerged from the crisis without any special events like the New Deal. The largest US monopolies, after highest point crisis and began an economic recovery, opposed the anti-crisis legislation of Roosevelt. In 1935 - 1936 at the request of the monopolies, the US Supreme Court overturned the laws on the activities of NIRA and AAA.

During this period, a broad coalition of liberal democratic forces rallied around the New Deal, thanks to which in 1936 F. Roosevelt won and was elected to the presidency for a second term. In 1937, he set about reforming the Supreme Court, the country's highest court, which sanctioned the Wagner Act and other acts of social legislation. In 1938, Roosevelt began to carry out a plan for the so-called "pumping the pump" - increasing demand with the help of new government investments. Volume public works expanded, the number of beneficiaries increased to 21.3 million. The budget deficit began to grow rapidly and in 1939 amounted to 2.2 billion dollars. After that, the number of supporters of Keynesian theory in the United States increased significantly.

Bibliography

1) Plutarch. Comparative biographies

2) Utchenko S.L. Cicero and his time. - M., "Thought", 1972. P.390. art.81

3) C.I. Kovalev "History of Rome", new edition, corrected and supplemented / Ed. Prof. Frolova E.D. St. Petersburg: Polygon Publishing House LLC. - 2002.- 864 p., ill. Art.417.

4) Chernilovsky ZM, Reader on the general history of state and law. M., 1994.

5) Strashun B.A. "Constitutional law foreign countries» t.z. M.: BEK Publishing House, 1998

6) Bogdanovskaya I.Yu. "Case Law", M.: Nayarna, 1993

7) Utkin I.A. Roosevelt.-M., 2000.

8) Kreder A.A. The American Bourgeoisie and the New Deal, 1988

9) Reader on the general history of state and law / ed. K.I. Batyr and E.V. Polikarpova. T.2.- M., 2005.

10) Reader on the general history of state and law / ed. K.I. Batyr and E.V. Polikarpova. T.1.- M., 2005.

reforms of the Gracchi brothers. political struggle in Rome. parties of optimates and populares

At this time, from the end of the 130s, the period of reformatory activity of the Gracchi brothers began in Rome. With their bills, they stirred up the entire Roman society and state and marked the beginning of a period of unrest and civil wars, which eventually led to the fall of the Republic.

In 133, the popular tribune Tiberius Gracchus proposed an agrarian reform aimed at supporting the poor and middle strata of Roman society. In the process of carrying out the reform, the situation escalated, and in 132 armed clashes began in Rome, during which Tiberius Gracchus and several hundred of his supporters died.

In 123, the case of Tiberius was continued by his brother Gaius, who was elected tribune of the people. Gaius Gracchus intended to continue allocating land to landless citizens. Of paramount importance were the laws passed in the interests of the horsemen, i.e. usurers, merchants and landowners of the middle class. One of the most important goals of the activities of Gaius Gracchus was the weakening of the power of the senate and the expansion of the rights of the people's assembly. The main blow was inflicted on the most important prerogative of the Senate - the management of finances. And, finally, Guy planned a bill to grant the rights of Roman citizenship to the Italic allied communities. In general, Gracchus was going to carry out a whole system of reforms in Roman society, but he ran into strong opposition from the conservatives. The struggle around the bills spread to the streets of Rome and as a result, Guy, like his older brother, died during armed clashes.\122\

Part of the reforms of the Gracchi brothers was carried out, others were carried out some time after their death.

In the process of a fierce struggle between the reformers \ who were later called populars \, who relied on popular assembly and conservatives \ or optimates \, whose stronghold was the aristocratic Senate, developed various programs for the development of the Roman state. In the future, all prominent politicians of Rome supported either the program of the optimates or the popular

15 Rome and the Italics: The Allied War

The allied war (91-88 BC), (according to the active role of the Mars tribes in it, it was also called the Martian), the uprising of the Italian tribes against Rome and the hostilities that unfolded after it in most of Italy.

allied war

The last attempt to smooth over the contradictions of various social groups were the initiatives of the people's tribune of 91g Livius Drusus. His bills were the programs of the brothers Gracchi and Saturninus modernized in the new conditions. He suggested:

1. make provincial courts of senators, but increase the senate itself at the expense of horsemen. 2 withdraw colonies for the poor in Campania and Sicily. 3. to restore and expand the sale of cheap bread in Rome; and 4 most importantly, to grant the rights of Roman citizenship to all Latins and Italics.

However, Drusus' bills were not adopted, and he himself, like his reform predecessors, was assassinated.

Shortly thereafter, the Italians, having no other means of defending their interests, took up arms. The so-called Allied War of 91-88 began. This war is considered one of the bloodiest in all of Roman history. The uprising swept the southern and middle parts of Italy. It was especially embittered by the fact that the forces of the parties were approximately equal - the Allies fielded 100 thousand people, their army had the same high military organization as the Roman one, because. Italics have long served in the Roman army as auxiliaries. The allies created their own political organization - a federation of cities, their own senate and magistrates - consuls, praetors, etc.

The Romans were in a very difficult position. Under these conditions, the Roman Senate took drastic measures. Additional mobilization was carried out, the best commanders were placed at the head of the armies, but, most importantly, according to the law of 89, the right of Roman citizenship was given to those communities that would submit an application within 3 months. This caused great discord in the ranks of the allies. Gradually, the Romans began to take up and in 88 the last enemy fortresses were defeated.

The most difficult Allied war was over. What is most interesting in the results of this war is that the Senate eventually granted all Italians the rights of Roman citizenship. Thus the demands of the vanquished were met by the victors.

The results of the war

The Romans granted citizenship rights to all Italics, but assigned them to only 8 (or 10) new tribes, and not to all 35, which gave them practically no socio-political influence. Subsequently, this circumstance was used by Publius Sulpicius Rufus to create a mass base of personal power for Gaius Marius. In addition, the Italics (especially the Samnites and Lucanians) actively participated in the Civil War of 83-82. BC e. on the side of the Marians against Sulla. In addition, all Italian communities practically turned into Roman municipalities. Thus, Rome lost its exclusive position in Italy and became primus inter pares.

In general, the Allied War undermined the Roman polis organization, included the Italians in the management of the Roman state, accelerated the processes of Latinization of Italy and the formation of the Italian people.

Taking advantage of the weakening of Rome during the war, the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator launched an offensive against the kingdoms dependent on Rome, ordering the simultaneous killing of 80 citizens of Rome in controlled territories, which was the reason for the start of the First Mithridates War.

The paradox, in my opinion, lies in a hitherto unknown fact: the winners accepted (with certain reservations) the conditions of the losers. Of course, Rome had no choice here.

The brothers Tiberius (162-132 AD) and Gaius Sempronius (153-121 AD) came from an old and wealthy plebeian family of the Sempronii. Their father, who bore the name of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, like the eldest son, was a consul and censor, and their mother Cornelia, the daughter of Scipio Africanus the Elder.

CAUSES
The reforms were caused by the need to stop the degradation (impoverishment) of the Roman peasantry (the social and military support of the Roman state) in order to maintain the high combat effectiveness of the Roman army in the face of growing uprisings of slaves and wars with external enemies.
ESSENCE
Tiberius
The eldest of the brothers is Tiberius, who was elected tribune of the people in 133 BC. e., proposed a bill limiting land ownership to 1,000 yugers per family (about 250 hectares). Remains of public land small areas- no more than 30 yugers (7.5 ha) were transferred to poor citizens without the right to sell. Tiberius succeeded in obtaining the adoption of this bill by the People's Assembly. To put the bill into practice, an agrarian commission of three people was created, which included the Gracchi brothers. But the agrarian reform met with fierce resistance from the overwhelming majority of large landowners, from whom the Roman Senate consisted. During the elections to the people's tribunes for 132 BC. f. Tiberius was falsely accused of seeking to become king and killed.
GUY
The youngest of the brothers, Guy, continued the work of Tiberius. In 129 and 122 AD. e. Gaius Gracchus was elected tribune of the people. He renewed in full the agrarian legislation of Tiberius. He continued land reforms, only now he tried to take into account the interests of other classes. The famous grain law of this tribune provided for the sale of bread to the urban plebs at below market prices, in fact, establishing the principle of state support for the poor. Gaius Gracchus also adopted a series of laws that raised the status of horsemen (representatives of the small and medium slave-owning nobility who formed the basis of Roman society), placing, for example, at their disposal a significant part of the entire judicial organization of Rome and giving tax collection in Asia. By decree of Gaius, Roman colonies were created outside of Italy, as a result of which the peasants improved their situation by leaving their homeland and receiving land in a foreign land. The activities of the youngest of the Gracchi brothers were even more ambitious, so that Cicero later even wrote that Gaius "changed the whole state of affairs in the state." This resulted in an open confrontation between the senators and the followers of Gracchus. As a result of the battle, three thousand supporters of Gaius were killed, including Gracchus himself.
RESULTS
As a result of the reform, about 80 thousand Roman citizens received land allotments, thus, the final result of the agrarian reform was the complete triumph of private ownership of land.
After 111r. BC AD, when it was allowed to sell land, most of the new owners were forced to get rid of it, because they could not compete in the market with products created by the cheap labor of slaves. Although the situation of the Roman peasantry improved for a while, the agrarian question was not resolved and could not be resolved within the framework of the slave system. On the contrary, the transformation of a significant part of the state lands into private property only unleashed the game of economic forces and facilitated the process of land concentration.
No matter how raging the reaction was at first, it could not completely destroy the affairs of the Gracchi. The most important events and laws of Gaius Gracchus firmly entered life, as they met urgent social needs. The courts remained in the hands of the horsemen for a long time, the farming system was further developed in the direction that had been outlined by Guy. Probably the Italian colonies survived. A new type of colony outside of Italy also held out. MEANING.
The Gracchi sought to revive the Roman peasantry. But in the II century. BC e. Rome and Italy have already firmly embarked on the path of slaveholding development. The labor of the free farmer was more and more supplanted by the labor of slaves. The peasantry was therefore doomed to ruin and destruction. Thus, the goal that the Gracchi set for themselves was unrealizable. Nevertheless, the movement of the Italic peasants under the leadership of the Gracchi left a deep mark. It marked the beginning of a broad popular movement in Rome and dealt a heavy blow to the senatorial republic.
Sources:
S.I. Kovalev. History of Rome
Ancient Rome. Reading book edited by D.P. Kallistova and S.L. Utchenko. Moscow, "Uchpedgiz", 1953.
Plutarch. Tiberius and Gaius Gracchi // Plutarch. Comparative biographies. M., 1964. T.III.

14. The first and second Sicilian slave uprisings.
The first Sicilian uprising 136-132 BC. e.
40s of the II century BC. e. were a time of relative internal calm and success in the aggressive policy of the Roman Republic. There was no longer a state in the Mediterranean that could fight the Roman legions. But so much discontent accumulated in the depths of Roman society that powerful uprisings of slaves began.
Remembering their recent freedom, heavily exploited slaves were the most fierce enemies not only of specific slave owners, but of the entire Roman state.
By the beginning of the 40s of the II century. BC. large masses of slaves concentrated in Sicily. There were many Greek cities on the island, where the level of agriculture, crafts, trade, based on the work of the classical type was high and the tension between the slaves and their owners reached such an intensity that any spark could lead to a fire. The historian Diodorus wrote:
“... getting rich for a long time and acquiring large fortunes, the Sicilians bought a lot of slaves, taking them away from the nurseries in droves, they immediately put a brand and marks on them. The Lords burdened them with service and cared very little about their food and clothing. Slaves under the yoke of suffering, often subjected to unexpected humiliating punishments, could not stand it. Converging with each other, they began to conspire about treason to their masters, until they brought their plan to fruition.
The uprising began with the murder of one of the most cruel slave owners of Sicily, Damophilus. The slave Evn stood at the head of the conspiracy.
Soon the flames of the uprising engulfed all of inland Sicily. Under the control of the slaves was a significant territory of Sicily. The slaves created their own government.
The leader of the uprising, Evn (throne name Antioch) was proclaimed king. He called his state New Syrian.
Soon, in the West of Sicily, another large center of revolt was formed. It was led by Cleon. Cleon surrendered to the power of Evna-Antiochus and became the second person in the state.
Having destroyed several Roman detachments, the rebels created two strong bases, Ennu and Tauromenium, which they turned into fortresses. The New Syrian state existed for several years, and the Romans, who crushed such strong foreign states, could not break it.
In 132 years. BC e. Polybius Rupilius besieged Tauromenium and blockaded the capital of the rebels, Enna. So the first Sicilian uprising was suppressed.
Second Sicilian Revolt 104-100 BC e.
Suppression of the 1st Sicilian uprising in 132 BC did not eliminate the reasons that raised the slaves to fight. As before, Sicily remained a country of mature slavery. Masses of slaves were subjected to harsh exploitation. Cause for an uprising. There were illegal actions of the governor of Sicily, Licinius Nerva, who did not comply with the order of the Roman Senate on the release of illegally enslaved people.
The slaves revolted first in central Sicily, then in Western. The rebels increased their forces, freed the slaves and armed them, hastily creating a combat-ready contingent.
The slaves began to organize their administration in the occupied territories. At the general meeting, a king was elected, who took the throne name of Tryphon (formerly Salvius). Salvius chose the fortress of Triokalu in the center of Sicily as his capital.
While Salvius was operating in inner Sicily, another powerful center of slave revolt led by Athenion arose in the west of the island.
Athenion recognized the supremacy of Salvia-Tryphon and himself became his first assistant. The unification of two large armies was the climax of the 2nd Sicilian uprising. In fact, all of Sicily was under the control of the rebels. For a year and a half the slaves were masters of Sicily.
In 101 BC. e. a decisive battle broke out under the walls of Triokala, in which the rebels were defeated. Triokala fell.
The long slave uprisings showed how tense the social situation in the Roman Mediterranean society had become.

Conclusion

In this course work, we consider the reforms of the Gracchi brothers in
works of Roman authors. Let's briefly summarize.

The Gracchi brothers were representatives of a noble plebeian family
sempronii, grandsons of Scipian the African. unsurpassed speakers,
commanding, fearless legionnaires. What made them
carry out their reforms?

Difficult economic and political situation in the Roman Republic. But:
they found death in their reforms. The Romans honored the memory with gratitude
Gracchi brothers. As Plutarch states: “The people openly set and
solemnly consecrated their images and reverently honored the places where they
were slain, giving to the brothers the first fruits that each of the times gave birth to
years, and many went there, as if to the temples of the gods, made sacrifices and
prayed."

The belated love of the people for the innocently killed and their defenders is completely
understandable. And what about us, from our distance, knowing everything that happened then,
to judge the life and deeds of the Gracchi brothers? Their purity and nobility
I personally have no doubts about my intentions. What about their actions? Good
As you know, the road to hell is paved with intentions.

Let us make brief conclusions about the activities of the brothers separately. Tiberius
Gracchus was elected tribune and put forward his agrarian reform bill,
in which he established restrictive norms for tenants
state land, the seizure of their surplus land and the redistribution
these surpluses between landless and landless Roman citizens.
Plebs accepted this law with a bang. In addition, Tiberius used
support famous people in Rome, among them the high priest Crassus,
lawyer Lucius Scaevola and consul Appius Claudius.

Large landowners immediately opposed this law. After all, they
lost their land. The Senate is the stronghold of the big landowners, since
belonged to their number. What can they do in this situation?
oppose Tiberius: money, influence and ... power.

The purpose of the Gracchus reform was not to create prosperity
poor, but in their face to get for the state combat-ready
strength. This was his main mistake. He thought of the essential benefit
which, upon reaching his goal, could bring Italy, Gracchus did not think about
difficulties in your business. As a result, Tiberius Gracchus died for his
bill. Innocent people also died. The Senate showed its
strength.

The political activity of Tiberius Gracchus lasted only a few
months, but with his reform bill he stirred up everything
Roman society and state, gave impetus to the development of turbulent events,
which the ancient historian Appian considered the beginning of the period of civil
wars in Roman history.

So, after the death of Tiberius, Gracchus was violated for centuries
civil balance. Of course, initially the indefatigable
the greed of the rich. But the illegal
actions of the tribune. Tiberius became the discoverer of the era of lawlessness,
civil conflicts and violence in Roman society. successor
Gaius Gracchus became his brother. Guy was purposeful, strong-willed, magnificent
speaker and man of action.

His main goal is to avenge the death of his brother. Cause of brother's death
is the Senate. And Guy, elected tribune, purposefully strikes
by the Senate, depriving him of influence and power.

Its main laws are: 1) a law obliging the state to regularly
provide all the poor with cheap bread; 2) transfer of all judicial
power from the hands of the senators to the hands of the equites; 3) creation of colonies
outside of Rome; 4) “Latin Law” to the Italians.

What happened is that the very foundation state power overturned.
The Senate was virtually removed from power. Gaius Gracchus created a new form
government controlled. In other words, unity. By this he
undermined the republican system in Rome. Unrest is inevitable. Senate so
just does not give power. And Gaius has no powerful allies. His
supporters peasants and urban plebs, but give their lives for their leader
they are not ready.

The Senate, feeling the current situation, decides to take an extreme step. Destroy
supporters of reform. A civil dispute will be decided by the shedding of blood.
We know the outcome.

For many years we have been taught that there is nothing higher than liberation
the revolution. That her holy aims justify lawlessness and cruelty,
violent change in the way of life, and the inevitable loss of life.
The Gracchi brothers seemed to us the first revolutionaries and the first
victims of centuries of struggle between the oppressed and their oppressors.

The Gracchi outlined a number of measures, which, although not resolved in their time, but
responded so well to the vital needs of Roman society and
states that were held shortly after the death of the reformers. Guy
Gracchus first appreciated business experience riders and tried to draw them to
more active state activity, which subsequently successfully
used by the Roman emperors. Sale of bread at symbolic prices
poor urban population, as an attempt to neutralize it
political activity, and using it to your advantage, later
became the most important measure of the Roman state. In the course of a fierce
the struggle between the reformers (who were later called popular),
based on the popular assembly, and conservatives, or optimates,
the stronghold of which was the aristocratic senate, various
programs. In the Roman state, the struggle for the implementation of these programs
determined to a large extent the entire subsequent history of the Roman
Republic until its fall. That is why one can say that
political activity of the Gracchi had a great influence not only on
events that are contemporary to them, but also on the course of the political struggle in the Roman
republic in the 1st century. BC e.

List of sources used

Appman of Alexandria. Civil wars. - L., 1935.

Historians of Antiquity: In 2 vols. - M., 1989. - 2 vols.

Kuzishin E. V. History ancient rome. – Minsk, 1985.

L. Osterman. Roman history in faces. - M., 1997.

Plutarch. Comparative biographies: In 3 volumes - L., 1964. - v. 3.

Reader on the history of ancient Rome. / ed. S. L. Utiemko. – M.,
1962.