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

1. Prerequisites for 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 dispossession of the peasantry. According to the census of 154 BC. the number of adult men suitable for service in the legions, i.e. those who had land ownership and Roman citizenship were about 324 thousand, and after the census of 136 BC. e. - already about 318 thousand. According to the census principle of recruiting the army, citizens who lost their land were dropped from the military contingents. The size of the army and its combat effectiveness fell. Rome was losing the character of an ancient polis, in which the vast majority of citizens were farmers-warriors. The power of Rome, its power over the population of the conquered territories and the further expansion of these territories were threatened. Discontent was brewing among the poor, which could always turn into open indignation. Sicilian Revolt 132 BC showed that in the event of such an indignation, the free poor could easily find themselves on the same ranks as the rebel 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 about the need to carry out a broad agrarian reform aimed at restoring peasant land ownership, reviving the peasantry, and, consequently, the army. Along with the lands that were privately owned, vast areas of “public arable land” (ager publica) still continued to exist in Rome. In the middle of the 2nd century BC. Most of these lands were occupied by wealthy nobles, who made extensive use of the labor of their many slaves. Participants in Scipio’s circle proposed subjecting this land to redistribution: partially confiscating it from large owners, since the right to dispose of these land funds remained with the state, and then distributing this land in small plots among the land-poor or landless peasantry.

The glorious winner of Carthage, Scipio Aemilianus, considered the situation hopeless and assumed the decline of Rome. They said about him that he, as a censor, 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.

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

2. Tiberius Gracchus

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

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

Having put forward his bill, Tiberius tried, as Appian reports, to appeal to the Senate.

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

But the plebs warmly supported Tiberius. Tiberius's bill became the banner around which small landowners united to fight against large slave owners. Peasants from all over Italy flocked to Rome to take part in the vote. Tiberius, who at first thought only about preserving 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 animals 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 wander without protection and without a roof over their heads. When the generals In battles they encourage soldiers to fight in defense of home altars and the tombs of their ancestors, they say a lie: of all the Romans, no one has either a home altar or the tomb of their ancestors! They fight in defense of the wealth and luxury of other people; they are called masters of the world, but do not have not a piece of land to own! "

The plebs pushed the moderate and cautious Tiberius onto the path of decisive action. The Senate, as a representative of the nobles, decided to prevent the reform and attached a second tribune - Marcus Octavius, so that he would speak out against Gracchus. Octavius, who himself owned public land in the state, declared his “veto” against the reforms. Tiberius put the question to a vote: “Can someone who goes against the interests of the people be a tribune of the people?” The meeting unanimously gave a negative answer, and one of the freed slaves summoned Octavius ​​from the platform. This was an unprecedented case: according to the unwritten but strictly observed Roman constitution, no magistrate could be removed from office before the expiration of his term of office. Having demonstrated that the constitution could be violated with impunity, Tiberius began a century-long period of civil struggle in the Roman Republic, ending with the liquidation of the republican system.

After the removal of Octavius, Tiberius's bill was adopted by the popular assembly. He himself, his younger brother Gaius 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 people's assembly a law on the use of income from the province of Asia to provide assistance to those receiving allotments.

Overcoming fierce resistance from large landowners, the commission vigorously carried out reform. But time passed, and the end of Tiberius’s summer term as tribune was approaching. Well understanding 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 in the next year, 132. Nobile, were already preparing to deal with the leader of the plebs, whom he hated, when he became a private citizen, they now concentrated everything efforts to prevent the second election of Tiberius. Accusations fell on him of violating ancient state regulations, of seeking to seize sole tyrannical power, and so on.

On Election Day, enemies of reform armed their clients and fans to forcefully disrupt the vote. Tiberius's position 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 Nazicus, called Tiberius a tyrant and called on the consul to save the republic. When the consul announced that he would not start a domestic war, Nazik shouted: “When the consul betrays the republic, then whoever wants to defend rights should follow me.” A crowd of senators with pieces of broken benches rushed into the street into the crowd of people. Everyone began to run away cautiously. Someone grabbed Tiberius by the toga, and he ran away in the tunic itself. On the road, someone kicked him from the bench, he fell, and then they finished him off. Up to 300 of his like-minded people fell, killed with circles and stones. Tiberius's body was not allowed to be buried, and with other corpses he was thrown into the Tiber. Of the surviving Gracchians, 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. It continued its activities even after the death of Tiberius (replenishing with new members). In general, over the 15 years of its activity, about 80 thousand people received land plots. But opponents of the reform did their best to slow down the work. The length of ownership and lack of documents often made it impossible to determine which plots belonged to the owner as private property and which due to occupation. On this basis, endless litigation and conflicts arose that the commission must resolve.

3. Gaius Gracchus

For the first time, in connection with the agrarian reform, the question of Italians arose with all urgency. According to Gracchus' law, state lands were taken away from Rome's Italian allies, but they could not receive plots distributed only among Roman citizens. This showed a certain limitation of the Gracchian movement. Despite the fact that Italics participated on an equal basis with Roman citizens in all the wars of Rome, the benefits of Roman citizens did not extend to them. Rich Italics sought to obtain Roman citizenship in order to participate on equal rights in the exploitation of the provinces; for poor Italics, Roman citizenship would have given the right to land plots and would have somewhat protected 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, the resolution of cases on the disputed lands was transferred to the consuls.

In 125 BC. Consul Flaccus, a supporter of Gracchus' reform, proposed to compensate the Italians by granting them Roman citizenship, but this proposal met such a storm of indignation in the Senate that Flaccus did not even dare to put it to a vote. The failure of the Flaccus project sparked a revolt in Italian cities Askuli and Fregellah.

In this tense situation, supporters of agrarian reform managed to bring Tiberius Gracchus’s brother, Gaius, who had a brilliant oratorical gift and extraordinary abilities as a statesman, to the tribunes of the people in 123. Guy held the position of tribune of the people for two years and during this time he 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 to 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 voting was usually decided by the urban proletariat. Therefore, for example, he passed the Corn Law, reducing the price of bread to 6 1/3 asses per mode, which was about half the usual price. He demanded that the plebs be allowed to attend theatrical performances free of charge. By implementing these laws, Gaius Gracchus managed to significantly increase the number of his supporters.

At the same time, Guy tried to get help from powerful capitalists - equity (horsemen). Another law of Gaius left the collection of taxes and duties established for the province of Asia to the Roman horsemen. To protect tax farmers from prosecution, courts for examining cases of abuse in the provinces were taken away from senators and transferred to the equestrians, from among whom were large tax farmers. The law on Asian tax farming was also beneficial to many more or less wealthy plebeians who took part in tax farming societies. To increase the income of representatives of these circles, Gaius Gracchus outlined a plan for extensive government construction of roads and public buildings, which involved contractors with their slaves; construction works could also provide income to the free poor. By this, he undermined the authority of the Senate and attracted equity to himself, who could help him with their money and influence.

Thanks to those laws of Guy, the voices of both the capitalists and the proletariat were ensured at popular assemblies, and they exercised their influence. “When the people accepted these rights,” writes Plutarch, “Gai received almost monarchical power, so that 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 officials’ regulations and could pass all sorts of laws at a people’s assembly that sympathized with him. unhindered, he became a second tribune, because no one dared to speak out against him.

Then Guy began to do his main plan- restructuring of the Roman state and citizenship. His initiative went in different directions. Thus, he reorganized the division of citizens into centuries, eliminating senators from the cavalry centuries. Spent new law on military service, ended the state's obligation to supply soldiers with clothing, and prohibited the admission of youth under 17 years of age into the army. Regulated the division of provinces between consuls. Reformed the way of sovereignty of public tributes. Started building new roads. He began to besiege new colonies, both in Italy and in the provinces. Having rummaged through the agrarian laws of Tiberius. He himself put into practice all the adopted laws, he took care of everything and managed everything himself.

“Although there were so many great works, there was no sign of fatigue on him, he did everything with extraordinary speed and meticulousness, so that even those who hated him and feared him were amazed at his talents, with which he accomplished everything and grasped everything” Plutarch.

Finding new land funds to provide plots to the poor, Gaius Gracchus first decided to resort to the colonization of the provinces. He passed a law establishing a colony on the site of the destroyed Carthage, where 6 thousand people were to receive 200 jugeras 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 Gracchus’s supporters was strengthened by the speech of the protégé of the nobility, tribune Livius Drusus, who put forward a deliberately impossible, 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 had gone to establish a new colony, intending to obtain a third tribunate, the infidel people turned against him, and his opponents launched a decisive offensive. The meeting led to armed struggle, and the Senate declared a state of emergency in Rome. As 11 years earlier, Rome witnessed a bloody clash, and again the Gracchians were defeated. Guy Gracchus and his supporters fortified themselves on the Aventine Hill, but an army was sent against him and a siege was begun. Senators, some of the horsemen who joined the Senate, and hired Cretan archers spoke out against 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 for his head. Then a pogrom began against his supporters - up to 3,000 of them were killed, their bodies were drowned in the Tiber, their property was confiscated, and women were not allowed to wear mourning. At the site where the domestic struggle took place, the Senate ordered the construction of a sanctuary of the Goddess of 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 sustainable small land ownership - one of the foundations of the republican system - in the conditions of developed slavery, rapidly growing monetary relations and usury became impossible. In this regard, the role of the rural plebs in the political life of Rome is becoming less and less significant.

As a result of the victory of the Senate, the reforms of Gaius Gracchus fell. Previously, the agrarian law was demolished. Decree from 119 BC. It was decided that state land was in the hands of private rulers and becomes their property. Thus, the nobility secured for itself all those public lands that the Gracchi wanted to transfer to the people. The peasantry took some advantage of the allotment of soil. First, the decree obligated that lands obtained by force of agrarian laws should not be freely sold to anyone; It is the peasants' duty not to abandon their homes and their homes. It seemed that with this the peasantry would achieve prosperity and become a strong layer. But in reality it turned out that the peasants could no longer be saved from decline. The new settlers from the urban proletariat had already lost the habit of farming.

The broad colonization projects advocated by Guy Gracchus also fell. Only in some areas were colonies established for Roman settlers. After the suppression of the Gracchians, the movement for agrarian reform temporarily died down, partly because many had already received land, partly due to the subjugation and provincialization of parts of Transalpine Gaul, where in 118 BC. The colony of Narbonne was founded. Here a new field of activity opened up for many Romans and Italics, who quickly filled this area, which was soon completely Romanized.

A series of further agrarian laws, the outcome of which was summed up by the law issued in 111 BC. That is, negated the results of the Gracchi reforms. This law declared Italian and provincial lands that were under the occupation of private individuals to be private property, and allowed the sale of plots distributed by the Gracchi agrarian commission. The result was an even greater concentration of land in the hands of a few. Already in 104 BC. The people's tribune Marcius Philip stated that no more than 2 thousand families in Rome have 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 payment of a portion of the harvest and fulfillment of various duties. Since most of the state land in Italy passed into private hands, new ways had to be found to solve the agrarian question. The question of the Italians also remained unresolved.

But the Senate did not have the courage to repeal Guy’s truly harmful laws on the distribution of grain in cities and on equity courts. The free distribution of bread became the privilege of the Roman proletariat, which could no longer be eliminated, since in Rome it would lead to revolution. This harmful custom was supported by various ambitious figures, thanks to which they gained the favor of the people for personal purposes. This “number of grain law” also significantly undermined agrarian reforms, because villagers 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-privilege, which allowed them to cover the abuses that were allowed in the provinces.

The content of the struggle that unfolded in the Roman Republic after the suppression of the Gracchi movement was that large slave owners sought the very development of private property and sharply opposed all its restrictions. Objectively, this was a struggle for the widespread 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 land ownership and the dispossession of peasants who became slaves, the political rights of broad sections of the population were increasingly curtailed, this was at the same time the struggle of large slave owners against slave-owning democracy, possible only in the conditions of the ancient polis, consisting of citizens, together with those landowners. Outwardly, this struggle was expressed in complex clashes between the optimates (i.e., the best) and the popular (i.e., the people), as adherents of the nobility and supporters of the plebs began to call themselves.

The Equity state switched once in one direction, once in the other. Social competitions of Equity often followed the same paths as Nobiles. But due to the fact that the nobility did not want to allow equity to power, they were forced to go hand in hand with the popularists. However, more than once the radicalism of the masses frightened them, and they were ready to compromise with the Senate.

First of all, we should consider the life and customs of the Roman Republic in the last third of the 2nd century BC. This is necessary in order to understand the preconditions for the agrarian reform of the Gracchi Brothers.

Appian describes the economic and social situation of the Romans very well in his writings: “There were often mutual disputes between the Roman people and the Senate on issues of legislation, the abolition of debt obligations, the division of public land, and the choice of magistrates. However, these were not civil wars in the strict sense of the word, which would lead to the use of violent actions. The matter was only about disagreements and bickering, which took place within the framework of the law and were settled with great respect for the disputing parties, by mutual concessions." (Appian. Civil Wars. Book One).

From the point of view of Tiberius, the main reason for the fall of Roman power was the dispossession of small free farmers who joined the ranks of the troops. Therefore, Tiberius proposed to stop this process by carrying out agrarian reform. He hoped to provide landless citizens with plots of land, preserve them from ruin, and secure them for the future from those who have them. To provide land to numerous landless citizens, Tiberius proposed limiting the right to lease public fields by landowners to a certain norm, and confiscating all surplus public lands to allocate plots from them to landless Roman citizens.

Appian appreciates Tiberius Gracchus as an excellent orator and a good reformer: “. This continued until Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, a man of noble birth, very ambitious, an excellent orator, thanks to all these qualities, very well known to everyone, having become a tribune of the people, made a magnificent speech” (Appian. Civil Wars. Book One, 10).

The situation in the people's assembly began to change not in Tiberius's favor. His opponents managed to put together a strong opposition.

Tiberius found himself isolated. To bring the agrarian and other reforms to completion, Tiberius needed to retain the position of tribune of the people for the next 132 BC, and this was prohibited by law. Tiberius and his supporters decided to put pressure on the voting process, which escalated into a bloody battle, during which Tiberius and several hundred of his supporters died.

About the life of Gaius Gracchus after the death of his brother, Plutarch writes in his Comparative Lives: “After the death of Tiberius, Gaius at first, either fearing his enemies, or in order to incite his fellow citizens against them, did not appear at all in the forum and lived quietly and secludedly, like a man who is not only depressed and dejected by circumstances, but also intends to remain aloof from public affairs in the future; this gave rise to speculation that he condemned and rejected Tiberius’ initiatives. But he was still too young, nine years younger than his brother, and Tiberius died before reaching thirty. When, over time, little by little, his disposition began to emerge, alien to idleness, effeminacy, passion for wine and profit, when he began to hone his gift of speech, as if preparing for himself the wings that would lift him in the public field, it was clearly revealed that Guy's peace will soon come to an end. Defending his friend Vettius in court, he brought such joy to the people and aroused such frantic enthusiasm that all other speakers seemed pathetic in comparison with him, and new fears arose among powerful citizens, and they talked a lot among themselves, no matter what. “Under no circumstances should Guy be allowed to hold the position of tribune.” (Plutarch. Gaius Gracchus.1).

Soon Gaius Gracchus was promoted to the stands. He continued land reforms, only now he tried to take into account the interests of other classes. Gracchus Roman agrarian reform

And according to one of Gaius’ laws, bread for the Roman poor had to be sold at the lowest prices. By decree of Guy, Roman colonies were created outside Italy, as a result of which peasants improved their situation by leaving their homeland and receiving land in a foreign land.

But the Senate was not satisfied with the excessive activity of the people's tribune, and in particular with the activity of Gracchus. The third time, Guy was never elected. This led to the fact that supporters of Guy’s reforms began to organize detachments armed against his enemies.

This resulted in open confrontation between the senators and the followers of Gracchus. As a result of the battle, three thousand of Guy's supporters were killed, including Gracchus himself. Unfortunately, the impoverishment of peasants continued, and numerous land reforms Gracchus brothers were defeated. Here is what Plutarch writes about Guy’s reforms: “After returning from Africa, Guy, first of all, moved from the Palatine Hill to that part of the city that lay below the forum and was considered the quarters of the common people, for almost the entire poor of Rome gathered there to live. He then proposed several more bills to bring to a vote. Ordinary people from everywhere came to his call, but the Senate convinced the consul Fannius to remove everyone from the city except Roman citizens. When this strange and unusual order was announced, that none of the allies and friends of the Roman people should appear in Rome for the next few days, Gaius, in his turn, issued a decree in which he condemned the actions of the consul and volunteered to protect the allies if they did not comply. However, he did not defend anyone, and even seeing how the lictors of Fannius were dragging him, Gaius, his friend and host, passed by - either fearing to discover the decline of his influence, or, as he himself explained, not wanting to give his opponents a reason to fights and skirmishes, a reason for which they greedily sought." (Plutarch. Gaius Gracchus.12)

GRACCHIAN REFORM

reforms carried out in Dr. Rome in the 2nd century. BC e. brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchi. The reforms were caused by the need to stop the degradation of Rome. the peasantry (the social and military support of the Roman state) in the conditions of the rapid development of slavery. Some political Figures close to Cornelius Scipio saw the salvation of Rome in limiting large land ownership, mainly. on the widespread use of slave labor, in the revival of small and cf. land ownership and an army of peasant owners. Tiberius, elected people. tribune at 133 BC e., proposed a bill that limited land use by society. field (ager publicus) 1000 jugeras per family. Government surplus lands in small plots of 30 jugers (7.5 hectares) were transferred to poor citizens without the right to sell. Tiberius managed to achieve the adoption of the people's bill. meeting. To implement the bill, an agrarian enterprise was created. a commission of 3 persons, which included the Gracchus brothers. Ag. the reform met resistance from the majority of large landowners and the Senate. During the elections to the people. stands at 132 BC e. Tiberius, falsely accused by the senatorial nobility of seeking royal power, was killed.

Guy, Nar. Tribune 123 and 122 BC e., restored the agricultural sector in full. legislation of Tiberius and resumed agricultural activities. commissions. In order to paralyze the resistance of large landowners, Guy tried to win over the merchant-usurers to his side. layers of horsemen and mountains. the plebs, creating a coalition of them and sat down. plebs. The horsemen were given the right to judge the provincials. governors, and also farmed out the taxes of the richest province of Asia (the former Kingdom of Pergamon). In the interests of the mountains. Guy of the plebs passed a grain law on the sale of mountains. bread to the population at prices lower than market prices. However, near the mountains. of the plebs, special interests emerged that differed from the interests of farmers, which weakened social base Guy. To provide land to poor citizens, Guy made a proposal to organize colonies in Italy and the provinces. This was contrary to the interests of the horsemen, who exploited the provinces through tax farming and usury. operations. In an effort to expand its social base and spread agri. legislation on the Italian allies, Guy proposed a law granting them the rights of Rome. citizenship, which caused no. only the fierce resistance of the Senate, but also the opposition of the horsemen, as well as the mountains. and sat down. plebs who did not want to share their privileges with new citizens. The fragile coalition of horsemen, mountains, created by Guy. and sat down. the plebs fell apart. At 121 BC e. Guy was not elected people. tribune; provoked into arms. uprising, he died along with his supporters. Attempts of the Gracchi to recreate the small earth. property by limiting large lands. possessions had temporary success. After the reform approx. 80 thousand citizens received land. plots. However, the reasons for the landlessness of the peasants were not eliminated: the development of slave ownership. property led inevitably to the pauperization of villages. population. In 111 BC e. it was allowed to sell plots received under the reform, which led to the collapse of agriculture. legislation. The state was soon forced to replace it with a cross. militia to create a standing army of proletarians. Horseman Thanks to the reforms of the Gracchi, the class began to turn into a privileged one and for a number of decades played an important political role. role. The activities of the Gracchi contributed to the democratization of Rome. about-va, design and development of the popular program.

In antiquity historiography along with sympathy. reviews of the Gracchi as noble fighters against injustice (Florus, Plutarch) are sharply denied. assessment of their activities is seen as a desire for individual power and the introduction of discord into the state of Cicero). When assessing the Gracchi in the newest bourgeois. historiography was affected by the attitude of the bourgeoisie. historians to property rights as sacred and inviolable. In this regard, the Gracchi were interpreted as violators of the law and even as representatives of antiquity. socialism (German scholar R. Pöllmann). Thanks to the owls. historiography is to consider the activities of the Gracchi in close connection with the development of slavery and the struggle of the peasantry against large landowners (N. A. Mashkin, S. I. Kovalev, etc.).

Lit.: Felsberg Yu., Gracchi, Yu.. 1910; Nitsch K., Die Gracchen und ihre nächsten Vorgänger, V., 1847";Meyer E., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Gracchen. Halle, 1894; Fraccaro P., Studi sull"età dei Gracchi, Città di Castello, 1914; Carcopino I.. Autour de Gracques, P., 1928; Martine F. de, Storia delia costituzione Romana. II. Roma, 1960, p. 402-71.

A. I. Nemirovsky. Voronezh.

Soviet historical encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ed. E. M. Zhukova. 1973-1982 .

See what "GRACCHIAN REFORM" is in other dictionaries:

Reforms carried out in Ancient Rome in the 2nd century. BC e. brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchi (see in Art. Gracchi) ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

1. (Roma) capital of Italy, political, financial. and cultural center, Italy's largest transport hub, international center. tourism. The Vatican State is located within the city. 2514.2 t. (1965). 1/3 of us. R. workers and artisans, many officials... ...

- (Russian peasant, originally from Christian) in pre-socialist times. society economical formations are a set of small producers in agriculture (in a broader sense in agriculture in general), who, as a rule, run their own households. by means and strength... Soviet historical encyclopedia

- (brothers), Tiberius (Tiberius Gracchus; 162 133 or 132 BC) and Guy (Gajus Gracchusi 153 121 BC) political. figures Dr. Rome. From the noble plebeian family Sem Proniev. We received an excellent education. They were close to the circle of Cornelius Scipio.... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia

A clear manifestation of class. struggle (between large landowners, slave owners and small producers, as well as between various groups of domination, class) in slaveholding. society of Rome. Slave revolts in the concept of civil war. in R. usually not... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia

Slave revolts in the middle of the 2nd century. BC e. Agrarian movement of the Roman plebs- The first slave revolt in Sicily The external brilliance and military power of the Roman state covered up deep and irreconcilable contradictions. Slavery in Rome and in many areas subordinate to it has reached an unprecedented development compared to... ... The World History. Encyclopedia

Contents: I. R. Modern; II. History of the city of R.; III. Roman history before the fall of the Western Roman Empire; IV. Roman law. I. Rome (Roma) the capital of the Italian kingdom, on the Tiber River, in the so-called Roman Campania, at 41°53 54 north... ... encyclopedic Dictionary F. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron

Rome- ancient origin community in Dr. Italy, then the slave owner. mountains state (polis), which subjugated the entire Apennine Peninsula; subsequently slave owner Mediterranean power incl. Means. part of Europe, Northern coast. Africa, Egypt, M. Asia, Syria... Ancient world. encyclopedic Dictionary

ANCIENT ROME- Roman Forum Roman Forum ancient civilization in Italy and the Mediterranean with its center in Rome. It was based on the urban community (lat. civitas) of Rome, which gradually extended its power, and then its right, to the entire Mediterranean. Being... ... Orthodox Encyclopedia

Books

• The legacy of the agrarian law of Tiberius Gracchus. The land question and political struggle in Rome in the 20s. II century BC e.
• The legacy of the agrarian law of Tiberius Gracchus: the land question and political struggle in Rome in the 20s. II century BC uh, Lapyrenok Roman Viktorovich. The book examines a wide range of historical issues related to the agrarian reform of Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus (133-124 BC) and the legislative activities of his younger brother...

Ancient world history. Volume 3. Decline of ancient societies Sventsitskaya Irina Sergeevna

Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

The first outbreak of the crisis was the tribunate of Tiberius Gracchus. In 133 BC. e. Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, elected tribune of the people, proposed an agrarian law, which was aimed at partially restoring the polis balance of the times of the early republic. Each ager publicus owner was allowed to hold no more than 500 ager (125 hectares) of land; in addition, he could have another 250 yugers for each adult son, with the expectation that one family would own no more than 1 thousand yugers of land. The surplus was returned to the disposal of the state. Of these, plots of 30 yugers were to be cut and distributed to the poorest and neediest citizens. Former owners received monetary compensation. The plots were prohibited from being sold. A commission of three people was supposed to be elected to oversee the implementation of agrarian reform. The law largely repeated the agrarian law of Licinius - Sextius, adopted during the period of struggle between patricians and plebeians, and was aimed at the restoration of small land ownership. But Tiberius Gracchus did everything possible to carry out the redistribution of land in the least painful way for the nobility.

Nevertheless, large owners opposed the reform. They managed to win over Gracchus's colleague, the tribune Marcus Octavius, who vetoed the project. After a long struggle, Tiberius decided to pose the question to the comitia: should a tribune who opposes the people remain in his position? As a result of the vote, Octavius ​​was removed from office; this was an act of great political significance: the popular assembly thereby placed itself above the magistrates. After the removal of Octavius, the agrarian law was adopted. The agrarian commission included Tiberius Gracchus himself and his relatives.

The triumvirs encountered a number of difficulties related to the distribution of plots and the resistance of large possessors. Sharply stood up and financial issue. Taking advantage of the annexation of Pergamon, Gracchus passed a law according to which the funds received were used to finance the reform.

In the summer of 133 BC. e., when Gracchus nominated himself for the tribunes of the people for the second time, the rich put up serious resistance to him. During one of the election meetings, a fight broke out; a rumor spread that Tiberius was demanding royal power. Then the senators went straight from the meeting of the Senate to the meeting place; Having grabbed the benches, they began to beat Gracchus' supporters. In this skirmish, Tiberius Gracchus and 300 of his followers were killed.

After the gabel of the initiator of the reform, rich possessors began to fight to end land redistribution. Their task was made easier by the fact that the sections displeased the Italian allies, whose lands were affected by the actions of the agrarian commission.

In 125 BC. e Gracchanians tried to settle relations with the Italians. Consul Fulvius Flaccus proposed a bill to grant the allies the rights of Roman citizenship. Italica supported Flaccus's proposal, but it was rejected in Rome. In this case, opponents of the law found support in the people's assembly, which did not want to share their rights. The response to Rome's decision was an uprising in the Latin colony of Fregella, which was soon suppressed. From then on, full rights of Roman citizenship became the main political demand of the Italics.

In 123–122 BC e. The tribune of the people was the younger brother of Tiberius Gracchus, Gaius, who came up with a whole series of laws that significantly changed the socio-political structure of society. Guy Gracchus was more determined than Tiberius. Apparently, he was the only Roman politician who seriously tried to democratize society. This desire was aggravated by the desire for revenge on the murderers of his older brother, who occupied leading positions in the state. In addition, Guy Gracchus tried to solve a number of pressing state problems that arose in the new conditions. This was the first attempt to adapt the polis apparatus to the needs of a major power.

First of all, Guy restored the agrarian law of Tiberius and continued the operation of the commission, the work of which produced fruitful results. About 80 thousand people received land. However, Italy's land funds were not enough, and Gracchus turned to the provinces. In 122 BC. e. he issues a law on the withdrawal of colonies. The location for the first of them was the former territory of Carthage, where it was planned to bring a colony called Junonia. The withdrawal of overseas colonies subsequently played a significant role in the Romanization of the provinces. Besides. Guy organized a grandiose construction of roads and grain barns, which provided work for the masses of the urban plebs.

One of the main laws of Guy was judicial. Judicial commissions on cases of extortion were removed from the jurisdiction of the Senate. Now the judges were chosen from among the riders. Gracchus probably planned to strengthen control over the provincial governors, but the equestrian courts turned out to be no less corrupt than the Senate ones. The position of the horsemen was also improved by the fact that Guy proposed introducing tithes in the province of Asia, the collection of which began to be farmed out in Rome. Thus, the rich province was given over to the plunder of the tax farmers (publicans), who felt completely safe under the cover of the equestrian courts.

The reforms of 123 made Gracchus the most popular politician in Rome. His authority was so great that he easily entered the tribunes in 122. It was at this time that Gracchus proposed one of his most radical laws: the law granting Italians the rights of Roman citizenship. The Senate and people were irritated by this proposal. Guy's opponents launched a wide campaign, using any tactics. The people's tribune Marcus of Libya Drusus made demagogic promises, which managed to split a significant part of the plebs away from Guy. The Senate skillfully played on superstitions, spreading a rumor about the wrath of the gods because of the founding of a colony on a cursed place (As is known, after the destruction of Carthage, the place where it was located was cursed.). Guy's popularity was declining. The Italian law did not pass. Even more dangerous was the fact that Gracchus failed in the elections of 121, and his worst enemy Lucius Opimius became consul. Guy's opponents raised the question of the liquidation of Junonia, which was the reason for a decisive clash. Opimius provoked a conflict and ensured that the Senate vested him with emergency powers to restore order. Gracchus and Fulvius Flaccus fortified themselves on the Aventine Hill, where they were attacked by Opimius. During the clash, 3 thousand people died, including Gracchus and Fulvius. The movement was suppressed.

Gracchus' opponents did not dare to abolish many of his laws. The courts remained in the hands of the horsemen, the tax-farming system continued to exist, and the Corn Law remained in force. The target of the attack was agrarian reform. In 121 BC. e. The inalienability of the Gracchan plots was abolished, and two years later the agrarian commission ceased to exist.

In III BC. e. According to the law of the people's tribune Spurius Thorius, all state lands under private lease were declared private property. All redistributions stopped. Subsequently, private individuals were prohibited from occupying public lands. Law III was an important step towards the victory of private ownership of land. State property, which was the basis of polis land ownership, is beginning to disappear.

The significance of the Gracchan reforms was enormous. They were the first step towards transforming the polis into a great power. The Gracchi put on the agenda a number of serious national problems, the solution of which became necessary. Their activities led to some democratization of Roman society, although it is hardly legitimate to attribute to them a desire for a democratic revolution. The Gracchi were the first to introduce a new style politics, the main element of which was the achievement of their own goals by relying on the people's assembly and the use of democratic slogans. Politicians of this type are called popularists. The popularists did not form a single whole and pursued different goals, usually purely personal, but the activities of the popularists played a big role in civil wars. The struggle over the Gracchan reforms became the starting point of the conflict within the Roman community.

From the book Great Secrets of Civilizations. 100 stories about the mysteries of civilizations author Mansurova Tatyana

Luck for the Brothers By the late 1940s, brothers Dick and Mac McDonald had good experience in business. After much searching they invented new technology restaurant operations based on fast service, low prices and high sales volume. The brothers refused the menu from

From the book Mommsen T. History of Rome - [brief summary by N.D. Chechulina] author Chechulin Nikolay Dmitrievich

From the book History of Rome. Volume 2 by Mommsen Theodor

CHAPTER I SUBJECT COUNTRIES BEFORE THE AGE OF THE GRACCHIANS. With the destruction of the Macedonian kingdom, the rule of Rome was firmly established throughout the entire space from the Pillars of Hercules to the mouths of the Nile and Orontes; it weighed on the peoples like an inevitable verdict of fate, and it seemed to them

author Kovalev Sergey Ivanovich

From the book History of Rome (with illustrations) author Kovalev Sergey Ivanovich

From the book 500 famous historical events author Karnatsevich Vladislav Leonidovich

REFORM OF TIBERIUS AND GAIUS GRACCHIS One of the main features of the Roman state was that such an activity as politics was elevated to a very high level. The widest strata of the population participated in it in one way or another, and sometimes quite complex

From the book Myths of the Ancient World author Becker Karl Friedrich

26. Unrest of the Gracchi. (133...121 BC) In such a sad situation, two brothers, the sons of the noble Cornelia, daughter of Scipio Africanus the Elder, decided to come to the aid of the impoverished and disenfranchised people: Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, distinguished by an exalted way of thinking and

From the book History of Rome author Kovalev Sergey Ivanovich

CHAPTER XX THE GRACCHIAN MOVEMENT The first open confrontation between various groups of Roman society was the tribunate of Tiberius Gracchus. Having achieved the position of tribune of the people in 133, Tiberius Gracchus put forward an agrarian bill that provided for the limitation of land

From the book History of Rome author Kovalev Sergey Ivanovich

The end of agrarian reform. The historical significance of the activities of the Gracchi No matter how fierce 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 into life, as they responded to urgent public

From the book History of Rome by Mommsen Theodor

Book four. REVOLUTION. Chapter I. SUBJECT LANDS BEFORE THE TIME OF THE GRACCHIS. Affairs in Spain. Viriaf. Fight against Numantia. Affairs in Greece and the East. Relations to Carthage and the beginning of the last struggle. Scipio Aemilianus in Africa. Fight under the walls of Carthage. Capture and destruction

From the book World History. Volume 4. Hellenistic period author Badak Alexander Nikolaevich

The Gracchi Movement An exciting and alarming factor for the ruling class was the weakening of the military power of Rome, which was the result of the dispossession of the peasantry. According to the census of 154 BC. e. the number of adult men suitable for service in the legions, that is, who had

From the book History of the Russian State and Law: Cheat Sheet author author unknown

30. REFORM OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19th century: ZEMSTY, CITY AND STOLYPIN AGRARIAN REFORM Zemstvo reform. In 1864, zemstvo self-government bodies were created in Russia. The system of zemstvo bodies was two-level: at the level of the district and the province. Zemstvo administrative bodies

From the book Torch of New Russia author Gubarev Pavel Yurievich

In memory of our brothers Semyonovka, June 3. A dry military report on the battle in the “Award List”: “A brief, specific statement of personal military feat or merit. As a result of competent team actions, interacting with other PTRS and NSVS crews, the breakthrough was stopped

From the book History of the Ancient World [East, Greece, Rome] author Nemirovsky Alexander Arkadevich

The socio-political activities of the Gracchi brothers (134–121 BC) The terrible Sicilian slave revolt and the shameful defeats of the Roman army in the Numantine War revealed a deep internal crisis generated by the excessive spread of slavery with all

From the book Essays on the history of political institutions in Russia author Kovalevsky Maxim Maksimovich

Chapter IX Reforms of Alexander II. - Reforms - judicial, military, university and press. - Political liberties of a Russian subject The transformation of the entire judicial system of Russia is usually celebrated as the third of the great reforms carried out during the reign of Alexander

From the book General History [Civilization. Modern concepts. Facts, events] author Dmitrieva Olga Vladimirovna

The activities of the Gracchi brothers In the context of an impending crisis that threatened the strength of the Roman Republic, some representatives of the nobility began to realize the need for change. It was important to unite society and revive the strength of the Roman army, the core of which was

1. Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

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

1.2 Tribunate of Gaius Gracchus. Agrarian, Corn and Judicial Laws

1.3 Death of Guy. The fate of the Gracchi reforms

2. General imperial legislation of medieval Germany

2.1 Maintaining the “Zemstvo peace”

2.2 "Carolina"

3. The evolution of English case law in the 17th-19th centuries.

3.1 Common law

3.2 Justice

4. New course Franklin Roosevelt

4.1 World economic crisis 1929-1933 and its consequences for the USA

4.2 New Deal program, its implementation, results

Bibliography

1. Reforms of the Gracchi brothers

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

The Gracchi brothers were the sons of Tiberius Gracchus - censor, twice consul and twice triumphant - and Cornelia. Fate decreed that of their twelve children, three remained alive - 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 (Scipio was accompanied to Africa by Gaius Laelius and Polybius) could not but influence the formation of Tiberius' political views. At Carthage, young Gracchus showed great courage and gained wide popularity in the army. During the same period, Tiberius married the daughter of the Senate Appius Claudius.

In 137, Tiberius became quaestor in the army of Mancinus, which was besieging Numantia. The Senate's refusal to recognize the treaty, actually concluded by Tiberius, was its first clash with the senatorial oligarchy. In practice, he was able to verify the imperfection of the Roman state mechanism and the depravity of the ruling clique.

In the summer of 134, Tiberius nominated himself for the tribunes of the people for 133. The elections were accompanied by passionate agitation for agrarian reform. Tiberius, who had long established himself as a supporter of reform, was elected unanimously. Having taken office on December 10, 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 retain 500 yugers. If he had sons, then each was entitled to 250 yugers, but with the limitation that one family could not have more than 1 thousand yugers (250 hectares) of state land. The second point stated that surplus state land should be returned to the treasury and small plots should be cut out of them and distributed to poor citizens for hereditary rent. these plots were prohibited from being sold. The third point of the bill provided for the formation of an authorized commission of three persons, which was entrusted with carrying out 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 caused fierce resistance from large landowners and the majority of the Senate, and Marcus Octavius, one of the tribunes of the people and a friend of Tiberius, under pressure from the Senate, opposed Tiberius and imposed a tribunician veto on his bill. Among the tribunes of the people, power lies with the one who imposes the ban, and even if all the others agree with each other, they will achieve nothing as long as there is at least one who opposes their judgment. Octavius ​​was adamant. The next day, when the people filled the square again, the law was approved and the people chose three to demarcate and divide the fields - Tiberius himself, his father-in-law, Appius Claudius, and his brother, Gaius Gracchus.

Tiberius sought a second position as tribune; according to the law of 342, this was allowed only after 10 years. On election day, the people gathered at the Capitol, Tiberius moved there to the Temple of Jupiter Capitoline (the meeting took place in the square in front of it). The atmosphere of the meeting became tense. An armed clash occurred between supporters and opponents of Gracchus; the senators went straight to Tiberius. All Tiberius' defenders 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 a bench, and Lucius Rufus laid claim to the second blow.

More than three hundred people died in this clash between supporters and opponents of Gracchus. Despite the requests of brother Guy, 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 murdered man without trial, captured and executed others.

Under the circumstances, the Senate considered it necessary to reassure 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 nominated himself for the tribunes of the people 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 previous extent. The content of the grain law (lex frumentaria) is as follows: it established the sale of grain from state warehouses at a reduced price in comparison with 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, the law nevertheless guaranteed the poorest population of Rome from constant fluctuations in bread prices. In this way, state price regulation was first introduced in Rome, which alleviated the situation of the poorest strata. Even more important was 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 permanent judicial commissions, in particular the commission on cases of extortion of provincial governors. This is where tradition diverges. According to Livy, Guy left the courts in the hands of the Senate, but increased the number of senators by adding 600 new members from the equestrians. According to Plutarch, “Gaius added the same number of horsemen to the senatorial judges, who were 300, 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 option, judicial commissions were generally removed from the hands of senators and transferred entirely to the equestrians. Livy and Plutarch reflect the initial draft of the law introduced by Guy in the first period of his activity, when the opposition of the Senate had not yet acted too openly and Guy intended to limit himself to a relatively moderate reform. But after he met open opposition from the nobility, he gave the judicial law a more radical character. Guy wanted to put an end to the abuses committed by 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 increased the political authority of the right wing of democracy - the horsemen.

Guy introduced two more bills: firstly, if the people remove an official 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 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, it is necessary to note several more laws that, apparently, also fall in 123. First of all, the military law (lex militaris). It prohibited the conscription of citizens for military service before they reached the age of 17 and ordered that soldiers be supplied with clothing at the expense of the state, without deducting, as was previously practiced, its cost from military pay.

There are also bills on new colonies, on the construction of roads and grain barns. He put most of his care into the construction of roads, keeping in mind not only benefits, but also convenience and beauty.

At the next consular elections in 122, Fanius won, thanks to the support of Gaius. And Gaius, for the second time, was re-elected as a tribune of the people (between the speeches of Tiberius and Gaius the 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 fill the vacant seats, without restrictions as a tribune of the people) . The hatred of the Senate becomes open, and therefore strengthened the love of the people with new bills, proposing to withdraw the colonies to Tarentum and Capua and grant citizenship rights 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 and completed everything there within seventy days, he returned to Rome.

1.3 Death of Guy. The fate of the Gracchi reforms

Guy did not receive the post of tribune for the third time, although an enormous majority of votes were cast for him: when announcing the names of those elected, his comrades resorted to criminal deception. The enemies, having installed Opimius as consul, immediately began to work to repeal many of the laws of Gaius Gracchus and attacked the orders made by him in Carthage. The popular assembly, which was to decide the fate of Junonia, met on the Capitol. Opimius appointed a meeting of the Senate for the same day. But things came to an armed struggle in the squares and streets of Rome. Supporters of Gracchus occupied the Aventine. The youngest son of Fulvius, a friend of Guy, was sent to the Senate 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 Gracchanians was quickly broken. Guy did not participate in the battle 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 in pursuit and overtook the fugitives. Guy was accompanied by only one slave, named Philocrates, he managed to get to a small grove dedicated to the Furies and there Philocrates killed first him 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, Guy’s wife, was even deprived of her dowry. The total number of Gracchanians who died on this day and later reached 3 thousand people. The most important events and laws of Gaius Gracchus became firmly established in life, as they met pressing social needs. The courts remained in the hands of the horsemen for a long time, and the tax-farm system was further developed in the direction outlined by Guy. A new type of colony outside Italy also survived. Colonists actually remained in Junonia, although the colony as such was abolished by the law of Minucius Rufus. The situation with agrarian reform was more complicated. But it was also changed in 121, the hereditary lease and inalienability of the Gracchan plots were abolished. Then the agrarian commission was abolished (probably in 119). At the same time, it was established that state lands are not subject to further redistribution and that plots of state land, within the framework of the legal norm, in the hands of possessors are their full property. However, such plots were subject to a special tax. The amounts received from here were to be distributed to the people. In 111, this last restriction on private property was also abolished. According to the law of the people's tribune Spurius Thoria (lex Thoria), which summarized the previous legislation, all former state lands, regardless of 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 small owners, a very low maximum was set for free use of pasture: 10 heads of large 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 Maintaining zemstvo peace

The Reichstag of Worms in 1495, which proclaimed the “eternal peace of the land” (prohibition of private wars), established an imperial supreme court for the affairs of imperial subjects and subjects of individual principalities (Reichskkammergericht). Members of the court were appointed by electors and princes (14 people), cities (2 people), and the chairman was appointed 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 court sentences. They were provided with military contingents for this purpose. In addition, a special tax was introduced for the needs of managing the empire - the “all-empire pfennig”. However, a significant part of these measures were never implemented. Initially, the power of princes in individual lands (principals) was limited to the activities of meetings of local ranks (Landtags) - class representations of the clergy, nobility and townspeople; in some lands these assemblies also included representatives of the free peasantry. In Landtags, zemstvo officials usually formed three chambers (in some lands there were two chambers - the clergy and nobility sat together). The commissioners 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 voters for appropriate instructions.

The competence of the Landtags varied 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 decided on issues that were not within the competence of the courts (for example, political issues). The Landtags intervened in the administration of the state, influencing the formation of the composition of 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 affairs (monitoring the quality of coinage, protection of forests and etc.), military affairs. The most important right of the Landtags was the right to vote taxes. As state needs increased and domains decreased, the princes had to turn more and more often to the Landtags for monetary subsidies. The Landtag allocated funds for the maintenance of the troops, which opened up the possibility of intervention 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-based. representative bodies than the Reichstag.

2.2 "Carolina"

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 imperial law of fragmented Germany, “Carolina” had the goal of streamlining criminal proceedings in local courts. Its first part is devoted to the stages of the judicial process, 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 elements of the crime, but only listed them, placing them in more or less homogeneous groups. It provides for a fairly numerous range of crimes: state crimes (treason, rebellion, violation of the zemstvo peace, rebellion against the authorities); against the person (murder, poisoning, slander, suicide of a criminal); against property (arson, robbery, theft, embezzlement); against religion (blasphemy, witchcraft, blasphemy, breaking an oath, counterfeiting coins, documents, weights and measures, objects of trade); against morality (incest, rape, adultery, bigamy, adultery, pimping, kidnapping of women and girls).

TO general concepts criminal law, known to “Karolina”, include intent and negligence, circumstances excluding, mitigating and aggravating liability, attempt, complicity. Exempt from liability:

· for murder – insane;

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

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

Mitigating circumstances:

lack of intent;

· age up to 14 years;

· committing a crime in the performance of official duty.

Aggravating circumstances:

· committing a crime against a person in particular high position;

· presence of “malicious intent”.

Aiding:

assistance before committing a crime;

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

· assistance after a crime has been committed.

The purpose of punishment is to deter. Punishments:

· the death penalty(simple - cutting off the head with a sword; qualified - everything else);

Self-harm and corporal punishment;

· disgraceful punishments;

· expulsion from the country;

· fines.

During the period of early feudalism in Germany, an accusatory (adversarial) process was used. There was no division of the process into civil and criminal. "Carolina" retained some features of the abolitionist 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 present documents and witness statements and 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 a judge on behalf of the state “out of duty.” The investigation was conducted at the initiative of the court and was not limited by time limits. The following courts can be distinguished:

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

· Church court - extended to the clergy and some other categories of people, for everyone - cases of marriages, spiritual wills;

· City courts had different structures: judge + assessors (scheffens) or city council;

· The court of the prince (head of the district) is 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 law faculty, where the professors made a decision that was binding on the judge. The court consisted of sheffens or assessors, 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 upon the denunciation of the victim, his testimony was accurately recorded. Requirement for plaintiffs: presentation of direct evidence of a crime entailing punishment. The accused was imprisoned regardless of guilt. The plaintiff could also be placed in prison if he did not provide the appropriate bail, which was considered sufficient by the judges and sheffens in the absence of evidence.

All this was done in accordance with the civil law order to pay the costs incurred, as well as dishonor, damages, if the plaintiff is unable to prove the criminal charge or his rights, or if, within a certain period appointed by the court, he is not able to present such evidence and suspicions as the court considers it sufficient if the plaintiff loses the case for other reasons.

The next stage 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. Sufficient evidence requires two good witnesses. The main event, proven by one witness, was considered half-proof. The final conviction for criminal punishment must be based on one's own confession. Only what was said to the suspect after the torture is taken into account and recorded. The perpetrator, who will be subject to criminal punishment by a court verdict, is warned three days in advance (to have time to think about his sins). If requested, the plaintiff or defendant may have a god in 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 17th-19th centuries.

3.1 Common law

After the revolution in England, the case law developed in the previous era in the general system of the royal courts (“common law”) and in the court of the Lord Chancellor (“equity”) continued to apply. “Common law” contributed to the strengthening of royal power in England, which he adopted 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 the strengthening of its role, it was important that already at that time professional lawyers sat in the royal courts. Their general position was an expression of professional opinion. Common law was originally formed as the “law of lawyers.” E. Jenks notes that it is impossible to determine exactly how common law came about. “In some way which cannot be precisely determined, the king's judges, meeting between their journeys in London to try cases in the centralized royal courts ... and Westminster, came to an agreement on the need to merge the various local customs into a common or unitary law, which could be applied throughout the country ».

3.2 Justice

In the Middle Ages, the greatest competition to common law was the law of equity, which developed in the courts of chancellor. “Equity,” which, unlike the “common law,” was not constrained by precedent, carried the beneficial influence of Roman law and was imbued with the spirit of entrepreneurship, became the main support of the king’s judicial policy and the object of criticism from the revolutionary camp. This fact, paradoxical at first glance, was explained by the fact that the chairman of the court of justice - the Lord Chancellor - was at the same time the highest judicial official of the king. He was just an executor of the royal will.

Equity developed institutions previously unknown to English law. For example, the right of trust property, which has come to be used in a wide variety of situations. The introduction of this institution was the legal basis 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 the husband). The Institute reconsidered the issue of mortgages and provided the right to repurchase mortgages. Movable property also received protection, and the transfer of property under the purchase and sale agreement was ensured.

These systems continued to form the backbone of English law and for a long time significantly exceeded statutory law in their weight and importance, even after it was updated by revolutionary legislation. After the Revolution, as before, the English legal system was far from being internally coherent and harmonious. At least two contradictions clearly emerged in it. The first is the contradiction between the 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 judge-madelaw. In the traditional confrontation between law and justice, the “common law” generally prevailed in the post-revolutionary years. The growth of the authority of the “common law” was facilitated by the conflict that arose in the pre-revolutionary period between two rival systems of the royal court. Parliamentary opposition to the court of chancellor intensified after the sensational trial of a certain Glaville in 1615. In this case, Lord Chancellor Enesmere, in accordance with the principle of “fairness,” reviewed the decision of the court of “common law” made by the chief judge of the court of common pleas, E. Coke, on the fact that on the basis that this decision was based on evidence, the falsity of which the court was not aware of when considering the case. Due to the unusual conflict of jurisdiction between the two courts, the king created a special committee chaired by F. Bacon. The latter supported the right of the court of chancellor to implement its decisions even if they directly contradict the results of the dispute under “common law”. This decision represented a sensitive blow to the prestige of the “common law”, causing retaliatory criticism from the political opposition of the Chancery Court. Parliamentarians complained that “justice” was a tricky thing, that it “depended on the length of the Lord Chancellor’s leg.” Although during the revolution parliament's attempts to abolish the court of the Lord Chancellor were unsuccessful and the dualism of the judicial system in England was preserved, the revolution left a noticeable mark on the activities of this judicial body. Considering the mood of influential circles of society and their desire for a stable law and order, from the end of the 17th century. The Lord Chancellors are pursuing a more flexible policy in their courts. They try not to repeat the acute conflicts of the “equity” system with the “common law”. Thus, Lord Chancellor Nottingham, who in England is called the “father of modern justice,” said 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 legal principles in the court of chancellor led to the fact that in the 18th century. the system of “justice” begins to harden, obeying the rule of precedent and acquiring the same formal procedure as the system of “common law”. But both in the 18th and 19th centuries. in the system of “justice” law never ceased to develop. So, for example, the inconsistency of the revolution of the 17th century. in the matter of property, the preservation of old feudal structures of property, restrictions on the disposal of so-called “real” things led to the further development of the institution of “trust”. This institution was distinguished by considerable complexity and conventions, but it made it possible to bypass a number of embarrassing formalities of “common law” and expand the possibilities and 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 “fairness” procedure caused great criticism from English entrepreneurs. Due to its overload, the consideration of cases in the Chancellor's Court was extremely protracted and slow. The dual system of case law required that the business world, using the services of highly paid lawyers, also require additional expenses. The “common law” took a slightly different path at the same time. Here, after the revolution, essentially the opposite process is observed: a departure from the rigid principle of precedent towards an increase in judicial law-making. The “common law” judges understood that their claims to a leading role in the legal system could be justified if they freed themselves from a number of old, clearly outdated rules and were more responsive to the needs of capitalist development. This tendency was especially pronounced under Chief Judge Mansfield (1756-1788), who developed a number of doctrines that were quite modern and convenient for judicial practice. It is not for nothing that 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 ​​“fairness” and “common sense” that was unusual for this system. For example, when considering cases of wills, he broke with the inherent “common law” absolutization of external form, which predetermined the outcome of the case. He began to give preference to identifying the true will of the testator, arguing that “legal intention, if clearly expressed, should correct the legal meaning of terms carelessly used by the testator.” Also in the field of contract law, Mansfield, in accordance with the new ideas about contract, attached decisive importance to the “true intentions” and will of the parties. Mansfield put an end to the existence of special merchant (trade) law, which had developed 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 hearing cases in “common law” courts, laying the foundations of the modern judicial process: he expanded the right of the parties to present evidence, introduced appeal, etc. Thus, in the process of its evolution, “common law” acquired such important qualities as like stability and flexibility. In connection with the final establishment of the principle of precedent in the 18th-19th centuries. it, as a source of law, begins to harden and give way to legislation. An important stage in the final development 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 until now “common law” and “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 judicial, organizational and procedural norms. As for the rules of substantive law (for example, trust property, etc.), they are still clearly distinguished by practicing lawyers and the judges themselves. Thus, by the second half of the 19th century. The reform of the highest judicial bodies has basically ended, 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 them meant that the decisions of the House of Lords, the Court of Appeal, and the High Court are binding and constitute a precedent that these courts themselves and all lower judicial bodies must follow. In English judicial practice, it is believed that the principle of binding precedent applies only to that part of the judicial opinion that directly substantiates the decision in the case, while other reasoning of the judge is not recognized as binding. In the event of a discrepancy between common law and equitable precedents, priority shall 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 revealed” primarily in judicial practice, should be above any law. . The doctrine of the “supremacy” or “dominance” of law became the English equivalent of the broader concept of the rule of law. The development of judicial law, due to the strict 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 of England. In the modern period of the history of case law, the question arises with great urgency as to how much the House of Lords itself is obliged to follow its own decisions. For several decades (since the famous “tram case” of 1898), the House of Lords categorically refused to change previously developed precedents. It assumed that it must follow its own decisions, and only the legislature retained the right to overrule precedents. This position of the lords led to a significant limitation of judicial rule-making, which in the 20th century. was primarily concerned with the interpretation of laws rather than with the establishment of new legal norms. In practice, this meant that from the end of the 19th 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 consequences for the USA

In 1929, a global economic crisis broke out, which lasted until 1933. The economic crisis, which aggravated all capitalist contradictions, led to the growth of a deep political crisis in the United States. It covered the banking system, industry, and agriculture. In this situation, the next presidential elections took place in November 1932. Democratic Party representative 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 achieved the adoption by Congress of 70 legislative acts aimed at improving the industry, Agriculture, trade, monetary system. The essence of the measures was to carry out state-monopoly regulation of the economy. There are two stages in the implementation of the New Deal: the initial one - 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. To improve their health, the export of gold abroad was prohibited; The exchange of banknotes for gold was stopped. All banks in the USA were closed. The Emergency Banking Act, passed unanimously, provided for the resumption of functions and the receipt of government credits (loans) from the Federal Reserve System. To increase the financial resources of the state and expand its regulatory functions during this period, the United States abandoned the gold standard, removed gold from circulation and devalued the dollar. Thanks to the devaluation of the dollar, the distribution of income changed in favor of industrial rather than loan capital. Thus, mass bankruptcies in the credit sector were prevented, the debt of monopolies to the government was reduced, and the export capabilities 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 market speculation. The introduction of state insurance of deposits helped prevent bankruptcies and increased depositor confidence.

4.2 New Deal program, its implementation, results

In June 1933, the National Industrial Recovery Administration (NIRA) was created, which began to implement forced cartelization 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 of selling goods below the prices they set. The law provided for the establishment of a minimum wages, maximum working hours, concluding collective agreements, the right to create trade unions, providing assistance to the multi-million army of unemployed. Despite the fact that at first the NIRA was received with enthusiasm by American business circles, by the fall 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 American Freedom League.

To address the agricultural crisis, the Farm 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 their acreage. 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 farm debt by the state.

The beginning of Roosevelt's activities coincided with the end of the global economic crisis. Other countries emerged from the crisis without any special measures like the New Deal. The largest monopolists in the United States, after the climax of the crisis passed and economic recovery began, opposed Roosevelt's anti-crisis legislation. In 1935 - 1936 At the request of the monopolies, the US Supreme Court repealed the laws governing 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 began reforming the Supreme Court, the nation's highest court, which had sanctioned the Wagner Act and other social legislation. In 1938, Roosevelt began implementing a plan to “prime the pump”—increasing demand through new government investment. The scope of public works expanded, the number of people receiving benefits increased to 21.3 million people. The budget deficit began to grow rapidly and in 1939 amounted to $2.2 billion. After this, 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) S.I. Kovalev “History of Rome”, new edition, corrected and expanded / Ed. Prof. Frolova E.D. St. Petersburg: Polygon Publishing House LLC. - 2002.- 864 p., ill. Article 417.

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

5) Strashun B.A. “Constitutional law of foreign countries” t.z. M.: Publishing house BEK, 1998.

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

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

8) Creder 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.