Tribunes

[P.Clodius]

Remember, the Senate was little more than an "advisory" board. Laws were passed in the various Concilium, (Concilia?) by the Tribunes and the people. I can make a good guess as to who will win this one but try to base your response on actions/legislation and not emotion or belief

[Primus Pilus]

Tiberius Gracchus for the Lex Sempronius Agraria which truly altered the course of Roman politics for the next century. Not only did Tiberius have his responsibility for bringing about the collapse of the Republic, but the Lex Agraria truly began to give a sense of equality to the masses. Without Tiberius, the concept of land for veterans and the jobless masses may have taken decades more to achieve. Without Tiberius, who knows what course of history may have been altered.

[P.Clodius]

Agreed. T. Gracchus' reforms were VERY revolutionary in terms of the conflict of the orders. Mos Maiorum was turned on its head. Where was the precedant for what he did? What was his aim, was it genuine reform or something else to be attained using the large Clientella base he would have acquired through the passing of such legislation. He could not have been unaware of the very large power base he would acrue. Also, his pedigree was without rival. A grandson of Rome's greatest hero to date, Scipio Africanus, he was allied through marriage to the Metellii and would have had a significant (and powerful) portion of the senate on his side. But did he go to far by undermining collegiality by have Octavius removed? Mos Maiorum once again tipped on its head! His tribuneship was certainly the start of The Roman Revolution.

[Lacertus]

I vote for Tiberius Gracchus. IMHO: Livius Drusus would be better but that didn't happen. Alas... He had great plans...

[Hamilcar Barca]

" " (Yes, T.G. was by far the most influential, everyone else has explained why)

[Onasander]

You know, I think that if Jimmy Carter would of been elected Tribune back then, all this crap that went on later never would of happened.

[M. Licinius Crassus Mortgage Co.]

I must agree with Clodius. That is why one of the first things Sulla did as dictator was to repeal many of the Gracchan laws. And indeed his demagoguery and pandering toward the headcount was imitated by Marius (though certainly of a different pedigree) and Caesar himself.

[Augur]

I also agree with the Tiberius G. choice, but perhaps for slightly different reasons.

 

Some months ago we examined a somewhat similar question, something like: who was the worst emperor? My vote went to Comodus, primarlily because it was Comodus who occupied and to some extent triggered one of the pivotal turning-points in Roman hisory, symbolized by the abrupt end of the Golden Age (of his five predecessors) and the begining of the broad disintegrations that were to follow. Certainly Comodus did not cause all the problems that were to follow, he was simply the most conspicious player in this momentous redirection.

 

Tiberius G., one of my favorite Romans, occupies a similar position in Roman history, specifically, the identifiable point in time during which the class struggle within the Roman Republic went out of control and remained out of control until the Republic was replaced by Empire. Again, Tiberius was clearly not responsible for the abuses that created or that resulted from this crisis, but he was cleary the central player (and victim) is this critical episode.

 

Thus, the old question: is it the man (Caesar, Hitler, Christ, etc.) who makes the times? Or the times that make the man?

[Ursus]

This thread temporarily locked.

 

User banned... thread re-opened [PP]