The Problems with the Roman Republic: Tiberius Gracchus
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- A video about the life and times of Tiberius Gracchus and his contribution to the end of the Roman Republic. Sorry it's taken a while. Hope this will be the first in a few videos looking at the key figures and events in the last century of the republics life, and how they contributed to its fall.
Music: Bensound.com
Clips are from:
The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964)
Rome (HBO) (2005)
Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire (2006) BBC
Thank you all for watching and thanks to my subscribers for being patient. I promise the next one won't take as long.
The algorithm is failing bc it took me way too long to find this channel
My thoughts exactly, how?
@@tequilamockingbird758 Idk. Algorithms suck? Couldn’t tell ya
Also commenting for the algorithm. Crazy underrated channel.
It's good isn't it ? Have you found Paul Cooper yet ? The Fall of Civilisations. Superb.
Oh yes excellent channel as well@@withnail70
This channel is a goldmine
It is, isn’t it? The algorithm is failing bc it took me way too long to find this channel
A terribly un-mined but extremely bountiful gold mine.
As a wannabe amateur historian I feel more than humbled. This channel is pure quality.
unironically the bit about roman agriculture and military is one of the best analisis on roman life on this plataform, thanks
How is this channel flying under the radar like this? It's a real historian
Exceptionally well-written and narrated. I think the Gracchi's story is the most interesting, and may be the most important, story in the history of Rome. You did it absolute justice. Looking forward to more!
Compared to many other "experts" on the history of ancient Rome, you state more facts, and conclude more truths than many others. Well done.
Them: "How often do you think about the Roman Empire?"
Me: "Significantly more now that I found this channel"
Wow I'm glad rich people nowadays are much more civil, they would never lie, be hypocrites or murder people who fought for the poor and wanted to redistribute wealth
🤣
You must be British, I guess.
🤦♂️
😂😂
No one wants to distribute any “wealth” to you, you pretentious pseudo intellectual college turd. Grow up.
At least at those time if they fucked around too much they would get killed. Not even this happens today they just get a golden parachute.
You're such a good narrator I keep getting swept away! This channel was a big part in reigniting my love of ancient Rome, to the point where I'm even studying Latin
If you're studying it, you'll probably be able to notice how poor my Latin is in future vids
Good for you!
Me too!
Cant believe I've only just found this channel!
This video pretty much covers my undergrad dissertation.
Your presentation is so engaging
Thank you
What a fantastic channel you have mate. I am hooked on Roman history and find your channel a wealth of information along with great context in how you deliver the information. Not an easy thing to do in general so hats off to you squire.
Oh my, one of the best historic video on YT I have ever encountered, I cannot believe it only has 3k views.. please keep making more, I am sure this channel will blow up one day!
Fantastic video! I was always curious about this period (plus what follows regarding Sulla and Marius) and this video really covered it in a brilliant way with a very gripping narrative! Thanks for the effort and I can't wait to see the next one.
this guy is fantastic! I do not know how he doesn't have a more views. Love your videos my friend and keep em comin!!
You definitely should have more views, dude. This content is really good.
There we go, keep em coming
Excellent work as always, I think these longer form videos allow for a good level of detail! I’m already looking forward to the next one 🙂
I was glad that you touched on the flaws inherent in the system rather than merely highlighting the escalation of violent precedent as a cause for the fall of the republic. I think in that lies the most prudent lesson of the Roman Republic, yet it is too often overlooked.
Great narration! Congratulations from Italy! I like to study many things about the ancient "Italian" republic, and your video was very useful for the purpose!
I'm enjoying your videos, this is great so far!!
Pro tip: turn auto focus off on your camera. Set the focus before you sit down move in and out of focus the whole video!
At 1:37, you ask a question: 'How did a people accustomed to democracy come to accept despotism?' The question is based on a false premise. Rome was never a democracy, not even during the republic. So, people in Rome could not be accustomed to it. The Romans themselves never called their political system a democracy - and for good reason. It was dramatically different to what the Greeks (and mainly the Athenians) called democracy, and it does not qualify as one under our modern understanding of the concept either. Funnily, in substance, this is what comes out of your own subsequent analysis of the republican institutions. Indeed, as you point out referencing Polybius, in terms of classical political philosophy, the Roman model is more adequately characterised as a 'mixed government' (as in mixing monarchic, aristocratic and democratic elements of governance). But it is best understood as an oligarchy tempered with popular participation. Plebeian participation in the political process brought a competitive element to the functioning of the oligarchy (centred around the Senate in institutional terms and the Senatorial class in sociological terms). For a long while, that had worked spectacularly well for the republic. It turned them a powerhouse in every sense of the word (and especially in terms of military prowess). It enabled the republic to build an empire. (Yes, the late republic was already and empire - with provinces ruled and exploited from Rome without any effective political representation.) And then, most conspicuously in 1st century BCE, that competitive oligarchy became thoroughly dysfunctional. It ended up bringing down the republic. The Roman Empire could only survive by first hollowing out and then gradually eradicating the institutions of the old republican order.
Another great video. Absorbing narrative and succinct presentation kept my attention throughout.
Another great video. The Farming and fighting portion was awesome
I love the long videos. Good job and thank you for the effort and the time it takes to do these videos so well. Brilliant.
Thanks for this. Great overview of a fascinating figure.
Attempts to effect reform of the economic and political systems that favor the rich no longer result in the death of modern "tribunes of the people," but our system still allows the undoing of reforms in backrooms. I'm far from original here, but my diagnosis of what's poisoned US politics is, at root, the inability of the middle and working classes to maintain the New Deal reforms that evened the playing field of opportunity, distributed benefits more fairly, and inhibited the concentration of wealth. The rich still got richer but set out to demonize and incrementally outlaw state sanctioned equality and well-being as tyrannical and anti-American. Am I a fool for likening the New Deal to the lex Agraria? I think Americans left and right would recognize themselves in the dispossessed farmers of Rome and yearn for a Tiberius to break the rules if it will ease their desperation.
I don't think you're a fool for likening the New Deal and the Lex Agraria. Comparisons between the late republic and modern America are pretty easy to make. in the original draft of this video I made quite a few, but ended up cutting them because I didn't want to get sidetracked into modern politics.
@@generichistory I hear you: Comments like mine above are troll magnets. As I listened to you, I wondered if all political troubles in the UK and US have an ancient equivalent in the long history of Rome. Was that a reason for teaching Roman history and Latin as a staple of Western education the 17th-early 20th centuries? You're by far my favorite history RUclipsr: I retain so much more of your content, probably because of your wry delivery and funny illustrations. Just want you to know that.
Yes!!
Sometimes it does. Why was Kennedy murdered? Did John Smith die from actual cardium arrest? Why was Michael Hastings murdered? Remember the guy (Schwartz was his name?) who invented the RSS and was driven to "suicide" for defending freedom of information? Remember Olof Palme (also assassinated)? Remember Petra Kelly (also assassinated)? Who ordered the murder attempt against Fico just a few months ago? And a very long etcetera.
It's just done more regularly and not by KKK-style oligarchic mobs led by a proto-Pope and armed with chair legs. It's much more systematic now.
No one wants to return to the new deal reforms because the new deal reforms made the depression even worse by extending it another few years. His policies made labor expensive to the point that there was much less of it being used, causing even more unemployment. When they started abandoning the policies in the 1940s, you began to see a recovery in the economy. So you want us to go back to failing? I don't understand.
Amazing video. Seriously. Fascinating history with rich narration. That’s an instant subscription.
This is the first channel to really give me the back story on the Gracchi. If only the Patricians had relented to Tiberius' fairly mild requests. But no, they had to do the very thing that would eventually see the Emperor Tiberius having rich Patricians killed after forcing them to will their estates to the state treasury.
Super high quality content -- I watched it all. Thank you for this
Thanks! A lot of work went into it so I’m glad you enjoyed it
Well done! Thank you for the education. You have a great speaking voice and not a dull moment in the whole video. My family ancestors are from Italy and the last few generations including myself are from the USA. I think the U.S. is in its decline and the true voice of her people is not heard nor will ever be allowed to be heard. The elite run my country and the Republic for which it was formed has fallen.
Thanks :) I hope to get more into the parallels between the modern US and Ancient Rome in further videos
Boris Johnson comparing himself to Cincinnatus is halt true (He hated the plebs) and pathetic (Cincinnatus accomplished things in Power)
Boris said he would return to the field and his plow. No Boris, you will return to the field as the scarecrow. Straw-headed slimy dirtbag.
"Comparing himself"...yeah...nah...
So glad your channel was recommended!
Hey your vids are great I'm a big fan! What do you mean when you say BCE and CE, what event separates these two frames?
This channel is stellar and should have huge subs. But possibly the obvious parallel of Roman politics to the current USA's has relegated it to a certain algorithm.
Great storytelling!
Fascinating history. I just recommended it to my brother as post-statesment to a conversation we had yesterday by email on the matter of how Western oligarchies are not interested on solving the problems of the West but rather just on making profits at any cost (cost for us the plebeians).
Great video. FYI around 33:00 a high pitched background noise comes in and makes it difficult to listen to.
I'll have a look to see if i can fix it
You keep me entertained
Holly car this guy knows his shit I’m addicted
Excellent presentation. I'm peeved that YT's Almighty Algorithm hasn't pushed this channel into my recommendations before now. Have always thought the decline & fall of the Republic was the most interesting period of ancient Rome. Looking forward to watching more of your vids. Thanks.
This was great.
Nice video my man! Which popular figures from the roman republic will you focus on in future vids? Sulla and Marius? The Cato's? Cicero? Catiline?
Marius and Sulla for sure bro
Spectacular. English isn't my native language and so I have no words to accurately describe how well-narrated and descripted this video was. I congratulate you! I hope you continue with the series on how republican Rome met its end, because this video was gold. You earned a follower because of it. Also, I want to ask for your help regarding a doubt I have on this very topic (the republic's eventual fall). I'm not revealing my doubt right now because I have to carefuly articulate it and write it before I ask for your opinion. But I would be very happy if you could "confirm" that you would be willing to help me!
Thank you! I do indeed hope to continue along the theme of the Roman republic. I'd be happy to help you with your doubt if I can.
Hi again. You are welcome. Thanks for answering!
Sorry for this lenghted comment, but here I go:
I don't know if you've read "Mortal Republic: How Rome Fell into Tyranny" by Edward Watts, but he has a new thesis I want to ask if you agree with or not.
He basically claims the republic did not need to die. Its death was not inevitable. It could have been avoided (as in, the republic could have lasted much more than it historically did). That a republic is not an organism and therefore can only live or die based on the decisions taken by its custodians (politicians and the people in general). Its citizens took it for granted and therefore allowed political misbehavior by politicians, commanders, etc. which increasingly violated the republic's norms that had so far fostered compromise and agreement between politicians, misusing them instead as weapons of obstruction or intimidation, and in doing so they introduced political instability and violence from 133 on, which eventually caused its fall. That is, he blames the fall of the republic on its people and their harmful decisions, NOT on the social and economic problems the republic was facing before (and after) that date. This argument I will call "B".
In the conclusion of his book, in explaining why the republic fell, he only mentions "B". He doesn't mention AT ALL the problems the republic was facing BEFORE that date and which according to many historians was what caused the death of the republic: the expansion of the republican empire and its related problems: economic inequality or the growth of latifundia, for example. This argument I will call "A".
He of course acknowledges the existence of A, but greatly diminishes it in comparison to other historians. He merely says that A created a social climate in which it was possible (but not necessarily) that B occurs.
So he acknowledges A, and he kinda acknowledges that A made B a possibility. But his thesis is that the republic fell solely because of B, not A.
How far do you agree or disagree with this? And Why?
Thank you!
@@theuncomfortabletruth3928 Personally I'm inclined to agree that the Roman Republics fall was not inevitable, at least not in the 130's. However, I don't think we can throw too much blame at the people living through it.
Personally, I think that the republic was forced to change by the growth of its empire. A political system designed to govern a city state simply couldn't continue to function as before now that it had to deal with an enormous territory. It was how the republic changed to respond to this that would lay the foundations for its fall.
I reckon the most consequential of these changes was the transformation of the legions from a citizen army to a paid professional force. This made it easier for Roman politicians seeking power to manipulate to troops into violently overthrowing republican institutions. However, it was also vital for the Roman legions to make such a change, as the old system of citizen soldiers was buckling under the weight of the new empire. In solving one problem, the Romans created a new one.
So I don't think we can blame the Romans for the decisions they made that would eventually lead to the republics fall. Each of those decisions made sense in the context of the problem they were trying to solve, and would contribute the republics end in ways that really couldn't have been foreseen. The fall of the republic was, after all, a slow process lasting for over a century. It's impossible to point at one moment and say, "there.... that is when the republic was lost". It died a slow death as a result of multiple decisions made across three generations that were all made out of necessity to deal with the emerging problems of a fast-won empire.
The fall was not inevitable, had the Romans made different decisions, maybe things would have gone differently. But the social, economic and political issues that they faced forced them to make decisions, the consequences of which only became clear years later.
Sorry for the long winded response. I hope that answers the question :)
@@generichistory Thanks for the answer! Yes, by seeing your video I guessed that was/is your thesis. I think that's the most common among historians. I agree with most you say, especially that the republic's fall was not inevitable and was a long process of a century. Thanks again! 👍🙌
Carbon copy of Extra History's "The Brothers Gracchi" series from 7 years ago... It's as if you watched that series then made a video where you just retell the story from them, with additional details here and there
This all sounds contemperarily familiar.
The profiteering on the "essential workers" labor. How many times their wealth did it provide while they stayed in their safe zones and the workers who survived stayed in the mire, and later lost their jobs when the profiteering was called inflation and the economists said it was because workers pay was too high.
Right down to the mass immigration permitted today to enter into Western countries functioning as the slave labor force the late republican Roman oligarchs exploited.
A lot of Roman history is the story of pushy mothers pestering their sons into bold actions and ultimately outliving them being wealthy as all hell. I find myself sympathising with Nero's decision regarding Agrippina.
very solid
Very interesting and informative !
Ohhh this series is awesome. I need more lol Any chance of a video or series on the Germanic tribes?!
Funnily enough, my plan is for the video after the next one to be about the Germanic Tribes
@@generichistory You just made my day lol I’m pissed it took me so long to find your channel, your content is phenomenal. Really enjoying this series and definitely looking forward to seeing what ya come out with next! Thanks man!!
Very enjoyable. Subscribed!
Great stuff
Your videos are fantastic. So glad I found your channel! If you’re ever in New Orleans give us a shout. Much love, thank you for the enlightening videos buddy
Thanks man!
We are worse today. They couldn’t fathom the power and destruction we could have today
This video is why i installed youtube. I would like to remunerate. Do you have a patreon or some mechanism by which i can? Also, thank you for a brilliant time.
Thanks! I have a Patreon here: www.patreon.com/GenericHistoryVideos
Where I share videos early and post general updates on how it's going! glad you enjoyed
@@generichistory thanks
"Ptolemy VIII (the fat)" is just too funny
Thanks, the narrator-presenter is superb. Who is he?
What percentage of Roman writings do you think survived?
Very good.
You should really mention that Cincinnatus is most famous for being given the powers of a dictator and then giving them up instantly after the battle was won and going back into his farming. In America for a long time George Washington was known as the American Cincinnatus.
Isn't that what Johnson was referring to?
I'm not sure what Washington had to do with Roman history.
@@NimLeeGuy George Washington famously did not want to remain in power after the American victory. He was referred to as the Cincinnatus of the United States. It's not really remember these days but it was a big thing once upon a Time. Cincinnatus was offered to have his powers of dictator extended and he refused and went back to his farm as did George Washington. By the way both of their farms were packed with slaves.
@@NimLeeGuyRead "Cincinnatus" by historian Gary Wills. Washington had power, but was really "drafted" by his countrymen and went back to his farm as soon as he felt he had served his country enough for his liking.
1:02 that never stopped happening and never will
Yeah, I keep hearing tribunes are sacred, then they get beaten then they get killed, beaten, killed.
Was there ever an instance when this was ever enforced?
The only examples that spring to mind are Nasica (the guy who killed Tiberius Gracchus), who went off into a sort of exile after people threatened to prosecute him. And I suppose Mark Anthony, who was assaulted in Rome while tribune, and would serve as the justification for Caesar crossing the Rubicon. Tbh, before the Gracchi I don't think anyone ever needed to enforce the sacrosanctity of the Tribunes.
I just watched the three videos of Serapeum Historia on the same subject, did you guys work together or something? They are so similar!
No I'd never heard of them until I saw this comment! Will deffo give them a watch
@@generichistory I watched videos on the Gracchi brothers on 6 channels, yours and Serapeum Historia are by far the most comprehensive of them all, great job man.
Really, every time I hear something from Livy, I have to keep in mind he was surely afraid to end up on Augustus' Naughty List...
Great video but bin the scarf please mate
Hiya, I'm writing essay and I want to cite on of your ideas/ interpretations (from a previous video) may I have a sir name please 😅
sure thing, hit me up on: generic.history.vid@gmail.com
1. The year of birth of Scipio Africanus was 236, not 136. 2. Although the theme of this video was the beginning of the fall of the Roman republic, it would be better if you had told us how much of Ager Public was distributed among the poor and how many poor people were settled there.
Fantastic
I have a question, if the 100 senators were appointed by Romulus, does that mean that there was a Senate at that era? even during the rule the 7 other kings? if so how did they tolerate 100 other man sharing the decisions? Also, first time I saw your videos I saied "whats Lucius vorenus doing here!" hehe great video thank you.
I honestly have no idea how Romulus' senate worked, or even if he had one. Most of Rome's early history is obscured by the "mists of time" that comes as a result of a lack of contemporary source material.
@@generichistory gratitude for the reply, I know its an old video, but I discovered your channel recently and I intend to watch every video, I rarely watch videos for information, but I noticed you mention sources, and you actually have books in the background. respect! and thanks again.
Its nice to realize most of those families and elites lost their...😢hopefully we see something in America soon. The parallels are absurdly on point
Actually they managed to persist, even if their names and lineages got forgotten in the Dark Ages (except for the Lucius clan, which has very wealthy and aristocratic descendants even today, who remember their ancestry). They just had to cede parts of their wealth to the new Germanic management.
Issue is that there were a thousand years of obscurity and the oligarchs forgot their roots and even surnames were forgotten (Dark Ages' aristocrats had no surnames, patronymics at best). As example, a branch of my own Italian (aristocratic) family, the Ponciani, claims ascendancy from Pope Pontian but all that can be actually proven is that they descend from St. Frances of Rome and her husband, some Ponciani guy who was commander of the Papal guard 500 years ago or so. Did they actually descend from ancient Roman aristocracy or even that Pope, the first one mildly documented? Maybe but it's anybody's guess.
And let's not get started with the Trojan ancestry because I also have examples in my family of those (not credible at all). 😅
This happening to the US. When and how did the US fall?
I hope I'm remembered for dying someday too
Only if you live as a hero and die as a revolutionary. And not even that is granted.
Or you could live as a villain and die shamefully in disastrous pursuit of undeserved glory and still being remembered as a disgrace, for example Crassus.
@@LuisAldamiz choosing the villain route
If only the video had visuals pertaining to the subject. I rarely like seeing the content provider.
Great video, great information. One thing that needs to be added is the psychological aspect that exited along these fascinating developments of the Romans. That is that the Patricians spoke Classical Latin, a language that was complex and gave the leaders extra focus intensity and sense of urgency as this language changed and disappeared, the civilisation declined and fell, see ruclips.net/video/diQpUB8ykk8/видео.html
You explain yourself as a GREAT professor at university would do.
No more or less barbaric than today. the only difference is that today the SCALE of the violence is far greater and violence is far more impersonal.
It never ended rome became the catholic church
It's Superbus NOT Suburbus. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He wanted to help the people so he was killed
The Roman republic wasn't democratic at all.
Like today
A scarf indoors?
All right then.
Im sure there's a fancy French name for it which makes it fashionable.
The people that tell you the algorithm is what's failing you are simply doing you a disservice. You speak like somebody that should be popular, but you need better editing and camera work. Stop using the autofocus.
Since when has rape become a dirty word? A horrible thing, yes, but the word itself?
video was going great until you showed up with the faggy scarf UGH
No need to use the term BCE, Before Christ Existed, the shorter BC is quite acceptable. This raises the question as to whether the longer term BCE is preferred by people wearing scarves.
Sorry - not everyone wants our verbal lexicon tied to your mythology.
Christ is more legendary than Romulis! Quit your fanaticism, get real!
@@LuisAldamiz
🤣
@@stutzbearcat5624 The calendar is already tied to that date though. Measuring time from Christ's birth and calling it "common era" is like wearing and Indian feather headdress and calling it "alternative headwear". Incredibly disrespectful and intellectually dishonest.
13:00 - 13:15 If only mothers still felt this way about their children instead being girl bosses. Feminism was a massive mistake.
BCE….lame
BCE and CE are a joke system. Otherwise neat video.
BS
I recommend turning auto-focus off, if you can.
Listen Carthage was not a city of merchants (uniquely) it was also a city of farmers. So much so that when Carthage was burned to the ground, the only manuscript saved (that at least whent down in history as such) was De Agricultura by Mago, called the "the father of agriculture". Bear in mind that when Cato the Elder said Carthago delenda est, he was genuinely in shock that the city payed war reparations ahead of schedule, and it had neither navy or armies to speak of. Their empire and comercial entreposts gone... The gold egg laying goose was agriculture. So the romans were just biggots on that issue.
Maybe but Phoenicians are most famed for their trading vocation, while the Romans weren't. Carthage (and other Phoenician cities) had a mercantile and mariner ethos, Rome did not.
Nice
Algo
Great content
Horrible outfit
Great stuff