From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as Low-importance).

This article seems to present a somewhat romanticized view of the Gracchi. Not only did Tiberius Gracchus claim that a tribune who opposed the will of the people was no tribune at all, he brought a bill to have said tribune, Octavius, to be voted out of office in an unconstitutional action. And Gaius' attempts to curry the favor of not only the people but also of foreigners by attempting to grant citizenship to the Latins make it seem like he could very well have been gathering allies for war. Furthermore, it cannot be assumed that just because a politician courts the good will of the people his intentions are pure. To cite the goal of the two as the same and clear-cut is overly simple, I think. It was a very common practice in the late republic to court the support of the people to increase one's own power, as Julius Caesar did. On that note, footnote 1 as well as the sentence in which it is referenced seem to be lacking in sources. (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Had a quick search for a source to support the Gracchi being seen as founding fathers of socialism but couldnt find one thats clearly not derivative. So I guess you could remove the sentence if you want. As for the overall article, it has a less romantic view than the one on offer in some of the sources such as Stobbart. Gaius's plans to include Latins sounds more the desire of a man of principle than that of an opportunist's, he must have guessed it would cost him popular support. The evidence seems to be that he forged on with a noble reform project even though he knew it had cost his brother's life. Of course if there are any scholarly sources that speculate they may have had base motives those can be included. FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


This article seems to be overwhelingly about Tiberius Gracchus. Perhaps that content should be moved to that page, and any other Gracchi might be mentioned here? --Brion VIBBER

This article is missing the meat of the story, which is that both Gracchi were murdered by the Senate, becoming some sort of "martyrs of the people", like Malcolm X, or something. Also that bit at the end about thugs is definitely not NPOV. Lemme dig up my books and I'll add to this. Graft 17:07 Aug 8, 2002 (PDT)

Moved back to Tiberius page Muriel Gottrop 10:23, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Surely it's not possible to be both noble and plebeian? Isn't noble just a synonym for Patrician, or am I mistaken?--Alun 10:38, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, it was possible to be noble and plebeian - many of the top noble families were. Exactly who the nobles are is open to some speculation (but see Brunt, PA 1982 'Nobilitas and Novitas' JHS 72 p1.17 for a brief summary of some positions). I suspect most believe that nobles were those who could count a consul among their ancestors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This is how it was taught to me by my professor of ancient Roman history: the term 'nobilitas' denotes a mixture of patricians (i.e. descendants of Rome's earliest inhabitants, making up its upper class) and plebeians (= descendants of later immigrants), who, after plebeians were allowed to stand for the consulate (367 BC: the leges Liciniae), were incorporated into the senatorial order, which was originally all-patrician. Old patricians (patres) and new senators (conscripti) made up what became known as the 'nobilitas'. So, yes, you could be plebeian and noble at the same time. 'Noble' and 'patrician' aren't synonyms. (Stefan van den Broeck) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Changes April 2009[edit]

Have just made a moderately large edit to expand the article. I moved some of the original writing about a bit to keep it coherent. Some changes I’ve made are to make it more clear that the reforms were focussed on economic conditions, not so much at the army. And to make it a little clearer that Equestrians were not an altogether separate class from senators. Ive taken out the mention of Gaius committing suicide as Ive never seen that in any of the sources, and it contradicts what was already written in the lede. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)