the crisis of the second centuty b.c

7/30/2019 The Crisis of the Second Centuty b.C

1/26

Albert-Ludwigs-Universitt Freiburg i. Br.Seminar fr Alte GeschichteWintersemester 2012/2013

Hauptseminare: Wandel der Politikformen in der spter Romische RepublikDr. Astrid Mller

THE CRISIS OF THE SECOND CENTURY: NEW PERSPECTIVES

Jose Luis Centeno DazMatrikel Nummer: 3559553


2/26

STRUCTURE

0. INTRODUCTION

1. CRITIC OF THE PRINCIPAL SOURCES

1.1. PLUTARCH

1.2. APPIAN

2. THE CRISIS OF THE II CENTURY: TRADITIONAL AND NEW

PERSPECTIVES

2.1. TRADITIONAL VIEW OF THE CRISIS IN THE SOURCES

2.2. DEMOGRAPHIC MOVEMENTS

2.3. THE ECONOMY OFAGER PUBLICUS

2.4. SHORTAGE OF MANPOWER

2.5. THE NUMBER OF SLAVES

2.6. GRACCHAN REFORM

3. CONCLUSSIONS

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY


3/26

0. INTRODUCTION

For the development of the next essay about the crisis of the second century

b.C. i am going to organize it in three parts. The first one is focused on making

a little critic of the write sources that tell us something about this period,

Plutarch and Appian. Secondly, i am going to talk about the crisis of the second

century, having this point several elements, such as the traditional view of the

crisis through the sources; the demographic aspects; the economy of ager

publicus; shortage of manpower; the number of slaves and the contemporary

perceptions. In every aspect i will try to show the traditional assessments and

the new perspectives that are creating about it.

1. CRITIC OF THE MAIN SOURCES: PLUTARCH AND APPIAN

1.1. PLUTARCH1

As we alredy know, the most valuable document of Plutarch are the Parallel

lives, where it is inserted Tiberius and Gaius lifes, who are really important for

understanding this epoch and its context. Firstly, we must say that the Parallel

lives have the purpose of axalt the greeks against the romans, and the romans

against the greeks, which is really difficult, doing this through the promotion of

1

About the life of Plutarch only saying that he was born in Chaeronea, nowadays dissapeared,

h. 50-id., h. 120). When he was twenty years he moved to Athens to study mathematics andphilosophy. He was disciple of the philosopher Ammonio de Saccas. Though, he almosttravelled thorough the whole Empire, most of his life he was in Chaeroneam where he

performed several public positions. He also was related to the Academy and he was the priestof Apollo in Delphi.


4/26

the common values that will give as outcome the roman-greek civilization2. We

cant deny the importance of this work, but we should take into account some

aspects if we want to use this source as a historic document. Firstly, Plutarch

did not live in the same period that he talks about and, therefore, his only way to

approach to it were his own sources, notes and the formed image of these

characters through the time until Plutarchs time. Also, we have to stablish a

marked difference between biography and History 3 , because the first one

doesnt study process and contexts like the history does. Despite of that

Parallel lives are historic biographies they are mainly focus on individuals. Here,

we have the example of Sullas life, where Plutarch mentions a lot of details

and data of his private life and personality, but the author did not get deeper

into the problems of the characters frame. Also, we could add another relevant

difference between History and historic biography, that sometimes are confused

in the imperial times, focused on the second, which was not done with a

scientifc aim. Plutarch does not make any hypothesis or questions and,

therefore, he had not the need of answering them, while History must do so,

conecting the frame and the data. He tried to build lifes under his own theory of

the past, impregnated by a perception that the past always was better and

goldener than the present. This way Plutarch can introduce and give relevance

to the moral and educational aspects, doing of his lifes behavioral models, also

2

MESTRE, F. Plutarco y la biografa de poca imperial. Revista de Estudios Clsicos, N 34,2007, Universidad de Barcelona. Pp. 11-28.3

Plutarch left really clear in the first lines of the Alexanders life that his purpose was to writelifes not history. Though, This way Plutarch It must be borne in mind that my design is not towrite histories, but lives. And the most glorious exploits do not always furnish is with the clearestdiscoveries of virtue or vice in men; sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a

jest, informs us better of their characters and inclinations, that the most famous sieges, thegreatest armaments, or the bloodiest battles whatsoever. Therefore as portrait-painters aremore exact in the lines and features of the face, in which the character is seen, than in the other

parts of the body, so i must be allowed to give my more particular attention to the marks andindications of the souls of men, and while i endeavour by these to portray their lives, may befree to leave more weighty matters and great battles to be treated of by others.


5/26

impregnated by the Platonic4 philosophy. The predominance of the moral and

educational components in the biographies of the imperial time 5 burden a

historical view, because he adapted the data and the process to his own

purposes, omitting, emphasaizing or ignoring whatever he needs for doing his

aims. As a result, the biographer, in this case Plutarch, was a builder of realities

supported by his experiences, memory, notes and sources that let him to

explain historic events but with a moral mould. I would like to add that for the

construction of any kind of knowledge6 we must start by storeing it in our minds,

after this think about it with our resources and then the outcome, in this case

the Parallel lives and inside them Tiberius and Gaiuslife.

In the case of Tiberius life, and about his agrarian reform, Plutarch put a

big significance in Tiberius moral evolution through his life, so Tiberius porject

may have been perfectly honorable at first, but he ends up as a troublesome

demagogue, and the whole secuence of events ultimately illustrates the wisdom

of Laelius7.

4

We have to remember that Plutarch studied in Athens under the direcction of Amonio, from the

Platonic school.5

MESTRE, F, op. cit.6

We can not forget that the knowledge is accumulative, and the weakest elements tend to lose

in the process of storeing.7ROSKAM, R. Ambition and love of fame in Plutarch lives of Agis, Cleomenes and the

Gracchi. Classical Philology, Vol. 106, No. 3, 2011. Pp. 208-225


6/26

1.2. APPIAN8

Nevertheless, some modern authors have pointed out some elements that we

should have on mind when we are using a source like Appian. First, Appian

presents to us a highly schematic version of the facts that tell us more about his

methods as historian that it does about the laws or the policies in that moment.

In the same way, his arguments for this part of the history are circulars, so he

starts and finishes with same problems, that is to say, the reform of Tiberius and

his brother could not solve these problems, restoring the same matters and

conditions that the Gracchan tried to fix before.

Another important issue is that Appian gives the same characteristics to the

laws of Tiberius that to the laws of the past years, supposing that the problems

were the same. At the same time, we find that, like Plutarch, Appian chooseswhat elements to include and how, depending on the needs of his narrative

estructure. Related with this element, we find that Appian uses the Gracchan

issue to introduce and emphasize the Civil Wars and the big elements that,

according to him, brought to them land fighting; citizenship; and the courts-.

He knew which was the result, the end of the Roman Republic, and he could go

adapting each cause to every effect.

8

About the life of Appian. Appian was born around the year 95 AD. He reached a high socialpossition in his homeland, and he did important functions in the imperial administration. Then,he was a lawyer in the imperial court and finally was procurator of the emperor. He wrote aRome History that included from its foundation until the year 35 BC with ethnographic content.

He used greek and roman literary sources, and possibly official documents from registers andarchives, which he could use because of his possition. Some of his sources were: Polybius,

Hieronymus of Cardia, Caesar, Augustus, Asinius Pollio, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus,Posidonius, Livy, Sallust and Valerius Antias among others.


7/26

2. THE CRISIS OF THE SECOND CENTURY

2.1. TRADITIONAL VIEW OF THE CRISIS (THE CRISIS IN THE

SOURCES)

To begin with this part of the work, i think that it is important to talk first about

the data and the process that the sources explained above can tell us about this

period.

Firstly, we have the contribution of Plutarch with the Life of Tiberius

Gracchus. Plutarch presents Tiberius really worried about the problems of the

peasants, specially during his journey toward Spain, where he saw in the

coastal parts of Etruria, the depopulation, of the country and the small farmer

and the shepherd were slaves and barbarians9. He also propposed a law

declaring illigal to anyone to posses more than 500 iugera of public land,

defending his proposal with a passionate speech the wild beasts that roam

over Italy have their dens and holes to lurk in, but the men who fight and die for

their country enjoy the common air and light and nothing else, but without a

house they keep wandering with his wife and childeren they are called the

masters of the world, but they do not posses a single clod of earth which is truly

their own10. The tale from Plutarch suggests that during the second century the

peasantry from Italy were the threatened by the expansion of using slaves in

the big estates of the rich.

The contribution of Appian for this period is in the book number one of

his work Civil Wars. In his account Appian focus on several aspects for the

9Plut. Tib. Gracch. 8.7

10Ibid. 9.4-5


8/26

description of the second century, before the tribunate of Tiberius: the

occupation of public land by the rich, the expulsion of the por, the growth of the

slave-staffed estates, and a decline in the number of free citizens. This way it is

presented the classical view of the second century and its problematic. The

process that these four characteristics point out is quite simple: as a result of

their conquest of Italy, the romans took land from those who they have defeated

and there they stablished their own people, solving the problem of the land,

makeing settelments. Also, they can use the uncultivated land for their

purposes, paying a rent to the treasury. However, the rich took first big parts of

the land and began to acquire the parts of the other people, creating large

estates worked by slave labour. The corollary of this picture is simple the rich

became richer, while the italians declined because of taxes, poverty and military

service, what explains the demographic backward movement that Appian

attributes to this time and to the Tiberiuss reform.

Also, it is really important for the reconstrucction of this period, specially

for the demographic movements, the census figures that Titus Livius give us.

This figures, that will be studied in the next point, have been used for

corroborating the arguments presented by the sources, but they must be

studied deepper.

2.2. DEMOGRAPHIC MOVEMENTS

One of the aspects more hotly debated during the recent years about the crisis

of the second century has been the demographic movements of the Italy


9/26

population during this century and more particuraly during 168-115. I do not

expect in this section to offer a exact conclussion about this theme, but to

potenciate and to present the several perspectives that nowadays exist and

develop about this topic.

The traditional picture about the demographic aspect has been

supported by the account of Appian and Plutarch, who tell us that the free

peasantry of Italy was increasingly threatened by the ever-expanding slave-

staffed estates of the rich11 . This idea holds that the population of free-

peasandtry in Italy fell in poverty as the result of the widespread use of slaves,

causing this way that the peasants postpone their marriages, which will implies

a decrease in the number of newborns and, therefore, a reduction and a decline

of the free Italian population in general terms. This idea is also apparently

supported by the figures of the roman census12

for those years.

However, as i have said above, this picture is being really discussioning.

In this debate, we could say that we have two perspectives for focusing on this

problem. On the one hand, we have the view of the low-counters and on the

other one we have the high-counters position that show a different perspectives

of the census figures for the years 169-115.

According to many low-counters, it really existed a downard trend in the

census figures between the years 164-114, reflecting a genuine population

decline13, which will explain the frame for the subsequent Gracchan reform.

This assumption would implies that the figures for the next years (125--) of the

11

DE LIGT, L.Poverty and demography: the case of the gracchan land reforms in

Mnemosyne, vol. 57, fasc. 6, 2004, pp. 725-757. pp. 72712

See table n.113

DE LIGT, L.

Some thoughts on the nature of the demographic crisis of the second centuryb.C.in Crisis and the Roman Empire, Classical studies, 2007 pp. 167-188.


10/26

census would be wrong, because they show a trend of population growth. In the

view of De Ligt14 this figures are approximately correct, this way, we should ask

why the figures for the years 164-130 are so low and tend to diminish. One

answer for this problem could be that during the period of 164-130 it produced

an increased in the amount of poor peasants, rising the number ofproletarii,

which were registered less effectivily than the assidui. Therefore, we have here

a problem of under-registration, but no a problem of population decline. Another

support for answering why the figures for these years (164-130) contrast so

much with the numbers for the next years, we could find it in the increasing

reluctance of many Roman citizens to serve in the army15. We have the

example, among others, of the wars in Hispania, where the dead could be easy

and the adavantage really escarce.

Another scenario has been proposed for understanding the figures of the

census for the years of the second century and explaining its demographic and

population tendencys. This tendency is known as the high-counters who

propose that the figures given by the low-counters are less reliable. For

supporting this affirmation, they argue that most of the people that compound

the census for the years of the second century are assidui, what could fit with

the minor effectiveness and care in the registration. However, with the intention

of seeding doubt around the reliability of the figures, they point out that the

majority of the citizen body was compound by proletarii. The reconstrucction

explained by Lo Cascio is a good example for the high-counter scenario. His

argumentation implies that there must have been some 500.000 adult male

14Ibidem

15For example Evans 1988, esp. 128-9. Cf. Also Brunt 1987, 33-4 in DE LIGT, L., 2004, op. cit.


11/26

citizens on the eve of the Hannibalic War16, and the population of Italy as a

whole was roughly six million in 225 B.C.17 to reach the thirteen million in the

time of Augustus. Nonetheless, the rate of growing and the total of population

have a serious weakness. Firstly, we can say like how managed to make living

this great amount of people and, secondly, the incredible growth rate that would

imply a 0.5-0.8 per cent per year over a period of 200 years18. The answer to

first question could be as tenants or as wage labourers, but we can find really

unlikely that the 50% of the popualtion depend on the incomes from a tenancy

or from the occasional labour, when this kind of work was seasonal at that time.

Their arguments are weaken by the economic19 and demographic implications

as we have seen. Other elements that are used by the high-counters for

supporting the high level of population are the centralization for doing the

census in Rome. That is, only the people physically present in Rome could be

signed in the lists, and therefore, lot of people kept under-registration. This way

could be really impractical, when the most of the assidui must have been

reluctant to travel to Rome20 and the efficacy of the census useless. The

archaeological evidence neither support the conclussions of the high-counters

about a fast and strong growth that support their figures of population. We

can conclude this section saying that the high-counter scenario suffer from

16

For example Lo Cascio, Elio, The Size of the Roman Population: Beloch and the Meaning ofthe Augustan Census Figures, The Journal of Roman Studies Vol. 84, 1994, pp. 23-40.17

DE LIGT, L., 2007, op. cit.18

This is the growth rate that offers Roselaar, Roselaar (2012, 197); but we can find anothercalculations in Rosestein (2004, 146) who argues 1.3-1.5% per year between 200-168 and 0.6-

0.8% between 168-124.19 DE LIGT, L. 2007, op. cit. p. 17220

BRUNT, P, Italian Manpower 225 B.C.- A.D. 14., Oxford, 1971, p. 40-43


12/26

several difficulties, but equally the low count scenario is not free from problems

either21.

For concluding this section, i would like to say that we have to recognise

a population growth instead of decline for the second century, as most of

schcolars has pointed out so far, but more according with the low-counter

scenario. The population growth was solved firstly with the foundation of

colonies22, especially in Cisalpine Gaul. Though, this growth rate could seem

low for provoking socio-economic problems, that the Gracchi would try to

resolve, we have to take into account the next point: if we combine the growth

rate inherent per year, together with the increasing competition for the land,

especially in Central Italy 23 , plus the manumission of slaves or natural

inmigration, then we may be see some of problems of the second century but

with regional character.

Table 1. Roman census figures (169/8-115/4)24

YEAR CENSUS FIGURE SOURCE

169/8 312.805 Per. Liv 45

164/3 337.022 Per. Liv 46

159/8 328.316 Per. Liv 47

154/3 324.000 Per. Liv 48

21

ROSELAAR, S. T., Public Land in the Roman Republic. A Social and Economic History of

Ager Publicus in Italy, 369-89 BC. Ed. Oxford University Press, New York, 2010, p. 19822

The foundation of colonies almost stopped after 17723

It is really important to try to know the regional variations in population and economic

developments for explaining the reforms of the Gracchi, since the zone of Rome could applypolitical pression. See ROSELAAR, T. S. op. cit. p. 20024

In DE LIGT, L., 2007, op. cit. p. 169


13/26

147/6 322.000 Euseb. Armen. Ol. 158.3

142/1 327.442 Per. Liv 54

136/5 317.933 Per. Liv 56

131/0 318.823 Per. Liv 59

125/4 394.736 Per. Liv 60

115/4 394.336 Per. Liv 63

2.3. THE ECONOMY OF THEAGER PUBLICUS

As we have just seen in the conclussion of the previous section, the competition

for the land as well as the expansion of commercial agriculture rose during the

second century. Both aspects are central for any reconstruction or

approximation to the socio-economic frame of this century.

Firstly, we must take into account that the people who wanted to invest

with the intention of producing for the market would have been reluctant to use

public land, since we know the insecurity of such holdings25. Then, we should

ask ourselves about how important was the occupation ofager publicus, how

deep was the competition for the land, and how big was the market for the

commercial agriculture. These three elements would imply a supposed rise of

the large estates worked by slaves to the detriment of the small farmers, one of

the aspects that the Gracchi tried to resolve.

25For the ager publicus and its evolution during the republican period, see ROSELAAR, T S.

op. cit.


14/26

For answering the first question, i recommend the broad work of Saskia

Roselaar where the ager publicus and its evolution is explained in more detail.

For the other two questions, i have also followed Saskia Roselaar26

, and i have

focused myself in the next aspects: the competition for the land, the expansion

of the commercial agriculture and the size of the market. Besides, i am going to

explain the role of the villae in the roman economy, because its very related

with the three points i have presented before.

About the competition for the land in the second century, it is generally

accepted that the Roman aristocracy gained the most of their incomes from the

agriculture and, therefore, there was a great competition for the land and the

poor were expelled from their holdings, normally in the ager publicus. This

traditional picture can be challenged if we take into account that the commercial

agriculture was limited to those areas with an important market nearby and that

the villae worked by slaveswere rather small that it was previously assumed.

Then, how can we maintain the question about the accumulation of the land by

rich, which caused the proletarianization for the small farmers?.

The first element, as i have mentioned above, is the size of the market 27. The

second aspect is focused on avoiding the classical separation between poor

and rich, since it existed a middle class who sold reguraly their products in the

market. The presence of this middle class can be seen clearly through the

property of slaves, who was not only restricted for the rich, and the finding of

estates that do not fit in the classical clasification, big and small holding. This

implication suggest that there were more sellers that is thought as usual, thus

26

ROSELAAR, S. T., Public Land in the Roman Republic. A Social and Economic History ofAger Publicus in Italy, 369-89 BC. Ed. Oxford University Press, New York, 2010.27

Ibidem, p. 180


15/26

the profit could not be so high and that the richs should have gained profit from

others activities, being therefore the pressure on the land less relevant.

Nonetheless, in the ancient societies, buying land was a secured invest, since

the land did not lose its value. In this way, the competition for the land, the size

of the market and the presence of slaves was much smaller than is usually

assumed and it seems unlikely that this was the sole cause for the difficult

possition of the small peasants.

The second point i am going to talk about is the expansion of the commercial

agriculture. The existence of commercial farms was not extended in Italy in a

homogeneous way. We have to remember the geographical factors of the

italian peninsula, like the mountains that divide the territory in small units. In this

way, the fertile lands that were in the isolated valleys were not focused on the

central italian market, because of the costs of the transport, but on the local

market, wich was getting important as well. The biggest pole of commercial

attraction, Rome, was supplied from its surrounding area28 with this kind of

agriculture, which we can find already in the 4th and 3rd BC centuries and

increased after the Hannibalic War.

In Rome and central Italy the competition for the land and the accumulation of it

was getting stronger for satisficing a rising market that supplied this big area,

whereas in the rest of Italy the importance of the local market had being rising

but without these characteristics.

28

At this point for studying a central market, in this case of Rome, is important the theory of Von

Thnen, who argues that the land closest to the market will produce the perishable goods andflowers, fruit, and vegetables; further away staple foods, such as grain, will be grown, andbeyond that extensive animal husbandry will be practised.


16/26

As we have said before, the size of the market is really important for

understanding the other elements of this point. So far, the reserach had

determined that the size of the market was quite significant, but recent studies,

as the made by Jongman seed new light about its limitations. This

investigations argue that the population of the whole Italy was 1.9 millon, even

slaves, for the year 28 BC. If we consider the average of nutritional needs for a

male and the estimation yield of crops, he concludes that only 20,800 km 2, the

20 per cent of all arable land in Italy, were need for feeding this 1.9 million of

people through basic food (grain, olives and wine). Knowing that the population

for the year 133 was fewer than for the first century, therefore, the amount of

land to meet the urban market was fewer as well. We must conclude that the

size of the market was smaller than is usually thought.

Once i have explained these three fundamental aspects for the roman economy

of the second century BC, im going to talk about the villae, as i have said in the

introduction of this point.

The study of the size and the weight of the market for the commercial

agriculture is really relevant because it is directly related with the rise of large

estates, worked by slaves and, therefore, with one of the elements that are

presented in the crisis of the second century. In this way, we must study the

size and location of this estates, often called latifundia, to know the size of the

market. These are composed by great amounts of land and numerous slaves.

However, this kind of estates do not appear until the first century BC, when it

evolucionated towards estates with more land and luxus. Besides, all the

archaeological evidence about villae dated from the second century BC are


17/26

much smaller and they produced not only for the market, but also for the

subsistence of his own personal. The denomination of villae for this kind of

estates, that were above of the subsistance level and were probably engaged in

production of the market, seems more suitable29

.

About the size and location of the villae we have our best source in Caton (234-

149)30, who stims the size of the olive plantations in 120/240 iugera and the

vineyars in 100 iugera. However, the land for other products must be added to

the land needed for the main crop, being the total larger than is usually

mentioned31. The estimations about how much land will be needed for the other

produce of the farm could be 30 iugera, having then 130 in the case of the

vineyards and 270 in the olive plantations32. Besides, we have the possibilities

that the farmer could have additional land in other part or will use ager publicus.

We can conclude that, given that the size of the villae was smaller than is

usually thought, and the accumulation of land and slaves less important, the

impact over the peasantry was less significant. At the same time, the size of the

market neither had the development and the consolidation that will reach in the

subsequent times, and therefore, there is no need for enormous estates.

29

Ibidem, p.15630

In general terms Caton describes this estate with the aim of doing profit in the market, and be

self-suffcient. The first element is corroborated by telling us wich size should have the city in thenearby of the villae or the importance of the presence of the sea, river or a good road for thetransport. The self-suffuciency should be satified with the growing of wine, olive oil, grain for the

slaves and many other products needed for the support of the farm and its inhabitants.31 ROSELAAR, S. T., op. cit. p. 15832

Ibidem, p. 160


18/26

2.4. ROMAN MANPOWER IN THE SECOND CENTURY

Another problem that emerges when we study the dinamics of the second

century BC, are the anxities of manpower, as we can read in the accounts of

Plutarch and Appian.

Different arguments have been propused for explaining this fact, such as the

impoverishment of the population, caused by the riseing in the time and

distance of the wars, the increase in the use of slaves and the preassure on the

land.

The distance and the new duration of the wars broke the balance between war

and agriculture, harming widely in the peasantry and its capacity of subsistence.

However, this traditional view is being challenged in the last years. One of the

best examples for supporting this is the work of Nathan Rosenstein, who

maintain that the warfare between the demands of the military service and the

farming needs alredy existed in the previous centurys before the Hannibalic

War. The time of the war rose33 alredy in the fourth century34. If this is true, and

it seems really viable, the principal problems of the second century caused by

the impossiblity of joining war and agriculture should be visible before this time.

One of the big achievements of Rosenstein is to have shown the high

compatibility between farming cycles and a long time spent in the army, through

the patterns of familiar models and the needs for the production. As he shows,

the late age of male marriage ensured that for some family patterns it was a

positive adventage to have a son away at war and for others strategies were

33

Another examples for the extension of the campaign we can find them in the war against

Pyrrhus.34ROSENSTEIN, N., Rome at War, University of North Carolina Press, Chapell Hill, 2004, p.

26-58


19/26

available to minimize harm, while, except at times of greatest preassure the

levying authorities may have avoided taking men whose loss would jeopardize

farm survival35

.

At the same time, the need or the supposed need of manpower by the Roman

state can be understandable, since we have notice about the high reluctance

for the dangerous and little profitable wars36.

2.4. THE NUMBER OF SLAVES

One of the big problems that we have to handel when we study the second

century and its problematic is the quantitative importance of the slavery, though

this a hard task because of the less resources for doing it. The slavery is closely

related with the appearance and rise of the villae, with the impoverishment of

the small peasants and with the demographic aspect, alredy outlined in the

previous sections.

About the different estimations that have alredy done on this issue, firstly

we find the results of Hopkins37 who has ventured the suggestion that in the

early imperial period Italy had two million of slaves, using the evidence collected

by Brunt. Of this two million, 1.2 million were assigned to the country, causing

this way the alredy known consecuences for the small farmers that the sources

like Appian and Plutarch tell us. However, this estimations do not reflect more

35

Ibidem, 63-10636

RICH, J.W. The supposed Roman manpower shortage of the later second century BC.

Historia: Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte, Bd. 32, H. 3, 1983. Pp. 287-331.37HOPKINS, K, Conquerors and slaves, Cambridge, 1978, p. 68, quoted in DE LIGT, L, 2004,

op. cit.


20/26

than the alredy known frame about the genuine slave society that Italy had38.

The doubts about this figures had risen in the last years, which does not deny

that in the Roman Republic the use of slaves for working in the big estates was

a fact. But in which proportion?. Another perspectives that study the number of

slaves in the Roman Republic fit better with the reconsideration of the basic

supports for this period. One good example of these can be the recent

demonstrations of Jongman, who affirms that fewer than 200.000 hectares of

Italian soil were needed to produce all the wine and oil that was consumed

annually by all the cities of Italy, even Rome39. We know through the writings of

Varro and Columela40 that one slave was needed for growing 7 iugera (which

correspond with 1.75 hetares) of wineyard, fewer for the olive plantations, then

we could assume that, combining this affirmations with Jongmans stimations

about the land needed, only 100.000 slaves were necessary to work in the

vineyards and olive plantations. To this number we have to add the numer of

slaves for the supervion, around another 100.000, and the slaves for growing

the grain. This way we get a number of slaves around 250.000, which implies

that the figures provided by Hopkins are really high and they only could

manintained by assuming that some 80 percent of the rural slave work force

was to grow grain41. Even if we take into account the existence of the middle

class who could afford having slaves42, this figures are less realistic. The

calculations presented for the section belong to the early imperial period, when

the urbanization was much spread, and, therefore for our period of studying the

38

DE LIGT, L, 2004, op. cit, p. 745 39

JONGMAN W., 2003, Slavery and the Growth of Rome. The Transformation of Italy in the

Second and First Centuries BCE, in, EDWUARDS, C., WOOLF, G. (eds), Rome theCosmopolis, Cambridge, 100-22, quoted in DE LIGT, L., 2004, op. cit. p. 746.40

While Columela presents one slave per 7 iugera, Plinio in his Natural History(17.215) talks

about one slave per 10 iugera. In DE LIGT, L., 2004, op. cit.41DE LIGT, L., 2004, op. cit. p. 746

42ROSELAAR, S., op. cit, p. 182.


21/26

figures should be still lower. That is to say, that the tradition weight given to the

slave element for the crisis of the second must be revised as one of the main

causes for the impoverishment of the small farmers and the subsequent

consecuences that led the Gracchan to make their reforms.

2.5. THE GRACCHAN REFORMS

At this point about the reforms that the Gracchi did with the intention of

solving the different problems of his own time, i am not going to focus on

explain their content, but i am going to try to approximate briefly to his

perception of their own time. Firstly, we can talk about the contemporary

perception of the demographic decline, although we have concluded before with

the census figures for the years 124 y 114 that it does not seem to exist such

fact, but otherwise, a situation of population growth. However, the literary

sources present the reforms for the year 133 as an attemp for stopping the

demographic backward. For understanding this fact it is perfectly reasonable

that Tiberius acted thinking that the number of peasants had declined, thought

his understanding of the census figures was not effective, which is

understandable if we take into account that to get an accurate demographic

view as a whole it is really difficult from a contemporary situation.


22/26

3. CONCLUSSIONS

As the main conclussions for this work about the different aspects of the second

century crisis i argue that:

For the conclussion of the demographic factor in the second century, we

must take into account the new researchs and interpretations of the old

and new data, that supports more a population growth than a decline in

this period. However, the figures between the years 159 y 136 show a

population depcline, which can be understandable, as of the reluctance

of going to war and less efficacy in the registration of the census.

About how afect the increasing preassure for the land to the Italy of the

second century and how important was the market for the commercial

agriculture, we can conclude that for the first factor we have to take into

account the geographical conditionant of Italy, can reducing the zone to

he central Italy, where Rome acted like a big pole of attraction. For the

second point, supported by the figures of Jongman, we can say that the

market for Italy was quite small than is usually thought and, therefore, the

commercial agriculture had not a so fundamental role, supporting this the

explication about the villae and its size.

As we have just seen in this point the impoverishment of the peasants

caused by the increase of the distance and the loger time of the war

must be revised, as have done Rosenstien. He shows a high

compatibility between war and agricultur and argues that the two


23/26

elements used to defend the idea of impoverischment in the peasantry

caused by this factors can no be mantaied.

About the number of slaves we should say that its number was fewer

than is usually thought, having into account the extension of Italy and its

arable land, the expansion of the estates and its size, which is really

lower than in the subsequent periods.

As the last point of this work i would like to say that it would be really

interesant to pay more attention to the different feelings and thoughts of

the contemporaries about this problems. The formation of the different

perceptions could be complemented and detailed with any source

(litteraty or archaeological) that could add some data or interpretation.


24/26

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY

PRIMARY SOURCES:

APPIAN, Guerras Civiles. Edicin de Antonio Sancho Royo. Biblioteca Clsica

Gredos, Madrid 1980.

PLUTARCH, Vidas Paralelas. Vidas de Alejandro y Csar. Y Vidas de Tiberio Y

Cayo Graco. Editorial Gredos.

SECONDARY SOURCES:

ABURTO LAGOS, L. Plutarch and the construction of knowledge ParallelLives

on.Tiempo y Espacio, Vol. 25, 2013. Pp. 1-13.

BOREN, C H. The Gracchi. Ed. Twayne Publishers, New York, 1968

BRUNT, P., Italian Manpower 225 B.C.- A.D. 14., Clarendon Press, Oxford,

1971

LO CASCIO, ELIO, The Size of the Roman Population: Beloch and the

Meaning of the Augustan Census Figures, The Journal of Roman Studies Vol.

84, 1994, pp. 23-40


25/26

ERDKAMP, P. Hunger and the Sword. Warfare and Food Supply in Roman

Republican Wars (264-30 BC). Dutch Monographs on Ancient History and

Archaeology, Vol. XX. Ed. H.W. Pleket and F.J.A.M. Meijer, Amsterdam, 1998.

GARGOLA, D. J. Appian and the aftermath of the Gracchan reform, in The

american journal of Philology, Vol. 118, No. 4, 1997, pp. 555-581.

DE LIGT, L. Some thoughts on the nature of the demographic crisis of the

second century b.C. in Crisis and the Roman Empire, Classical studies, 2007

pp. 167-188.

------------. Poverty and demography: the case of the gracchan land reforms in

Mnemosyne, vol. 57, fasc. 6, 2004, pp. 725-757.

------------. The economy: agrarian change during the second centuryin

ROSENSTEIN, N. A companion to the Roman Republic. Malden, Mass:

Blackwell Publ, 2006.

------------. Roman Manpower Resources and the Proletarization of the Roman

Army in the Second Century BC. In BLOIS, L and LO CASCIO ,E (eds.), The

Impact of the Roman Army (200 BC- AD 476). Vol. 6, Leiden-Boston, 2007.

MESTRE, F. Plutarco y la biografa de poca imperial. Revista de Estudios

Clsicos, N 34, 2007, Universidad de Barcelona. Pp. 11-28


26/26

RICH, J.W. The supposed Roman manpower Shortage of the later century BC.

In Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte. Bd. 32, H. 3, 1983, pp. 287-331

-----------. Tiberius Gracchus, land and manpower in Crisis and the Roman

Empire, Classical studies, 2007 pp. 153-166.

ROSELAAR, S. T. Public Land in the Roman Republic. A Social and Economic

History ofAger Publicus in Italy, 369-89 BC. Ed. Oxford University Press, New

York, 2010.

------------------Ager publicus in the roman republic and the evolutionary theory

of land rights, in The Italians on the land: changeing perspectives on

Republican Italy then and now. L. Earnshaw-Brown & A.P. Keaveney (eds.),

Newcastle, 2009, pp. 11-30.

ROSENSTEIN, N., Rome at War, University of North Carolina Press, Chapell

Hill, 2004.

------------------ A companion to the Roman Republic. Malden, Mass: Blackwell

Publ, 2006.

ROSKAM, R. Ambition and love of fame in Plutarch lives of Agis, Cleomenes

and the Gracchi. Classical Philology, Vol. 106, No. 3, 2011. Pp. 208-225

the crisis of the second centuty b.c

Documents