ADRIAN JOSEPH: What can the ancient Romans teach us about land reform?

A study of ancient Rome’s history provides abiding lessons about the dangers associated with proposing imprudent land reform measures to realise economic equality between citizens.

Roman land reforms, introduced by the brothers Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus in the second century BCE, dealt with agrarian problems, many of which are still present in contemporary societies, including SA.

The reforms initiated by the Gracchi brothers were introduced in response to a situation of disequilibrium in Roman society and were intended to prevent political upheaval. Their main intention was to increase the number of free men possessing enough property to qualify them for military service, since Tiberius Gracchus was concerned by the shortage of such recruits as well as by the growing ineffectiveness of the Roman army.

Many free men living in or near Rome were anxious to return to the countryside from a city that could not offer them employment, and there were many others who continued to scratch a bare living in the countryside.

The ancient philosopher and biographer Plutarch documented this discontent in his Parallel Lives, quoting a portion of one of Tiberius’ speeches: “The wild beasts that roam over Italy,” he would tell his listeners, “have their dens and holes to lurk in, but the men who fight and die for our country enjoy the common air and light and nothing else. It is their lot to wander with their wives and children, houseless and homeless, over the face of the earth… They are called the masters of the world, but they do not possess a single clod of earth which is truly their own.”

All of these elements combined to generate an explosive situation that engaged the attentions and energies of Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus. It is quite evident from the lives of these two brothers (and Plutarch) that these men were convinced that economic inequalities were the reason for weakness in the state, and that economic injustice must be remedied by political means.

Considering the inequalities in land that formed the background for the proposed agrarian reforms, the Gracchi ascribed great importance to having a middle class of small landholders constituting the bulk of the citizenry.

Indeed, the importance of property as a precondition to the dignity and independence of free men was recognised by the Greek philosopher Aristotle in his Politics: “Great then is the good fortune of a state in which the citizens have a moderate and sufficient property; for where some possess much, and the others nothing, there may arise an extreme democracy, or a pure oligarchy; or a tyranny might grow out of either extreme….”

Unfortunately for the Gracchi, their reforms had no permanent effect for they did nothing to address the conditions that gave rise to the concentration of land in the first place. Their proposed reforms invoked strong opposition, and many of the reform laws were soon repealed, while others continued but with weakened effectiveness over time. Land issues would continue to plague the Romans for a long time thereafter.

The Gracchi became martyrs in the truest sense of the word as they would witness the failure of their reforms and suffer for their willingness to die in support of their beliefs. Both of their bodies would ultimately end up in the river Tiber. While the Gracchi are often portrayed as radical revolutionaries, many scholars argue that most of their reforms were aimed at reviving the traditional Roman ideal that every citizen should own land.

Despite earlier premonitions of discord it was the Gracchi who opened the great cleavage in politics between the populares (populists) and the optimates (aristocrats), which both Cicero and Sallust regarded as fundamental in the late republic. The Gracchi exposed all the divisive forces in Roman society, and their reforms and ruin set in motion the events that culminated in the fall of the Roman Republic.

Undoubtedly, the Gracchi brothers are among the most tragic figures in Roman history. Both were admittedly men of high integrity and sincere patriotism, and their measures were for the most part excellent examples of the conservative reform which, if applied in a timely manner, preserves a constitution by adapting and revitalising it. But despite their fundamental moderation both in turn were carried away in the excitement of the political contest and made strategic errors that had the unwelcome effect of heightening passions.

As to the general constitutional question regarding land in this country: thoughtful observers of history know there has never been a perfect constitution, and that no revision of constitutional provisions can cure the basic ills of society. Any constitution that has worked has done so because its citizens have made it work.

Citizens who make constitutions work are of a sort whose motivations are not wholly self-interested, and who are willing, ultimately, to accept compromise for the sake of society as a whole. Unfortunately for the Romans, too many of the chief political actors in the political tragedy of the Gracchi were not willing to accept compromise.

On this point it would be apt to conclude with the wise words of the Roman stoic Marcus Aurelius, taken from his Meditations: “Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future too. Its pattern will be the same, down to the last detail; for it cannot break step with the steady march of creation. To view the lives of men for 40 years or 40,000 is therefore all one; for what more will there be for you to see?”

• Joseph is reading politics, philosophy & economics (PPE) at the University of Cape Town.