Opposition To Tiberius Gracchus
Tiberius was essentially opposed by three men: Marcus Octavius, Scipio Nasica and Scipio Aemilianus. Octavius opposed Tiberius because Tiberius would not let him veto the Lex Sempronia Agraria. This offended Octavius, who then entered into a conspiracy with Scipio Nasica and Scipio Aemilianus to assassinate Tiberius. Nasica would benefit from this because Tiberius had bought some land from a place that Nasica wanted. Because of this, Nasica lost out on 500 sesterces. Nasica would often bring this up in the senate to mock Tiberius. Aemilianus opposed Tiberius Gracchus because he saw the greatness of Rome in conquest rather than Tiberius's view of honor and honesty.
According to the historian Plutarch (in his Livesof the Gracchi), only Scipio Nasica was directly involved in leading the senators to kill Tiberius. Furthermore, the death of Tiberius Gracchus was an open attack, much closer to a riot, and may not necessarily amount to an assassination in the modern sense.
If Octavius were to benefit, the most direct benefit would come from the lands he himself owned in excess of 500 iugera. Furthermore, Tiberius (again according to the history of Plutarch) reputedly offered to pay Octavius for his own lost lands personally, and that the two were friends until the weight of the wealthy/Senate brought him as the opposition to Tiberius' law. Appian's Civil Wars however does not confirm this.
There is too great a conflict between the contemporary sources to confirm the actual nature of Tiberius' death and the personal conflicts that lead up to it, but it is highly likely that Scipio Nasica was the man who led the senators to attack Tiberius, that Octavius did oppose his law and last that Scipio Aemilianus did not agree with Tiberius' actions, even if it was not to the point that he wished Tiberius dead.
Read more about this topic: Tiberius Gracchus
Famous quotes containing the words opposition to and/or opposition:
“At times it seems that the media have become the mainstream culture in children’s lives. Parents have become the alternative. Americans once expected parents to raise their children in accordance with the dominant cultural messages. Today they are expected to raise their children in opposition to it.”
—Ellen Goodman (20th century)
“It is useless to check the vain dunce who has caught the mania of scribbling, whether prose or poetry, canzonets or criticisms,—let such a one go on till the disease exhausts itself. Opposition like water, thrown on burning oil, but increases the evil, because a person of weak judgment will seldom listen to reason, but become obstinate under reproof.”
—Sarah Josepha Buell Hale 1788–1879, U.S. novelist, poet and women’s magazine editor. American Ladies Magazine, pp. 36-40 (December 1828)