Agrarian law, by extension, applies to Roman laws that control the division of public lands (Black 2). The agrarian law was the only one of the four documents that mandated the signing of a peace treaty. In this situation, the landlords decided to give up approximately 60% of their property. It is worth remembering that a statute proposed by Cassius gives effect to his initiative (Hankins 8). According to Niebuhr, the statute sought to restore the law of Rome’s sixth king. Strictly speaking, the behavior identified the patrician’s addict in public. In their article, McClure and Hankins (4), notes that the remainder of the land was to be divided amongst the plebeians. However, the tax levy was imposed on the land the patricians possessed.
On the contrary, the senators rejected the proposed law. They argued that some of the laws were squatting on the land of the public Roman. For example, plebs became concerned thinking that the land was just being given to the allies of the Latin (Black 3). Such an action was likely to lead to legal war. In 122 BC the brother of Tiberius, Gracchus also attempted further reforms. Some of the reforms include the expansion of the area of law of the influence to all of the colonies in Italy.
Some of the political landscape that might have influenced these ideologies include the existence of the three types of land in the Ancient Rome (McClure and Hankins 5). These types of land include the common pasture, private land, and the public land. In particular, wealthy owners of the land had started to dominate the areas of agrarian of the empire by the second century BC. In practice, they had to rent large tracts of public land. In effect, the activity forced out small private farmers with competition.
What is the purpose of government, and by what means should it accomplish those ends? To what extent should a state limit individual freedoms to achieve those ends?
In simple terms, a government refers to an organization which is dominant in physical force in a particular location. For this reason, it is necessary for ensuring the proper use of strength. Here, the government has to specify physical laws for the clarification of the use of such force (Hankins 9). Moreover, it must have the ability for ensuring the enforcement of the laws.
In general, the primary purpose of the government is to give protection to the rights of the individuals of citizens. McClure and Hankins (6), explains that the government has to deal with either threat since rights can be assaulted both outsides and within a country. In trying to accomplish those ends, the government must use the means of an army to defend the country. Additionally, a system of police helps in the protection of the individual citizens from other persons within the country.
In order to accomplish those ends, the state must limit the freedom of individuals. As a result, the rights are upheld in the right way. In essence, there must be objective in the judgment of the use of force (Black 5). Because the persons involved in an incident might not be objective, it is the job of the government to judge the individual use of the force by its citizens. The state has to provide a system of court. In short, laws act as the useful tools that help the court to decide the validity of the use of force.
What has been the evolution of the function of the government in the neo-Roman tradition? Why is this adaptation necessary?
First, the democratic tradition or the neo-Roman can be found in Machiavelli. Again, in the eighteenth century American and French, and in seventeenth century English thought (McClure and Hankins 8). In light of the function of the government in the neo-Roman tradition, there was a provision of the foundation for Rousseau’s, Hobbes, and Constant’s claims regarding the ancient liberty’s nature. In the second tradition, there was at least an important look as opposed to the myths of the Roman Republic.
Whether the neo-Roman is a useful or a meaningful historical category is itself a central question regarding the interpretation of Plato’s history. In light of the necessity of the adaptation of the neo-Roman tradition, it was naturally acceptable for the neo-Roman doctrine to be essentially the same (Black 9). At this point, Grotius tried to resolve the fundamental problems of the war’s old law by only letting rise of the causes of the causes of war from the unlawful acts that the Roman private law defines. In particular, it is evident that such works of the normative Roman were both influential and authoritative in a way different from other sources.
What is the ideal citizen according to the authors we have studied? What are the benefits and the detriment of citizenship for the individual citizen and for the government itself?
According to the authors, the ideal citizen is one who is every inch a patriot. In reality, the citizenship helps in securing the people a sense of security for their property and life. In democratic countries, an ideal citizen enjoys the voting right in elections to public bodies. For example, the person is allowed to stand as a candidate for any election or any other special seats.
For an individual citizen and government, citizenship enjoys the benefits that include several facilities (McClure and Hankins 9). For this reason, the state provides the person with vital services like the right to vote, transport, hospitals, electricity, and the schools for the education of children. In the government, they are also charged with the responsibility of looking after the welfare citizens. In this case, a citizen is supposed to stand and fight for some rights (Black 11). Some of the detriments of citizenship include being subjected to unfair competition from another influential member of the country. According to McClure and Hankins (13), the citizen must also obey the state’s laws at all time in order to avoid landing in problems.
What purpose do tumults serve in the development of society? Are tyranny or coercion prerequisites for the emergence of freedom?
In the development of the society, the purpose of the tumults helps in keeping the society going. It provides the organization with a clear vision that provides great enjoyment in addition to the deep sense of peace of mind (Hankins 10). In other words, nothing is accidental about what is done about the development of the society. In light of the development of the society, tumults enter an exquisite time. Moreover, it helps in remodeling a society.
Usually, coercion or tyranny is thought of as oppressive and cruel. Often, the person who lack the legitimacy rule the original definition of this term whether there are benevolent or malign. According to the history, the benign tyrannies tends to be insecure (Black 13). For this reason, they aimed at maintaining their power by becoming more oppressive. For those grounds, coercion or tyranny are not prerequisite for the emergence of freedom.
Black, Robert. “Renaissance Civic Humanism: Reappraisals and Reflections, James Hankins.” The English Historical Review, vol. 116, no. 467, 2001, pp. 2-13. Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/enghis/116.467.715.
Hankins, James. “Machiavelli, Civic Humanism, And the Humanist Politics of Virtue.” Italian Culture, vol. 32, no. 2, 2014, pp. 8-10. Informa UK Limited, doi:10.1179/0161462214z.00000000026.
McClure, George, and James Hankins. “Renaissance Civic Humanism: Reappraisals and Reflections.” The American Historical Review, vol. 106, no. 4, 2001, p. 4-19. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/2693143.