Assassinations of Caesar and the Gracchi brothers.

In analyzing the writings of Aristotle and Plato, we are given a sense of understanding with how the ancients of Greece interpreted political violence and how their ideas of political organization could justify such acts. With the killings of the Gracchi brothers, (Gaius and Tiberius) as well as the murder of Julius Caesar, the Romans’ politically motivated deaths can be explained in the words of the Greeks philosophers as them being tyrants. From our previous essay, we have acquired that “[A]ny political system able to dispense… political violence deserves our respectful attention.”1 That being said, we can note that the deaths of Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus and Julius Caesar we’re done in attempt to rid Rome of tyranny, keeping the full control of the Roman Empire out of the hands on one man and maintaining the importance of the Senate. But did the three men actually qualify themselves as tyrants in the view of Aristotle and Plato?

With Tiberius Gracchus, it was insisting that he be elected for a second term as tribunal. This did not sit well with his opposition in the Senate and eventually led to a gathering by Tiberius and his supporter in the Capitol, which ended in a small brawl and a group of senators eventually gathering against Gracchus and striking him and many of his supporters down, throwing their bodies in the Tiber River.2 Though the violence by the Senate was unjustified, it was not necessarily unprovoked by Tiberius. He had interfered and disregarded the rules of the Senate when it came to finance, foreign affairs and discussion of legislation. In seeking a re-election, the fear became that “prolonged tribunates would open the way to demagogy” and that the result would be of “mob-rule or dictatorship” though Tiberius may not have been away of the implications.3

Gaius Gracchus on the other hand, seemed to be more aggressive than his brother because of his will to go to greater lengths to achieve his wishes for a better Rome.4 He