WHEN THE ITALIAN citizenship bill died, at least one Italian city did not take the news well. In late 125 the city of Fregellae went into revolt. A former Roman colony that had been planted in 328 during the heat of the Samnite Wars, Fregellae had subsequently stayed loyal to Rome during the long struggle against Hannibal. The city was, in fact, noted for its exemplary service against the Carthaginians. Citizens of Fregellae destroyed a key bridge to stymie Hannibal’s advance in 211 and then resisted pressure to capitulate even after Hannibal laid waste to their farms in retaliation. For their steadfast loyalty, the Senate included them among those cities by whose “aid and succor the dominion of Rome was upheld.”11
The details of the Fregellae revolt are practically nonexistent, but it was not considered threatening enough to demand consular attention. Instead, the Senate dispatched praetor Lucius Opimius to end the rebellion in early 124. As Roman leaders go, Opimius was forged from a particularly brutal mold. Opimius proceeded to sack and demolish Fregellae so that “of the city whose brilliance but yesterday irradiated Italy, scarce the debris of the foundations now remains.” The brutality of the sack was possibly a direct warning to other Italian cities who might in the future think of following Fregellae’s lead. Future Romans would link the destruction of Fregellae to the string of demolished cities that stood as bare witnesses to Rome’s expanding imperial self-confidence: “By the Roman people Numantia was destroyed, Carthage razed, Corinth demolished, Fregellae overthrown.” But when Opimius returned to Rome the Senate denied his request for a triumph. They felt that while the object may have been to cow the Italians, rubbing their noses in it was a bit over the top.12
Opimius’s brutal suppression of Fregellae turned out to be only the first example of the cold-blooded tactics he was willing to employ in defense of the existing order. Opimius would be elected consul in 121 and take center stage in the final showdown of the Gracchan revolution—a revolution that reignited just as Opimius returned home from the sack of Fregellae.13
GAIUS GRACCHUS WAS not in Rome as this drama played out. He was elected quaestor in 126 and posted to the island of Sardinia, where he continued to make a name for himself. The winter of 126–125 was particularly hard and the legionaries suffered badly from a lack of proper supplies and clothing. The Roman governor forcibly requisitioned material from the towns of Sardinia to feed and clothe his men, but when the Sardinians sent an embassy to Rome to complain, the Senate canceled the requisitions and ordered the governor to supply his men some other way. This “some other way” turned out to be Gaius Gracchus making a circuit of the island during which he used the full power of his persuasive oratory to convince the Sardinians to supply the Romans of their own free will. The Sardinians were convinced and contributed voluntarily.14
When the Senate heard of Gaius’s successful campaign, they did not congratulate him so much as fret over what would happen when his persuasive brand of charismatic oratory returned to the Forum. So they conspired to keep him in Sardinia for as long as possible. It was perfectly normal for a consul to transition into a proconsul when his annual term of office expired, and it was also normal for his staff to stay on with him. So the Senate extended the Sardinian command for another year, and Gaius remained in Sardinia. But then the following year the Senate extended everyone again, which was highly irregular. Not since the Punic Wars had such multiple extensions been necessary—and with Sardinia peaceful and subdued, it was a curious decision.15
Gaius suspected that the extensions had less to do with the necessity of keeping the consul in Sardinia than with keeping Gaius Gracchus out of Rome. So to counter these highly irregular orders, Gaius broke out a highly irregular response. Ignoring the mos maiorum that a staff officer was obligated to stay with his commander for the duration of their provincial assignment, Gaius simply packed up his belongings and headed back to Rome in the spring of 124. The Senate was outraged at his unexpected appearance in the city. Seeing happy throngs of cheering citizens greet him at the docks only darkened their mood.16
But though their plan to trap Gaius in Sardinia had failed, that did not mean conservatives were going to let him waltz into the tribunate unopposed. Immediately upon his return Gaius was hauled before the censors to answer for the abandonment of his commander. It was while defending himself from this charge that Gaius delivered one of his most famous speeches. With his honor besmirched, he defended his conduct in Sardinia, saying that while others used their provincial postings to oppress the locals and make themselves rich, “when I left for Rome, I brought back empty from the province the purses which I took there full of money. Others have brought home overflowing with money the jars which they took to their province filled with wine.” This was a pointed rejoinder to the men accusing him of civic immorality, many of whom had indeed spent their service abroad drinking wine and filling the empty bottles with treasure.17
There were limits, though, to the powers of the censors to punish Gaius for his alleged transgressions. It is possible however that the moral approbation was meant to merely lay the groundwork for a more serious charge—one that would be heard in a criminal court. Conjuring up a vague Italian conspiracy theory, Gaius’s enemies accused him of helping foment the rebellion of Fregellae. Gaius’s pro-Italian bias would have been well known by now, and conservative senators tried to link that bias to actual treason against the Senate and People of Rome. The charges were of course ridiculous, as Gaius had been in Sardinia for the whole length of the uprising, but they still created a scandalous cloud that forced Gaius to respond. Records are scant, but we know that Gaius successfully dodged the accusations and began campaigning for his destined tribunate.18
THE TRIBUNATE ELECTION for 123 was particularly fierce as the bulk of the nobles organized their clients to oppose Gaius’s election. But the broad popularity of the Gracchi name and the power of Gaius’s oratory were irresistible. Citizens poured into Rome from the surrounding countryside, and in the days leading up to the election there was not housing enough for all of them. Even the wide-open Campus Martius was soon overcrowded to the point where men occupied the rooftops.19
While Gaius campaigned, a bill came before the Assembly to finally ratify the settlement of Asia that had been engineered by Aquillius. Ten years had now passed since the death of King Attalus, and the settlement of Asia was only just now ready for ratification. It had run into an unexpected delay when reports of Aquillius’s shameful conduct filtered back to Rome. Among other things, Aquillius stood accused of taking bribes from King Mithridates V of Pontus to settle the border to Mithridates’s advantage. Since the charges were 100 percent true, all signs pointed to an open-and-shut conviction. But instead the jury acquitted Aquillius. This was partly thanks to the incomparable oratory of Marcus Antonius, a rising young star who defended Aquillius in court. But it was also thanks to the money Aquillius spread among the jurors—essentially using bribe money to bribe his way out of accusations of bribery.20