• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Roman Slavery

Slaves existed at Rome in the earliest times of which we have any re~ cord; but they do not appear to have been numerous under the kings and in the earliest ages of the Republic. The different trades and the mechanic arts were chiefly carried on by the clients of the patricians; and the small farms in the country were cultivated for the most part by the labors of the proprietor and of his family. But as the territories of the Roman state were extended, the patricians obtained possession of large estates out of the public domain; since it was a practice of the Romans to deprive a conquered people of apart of their lands. These estates required a larger number of hands for their cultivation than could readily be obtained among the free population, and since the freemen‘were constantly liable to be called away from their work to serve in the armies, the lands began to be cultivated almost entirely by slave labor. Through war and commerce, slaves could be obtained easily, and at a cheap rate, and their numbers soon became so great, that the poorer class of frccmen was thrown almost entirely out of employment.

Long after it had become the custom to employ large gangs of slaves in the cultivation of the land, the number of those who served as personal attendants was very small. Persons in good circumstances seem usually to have had only one to wait upon them, who was generally called by the name of the master. But during the latter times of the republic and under the empire, the number of domestic slaves greatly increased, and in every family of importance there were separate slaves to attend to all the duties of domestic life. It was considered a reproach to a man not to keep a. considerable number of slaves. The first question asked respecting a person’s fortune, was an inquiry as to the number of his slaves. which a person in tolerable circumstances ought to keep. The immense num~ ber of prisoners taken in the constant wars of the republic, and the increase of wealth and luxury, augmented the number of slaves to a prodigious extent. The statement of Athenians that very many Romans possessed 10,000 and 20,000 slaves, and even more, is probably an exaggeration; but a freedman under Augustus, who had lost much property in the civil wars, left at his death as many as 4,116. Two hundred was no uncommon number for a person to keep.

Gibbon estimates the population of the Roman empire in the time of Claudius at one hundred and twenty millions: sixty millions of freemen and sixty millions of slaves. The proportion of slaves was much larger in Italy than in the provinces, according to Milman. Robertson states that there were twice as many slaves as free citizens, and Blair estimates three slaves to one freeman, between the conquest of Greece, B. C. 146, and the reign of Alexander Severus, A. D. 222, 235. Milman is inclined to “adopt the more cautious suggestions of Gibbon."

The oppressions to which they were exposed, drove them twice to rebellion, and their numbers enabled them to defy, for a time, the Roman power. The first of these servile wars began in BC 134, and lasted two years; the second commenced thirty years later, and lasted four years. The Sicilians treated their slaves with extraordinary rigor, branding them like cattle, andcompelling them to toil incessantly for their masters.

Eunus, by visions and pretended prophecies, excited the slaves to insurrection; and his conduct, and that of his followers, when they took possession of the city of Euna, presented a striking contrast to the moderation of the Chian slaves. They pillaged the houses, and, without distinction of age or sex, slaughtered the inhabitants, plucking infants from their mother’s breasts, and dashing them on the ground: The number of the insurgents at one time amounted to 60,000 men, who, armed with axes, slings, stakes, and cooking spits, defeated several armies. Pursuing them, however, without relaxation, the state at length prevailed, utterly crushed the insurrection, and carried Eunus a prisoner to Rome, where, according to Plutarch, he was devoured by vermin.

Like the slaves in Sicily, the Gladiators of Italy rose in rebellion against their oppressors, and under the able generalship of Spartacus, defeated a Roman consular army, and were not subdued until after a struggle of two years, and when 60,000 of them had fallen in battle. Spartacus was a Thracian by birth, and had been compelled, like other barbarians, to serve in the Roman army, from which he had deserted, and, at the head of a body of chosen companions, had carried on a partisan war against the conquerors. By the courage and skill of Spartacus, several considerable battles were gained; but his authority was insuflicient to restrain the ferocity and licentiousness of his followers, and the cities of the south of Italy were pillaged with the most revolting atrocities. In a few months, Spartacus found himself at the head of 60,000 menand the consuls were now sent, with two legions, against the revolted slaves.

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC – 43 BC) was a Roman politician and lawyer who is considered one of Rome’s greatest orators and prose stylists. Cicero stated that the ruler even of slaves should consider their happiness (Q.F.,1,1, 24). The sentiment would have more weight as an expression of regard for humanity, were not dumb beasts included under the same rule. There is in the passage no recognition of the slaves' rights as grounded in their common humanity. The statement that intimacy with slaves detracts from the prestige of a public man simply registers public opinion, and refers to social intercourse rather than to rights as men (Q. F., 1, 2, 3).

At the time of the exile Cicero made an arrangement whereby he expected that, in case of the confiscation of his property, his slaves would be regarded as freedmen, but would remain slaves in case there should be no confiscation. To give any attention to such a matter, while so occupied with his own troubles, implies a certain interest in the slaves; yet in referring to the matter in a letter to Terentia he dismisses it as unimportant (minora, F., 14, 4, 4). A confession of grief at the death of a slave, while indicating the writer's tenderness of heart, closes with an apology: "The circumstance disturbed me more than it seems the death of a slave ought" (A., 1, 12, 4). The tone is practically such as one might use in speaking of the loss of a favorite animal. Still the warm personal regard expressed for Tiro shows that it was possible for Cicero personally and practically to recognize the fellow-man and friend in the slave and freedman.

Under the empire various enactments were made to restrain the cruelty of masters towards their slaves; but the spread of Christianity tended most to ameliorate their condition, though the possession of them was for a long time by no means condemned as contrary to Christian justice. The Christian writers, however, inculcate the duty of acting towards them as we would be acted by ; but down to the age of Theodosius, wealthy persons still continued to keep as many as two or three thousand.

Justinian did much to promote the ultimate extinction of slavery; but the number of slaves was again increased by the invasion of the northern_ barbarians, who not only brought with them their own slaves, who were chiefly Sclavonians, but also reduced many of the inhabitants of the conquered plcvinces to the condition of slaves. But all the various classes of slaves became merged in the course of time into the serfs of the Middle Ages.

The rich slaveholders preferred luxury and indulgence to marriage ; and celibacy became so general, that the aristocracy was obliged by law to favor the institution, which, in a society where all are free, constitutes the solace of labor and. the ornament of life. A Roman censor could, in a public address to the people, stigmatize matrimony as a troublesome companionship, and recommend it only as a patriotic sacrifice of private pleasure to public duty. The depopulation of the upper class was so considerable, that the waste required to be applied by emancipation; and repeatedly there have been periods, when the majority of the Romans had once been bondmen. Emancipation was essential to the preservation of a class of freeman, who might serve as a balance to the slave population. It was this extensive celibacy and the consequent want of succession, that gave a peculiar character to the Roman laws relating to adoption.

A fugitive slave could not lawfully be received or harbored; to conceal him was theft. The master was entitled to pursue him wherever he pleased; and it was the duty of all authorities to give him aid in recovering his slave. It was the object of various laws to check the running away of slaves in every way, and, accordingly, a runaway slave could not legally be an object of sale. A class of persons made it a business to capture fugitive slaves. The rights of the master over the slave were in no way affected by his-running away.

The state of slavery was terminated by mannmission. It was also terminated by various positive enactments, either by way of reward to the slave or punishment to the master. Freedom was given to slaves who discovered the perpetrators of certain crimes. After the establishment of Christianity, liberty might be acquired, subject to certain limitations, by becoming a monk or a spiritual person; but if the person left his monasth for a secular life, or rambled about in the towns or the country, he might be reduced to his former servile condition.

The continued and increasing deleterious effects of slavery on Roman institutions, may be traced through the changes in the character of that majority of the citizens, whom it left without the opportunity or the fruits of industry. Even in the time of the younger Gracchus, they retained dignity enough to hope for an amelioration of their condition by the action of laws, and the exercise of their own franchises. Failing in this end through the firmness of the nobles, the free middling class was entirely destroyed; society soon became divided into the very rich and the very poor; and slaves, who performed all the labor, occupied the intermediate position between the two classes.