Roman slavery

Roman slavery was credited or incredited to Greek slavery even though they
have difference in some aspects. The rise of rome marked a new cycle of urban
imperial expansion which represented not just a geographical shift in the
centre of gravity from the ancient world to Italy. But also a new mode of
production that gives or brought in a new type of development in the socio-
economic arena which was marked by rise of towns, trade and growth in
agrarian production facilitated by the employment of large number of slaves
primarily as gang slaves on large tracts of roman land called as Latifundias. In
contrast in Greece agriculture was practiced on much smaller scale which was
also linked with the structure of Greek polis with its absence of huge
concentration of wealth in few hands. It was the roman republic who first
united large scale property with gang slavery in country side in a major scale.
The advent of slavery as an organized mode of production was first seen in
Greece but it was in Rome that heralded the classical phase of roman
civilization the pinnacle of its far culture. An examination of slavery growth
throws light of all networks of changes that affected all specifics of the society.

Keith Hopkins concentrated on the processes that in his view affected the
growth of slavery namely 1) continuous wars, 2) the influx of war booty 3)the
investment in land 4)the formation of large estates 5)the impoverishment of
peasants 6) the emigration of peasants to towns and provinces 7)growth of
urban market.

Mass slavery in Rome was a product of conquest. In about 200 years Romans
conquered almost whole of the Mediterranean basin. Slaves were concentrated
in roman Italy, the heart land of the empire. Most of them were captured after
the battles or an immediate aftermath the conquest. Among the agricultural
slaves males predominated and while the empire was being expanded they
were replaced by fresh captives of wars and their supply was supplemented by
trade and breeding. Therefore an important element was the expansion in slave
population. By the end of 1st century BCE, there were 2 million slaves out of 6
million people. An important feature of roman slavery is a very wide
latifundation for the first time in antiquity which was related with
developments in empire. The continuous wars accentuated the declined
peasants. Constant warfare required endless mobilization and citizens called to
legions were died in 1000s or while those who survived were not able to
maintain their farms at home. The rich invested a considerable part of war
booty in agricultural land in Italy. Earlier period fertile land around Rome was
densely occupied by citizen peasants. Now the rich bought these lands either
by force or by violence. These small land holdings were reorganized by larger
and more profitable farms. The peasants who survived or subsisted were now
evicted to make route for slaves to produce surplus for markets. The latifundia
in many ways represented a new social phenomenon. It didn’t necessarily
formed consolidated blocks of land found as single units. The typical pattern for
the latifundists was to possess a large number of medium sized villa states.
Sometimes contiguous by equally often distributed across the country. The
establishment of latifundia had wide ranging consequences for the peasantry.
Large number of peasants who had been displaced by the slaves migrated to
the city of Rome to take advantage of the increased expenditure there and to
some other Italian towns or they joined the army or migrated to the newly
pacified north Italian plane. This displacement embittered the poor and by the
end of 2nd century BCE ignited a spark of series of political disruptions. It also
provided a plan for the political activists of whom Tiberius Grachhus is a best
example who tried in vain to limit the amount of public land that rich could
cultivate. Movement of the population may be seen as the simultaneous
creation of the new surplus as well as a new market for its consumption. Land
owners now achieved the surplus by raising the productivity of labour. Fewer
men produced more food as underemployed peasants were expelled with their
families from the plots and replaced by fewer slaves. Collumella is a text which
is based on agriculture recommended that an arable farm of 200 ugera which
would be 120 acres could be cultivated by 8 adult male slaves which was the
same area of land that other wisely comprise of 80 free peasant families or
citizens. Thus the manpower saved by placing the slaves was substantial. It was
necessary to sell the surplus created to acquire return on investment in land of
slaves. The peasants who migrated to rome and the new urban slaves provided
the base for the formation of a market. It was they who consumed the surplus.
One can safely state without doubt that rome was the biggest market. This was
supported by the fact that there was free and subsidized wheat to the citizens
living in the city of rome while it underwrote the capacity of the poor to buy
wheat and bread it left them with enough money to but wines and olives.

A question is why slaves settled on land of peasants evicted? Some writers

assert that conquering roman in course of their conquest enslaved the defeated
and carried them to their farms for working in there. But this didn’t explain
various issues involved such as though the romans had captured land occupied
by nearly 50 million people why did they has only 2 million slaves effectively.
To the rich , slave labour had obvious advantage that dependant peasants didn’t
have. Though slaves were expensive and unwilling to work hard there by
incurring cost of supervision yet they were not liable to be called away for
military service like peasants. And they were forced to work harder throughout
the whole year. In the period of the imperial expansion continuous wars were
there to conquer the slaves for the rich families. Unlike most peasant families
slaves could be formed permanent work gangs several times the size of the
family. Gangs of 10 slaves each were need to work on the nearly acquired farms
of the rich. In the period of roman expansion, continuous wars made slavery an
easy and attractive way for the rich man to organize labour on forms of too large
to be cultivated by free family. This was specially seen because under Roman
law house hold employees were considered as slaves. The incoming of large
numbers of agro slaves implies drastic reorganization of land holdings. Because
where there was a system of small family farms slave labour could not be
adequately exploited. Therefore maximization of productivity of slave gangs
was possible only through amalgamation of small holdings. The high capital
cost of slaves led to the creation of lended units large enough to provide them
with work throughout the year. An important and highly significant feature of
roman slavery was that its impact on daily life of romans it had social, political
and cultural implications. Many citizens viewed slaves as nothing more than
forcibly imported aliens who were exploited to a degree. The presence of a
substantial number of slaves in roman society defines free citizens even as poor
than superior. This sense of superiority limited the willingness of free citizens
to compete with slaves. It persisted as a method of displaying wealth in the
Roman Empire long after it had seized to be a major method of producing
wealth even though slaves were employed because it is very fashionable or
respectable.

Wars led to a sudden influx of wealth that not only disrupted large established
factors of consumption, production and exploitation but also led to the
formation of a new ruling elite often described as nobles. These elite converted
its newly found wealth into the only asset that conventionally gain high social
status moreover compared to public office, land ownership provided a steady
income. Roman nobles increased their wealth towards a level commensurate to
their control over a huge empire. The political power of citizen body limited the
extent to which nobles could exploit citizens. The roman plebs had sufficient
political and military power to have their shares in their imperial booty and
many concessions were extracted to the state. For example roman citizens were
exempted from paying direct taxes after 167 BC. From 122 BC they received
subsidized wheat and from 58 BC free wheat. Those who had fought war got
lands in colonies outside central Italy.

One of the most striking aspect of roman slavery was the frequency with which
slaves were freed by the masters (manumission). The impression from the
sources is that a large number of ex slaves mingled with the free population of
city of Rome. The free barricade of 7000 men established in AD 6 was initially
recruited from the ex slaves. During the period of Augustus a law was passed
forbidding a master for freeing more than a 100 slaves. Almost all ex slaves
freed by masters attained roman citizenship. Many of them gained considerable
wealth and social prominence. In roman senate it was reported that many
knights and some senators were the descendants of ex slaves. In the 1st century
AD, ex slaves of emperors’ households filled important positions as secretaries
of states in the central administration. Slaves of emperors frequently married
women of free birth and kept slaves as business agents. They were also put in
charge of other slaves as overseers or supervisors. Sources say that at humbler
levels of society, ex slaves dominated the commercial sectors of rome. They also
became leaders in religious groups. But a question can be arised. Why there was
manumission of slaves in very large number? Because they were expensive and
were an investment. The views on slave manumission (humanitarian or
economic) required some elaboration. Most roman slaves were freed only by
death. Sub humans have no realistic prospect of liberty. The cruelty to slaves
was too much. Roman literature shows it very well. Gladiators show that slaves
were killed for the pleasure of the free men. Some slaves like miners didn’t
survive long. They were under the complete mercy of their masters.

There was both collective and individual resistance. Between 135 and 70 BC,
there were 3 major slave rebellions in Italy and Sicily. However the initial
success of the rebellions was no longer remained because they were ruthlessly
crushed. In one notorious case in 61 AD, 400 household slaves were executed.
One advantage the slave posses was there was no distinguishing and obvious
signs of being a slave. Both as slaves and free men, slaves could easily merge
with population. The stoic philosophers stressed the common humanity of
slaves and free men: masters buy and sell only slave’s body. The mind was its
own master and it’s free”. Later Christianity however helped to soften the
hardness of roman law concerning slaves. It was forbidden to sell slaves to
gladiators and prostitutes without a cause and masters could not punish
excessively or kill them. Separation of slaves and children were discouraged
and magistrates could order mistreated slave to be sold to another masters.

Slaves form the lower stratum of the of the roman social pyramid. A different
kind of status adopted by slaves was inherent in the institution of “Peculium”.
This allow a slave a working capital borrowed from his master and gave him a
decisive advantage over the free poor as well as a prominent position in the
field of commerce. In return master got a share of an inherent of the income.
Peculium was an expression of freedom of an action of slaves to regulate their
own property. There are evidences for masters paying wages to slaves in some
cases. in 1st century AD there was a proposal to rein slave the free slaves which
hotly debated in 56 AD. It was threatened by large number of slaves so nero
rejected it. Another law was masters were given power to punish ungreatful ex
slaves .in addition masters could also detail specific condition as a pre requisite
to freedom including service to his master and his family after attaining
freedom.