Marcus Aurelius on Justice and Slavery

                 Marcus’ principles and ideologies were mainly developed by his upbringing. Growing up, he
was always around older people, mostly male that led him to an authoritative figure – conservative,
serious, and responsible. Interaction with kids his age is not a common situation he has been in, he
was home-schooled with private tutors. In Ancient Roman Education, upper-class children are usually
home-schooled because interacting with lower-class children in a normal schooling system will
corrupt their education. Normal schools that time is considered a bad influence on the upbringing of
children – bad behavior and lack of discipline resulting in idleness. However, a break from a
patriarchal system in his childhood and education is his mother who was very supportive and loving
who taught him that there is another, simpler way of living, removed from the wealthy life in the city.

In his book Meditations, Marcus has mentioned his obligations to his slaves because he

believed that he had “duties to all men since all like himself share in the divine reason and are his
kinsmen” – that justice is also extended to slaves. However, to bluntly note that Marcus did not
eradicate slavery rather it focuses on the notion of justice on the matter of slavery. Marcus as a ruler
upholds traditional ways and laws, he was strict on matters of class distinction and citizenry. An
example of this matter is through differential clothing worn by different members of the society:
clarissimus for senators and egregius for knights. Additionally, he was persistent in keeping senators
as commanders. Senators were also forbidden to marry women with criminal records and freedmen
were not allowed to marry ladies of senatorial rank - with these, he was criticized to tend to favor the
upper classes.  
According to Brummer (2018), there are three main points on the context of slavery: 1) there is an
increase on focus on administration; there is the emancipation of slaves and; 3) there is an issue of
punishment: 

1. Focus on Administration
                 His rule was very authoritarian in nature, not surprising because of his upbringing as
aforementioned. He did not only acted as a legislator but he was also a judge. Nevertheless, he did
not administer all the laws solely rather, he organized his administration to assist with the legal
process.  
In addition to the laws, Marcus Aurelius also made a series of judicial changes to assist the workload
of the courts and the administration of the slaves. This included, first, the order for officials to help in
the hunt for escaping slaves and, second, the penalty for those transporting these slaves; second,
Marcus Aurelius granted them Pretorian and Consular ranks the power to settle disputes; and,
second, the Senate to hear appeals, displaying profound and unprecedented regard for the Senate.
It culminated in an organized government, while the same would have been true if Marcus Aurelius
had relied on military rule alone. This also meant that Marcus Aurelius was also not participating in
resolving conflict Third, Marcus Aurelius raised the number of court days to two hundred and thirty a
year, helping to clear backlogs and avoid long stretches of imprisonment before sentencing. Fourth
and finally, Marcus Aurelius has re-established four travel judges in Italy. The goal of this was to
reduce costs and speed up justice. As can be seen, these judicial reforms did do a lot to change the
structure and also meant that certain judicial matters were decentralized, in the sense that one
individual, the emperor, was not expected to manage everything, but could delegate responsibility
to others.

2. Emancipation of Slaves 
                 A common thing in Marcus’ administration was the emancipation of slaves, this is often
granted to those slaves who had worked efficiently without supervision. Freedom is earned, if the
owner promised freedom to his slave, it shall be granted. This assurance of freedom drives slaves to
work well. If written in a will, heirs can also emancipate slaves. Roman government and
municipalities also could emancipate slaves because slaves can also be a part of a corporation. This
capacity to emancipate slaves is called collegia, meaning they have the right to do such. Another way
could be through the owner’s own free will, however, there are some restrictions, there are several
slaves that can be granted through this way. Furthermore, Marcus prohibited the emancipation
through force, gift, or inheritance. Owners are also not permitted to emancipate slaves if such
emancipation promotes insolvency or to fraud their creditors.   

3. Punishment 
                 In the judgment, Marcus Aurelius followed the Stoic belief that equality is proportionate and
that every man has his station in life and has to be happy with whatever happens to him as he stated
in his book Meditations.  Marcus Aurelius continued the Roman custom of punishing citizens of lower
classes more harshly for the same crimes as those committed by aristocrats. In the same way, as
during his rule, Marcus Aurelius enhanced the lives of the wealthier people by expelling ex-slaves
from the council of Athens and limiting the membership of the Areopagus. As this section has
demonstrated, it has taken steps to improve the freedoms and prestige of senators. He also
supported individual senators by allowing them to reduce their required investment in Italian land
from one-third, as mentioned by Trajan, to one-quarter.
                 However, arguments against Marcus Aurelius branding him lenient toward the lowers class
was proved. An example of this leniency is republican law. Republican law had specified that if the
owner or any of his immediate family were killed, all slaves, including those who had been freed,
would have to be interrogated under torture and then hanged, whether guilty or not. And prisoners,
who had learned something, may have been hanged for murder. This was justified because the duty
of the slaves included the protection of its owners. Therefore, if the owner is murdered, the slave has
failed to perform his duty and is therefore liable for the murder. 
Nevertheless, modification to this law was approved that granted slaves immunity where they will be
absolved on their master’s deathbed from murder. At least, some favor for the lower class. Another
example of this is the situation in which the freedom for imprisoned slaves granted by their owner
was deemed inadmissible due to the imprisonment of slaves. Marcus Aurelius, however, agreed that
if their sentence had been completed, the slaves could apply for manumission.
A further example is the case of wills and slaves included in estates. Here the estate had gone to the
fiscus, for the departed had nullified the will by erasing the names of all the heirs. Marcus Aurelius
was of the view that the heirs should remain and that the slave whose name had been removed
would be freed.
Having found these conflicting points, Brummer (2018) believes that the judgments in favor
of libertatis and the judgments in favor of the upper classes were in the eyes of Marcus Aurelius a
contradiction. The fact that he was a party to independence and also lent to the defendants was
presumably not seen by him as in contrast with his stance on class distinction. In general, this leads
us to think that he saw these as two separate things, and essentially moral justice was what Marcus
Aurelius wanted the most. This is also interesting that it was only in cases of democracy that Marcus
Aurelius appeared to favor the lower classes and the slave defendants.

                 In conclusion, Marcus Aurelius’ concept of justice and slavery attempted to remove or at
least reduce the barriers to slaves attaining freedom. With this, we can infer that the idea of
eradicating slavery was not the main objective of his administration because slavery is not a
recognized problem rather, it is a social order. Additionally, his laws did help the marginalized even
though the upper class is highly favored. His actions towards this issue deliberately showed his moral
and ethical principles. 

Brummer, S. (2018). Marcus Aurelius: Living philosophy and the business of governing an Empire.
University of Stellenbosch