Roman slavery

Roman slavery was credited 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.
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.

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. 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 the 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 master.

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
ungrateful 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.