In Boeotia slaves were not numerous--being only occasionally made and

used. Neither serfs, bond-men, nor chattels, were held in Elis, Locris,

or by the Arcadians, Phocians, or Achæans, until the downfall of Greek

dignity, liberty, and independence, under the Macedonian and Roman

rule. The Phocians prohibited slavery by express legislation.

The Ionians in Attica boasted that they sprang from their native soil.

They were therefore the primitive tillers and cultivators of their not

over-fertile and rather rocky land, of about one hundred and ninety

square miles. This land was divided more or less equally into small

homesteads worked by yeomen, to whom chattels would have been a burden.

Centuries after the heroic or legendary epoch, when Attica possessed

wealthier landowners, Hesiod advises the agriculturists to work their

lands by the free labor of the Thetes in preference to slave labor.

Athens became very early a commercial city, and perhaps piratical

expeditions for the kidnapping of slaves were fitted out from the

Piræus. At any rate, slavery, chattelhood, was especially, if not

exclusively, fostered when commerce became more extensive. Athens was

the seat and focus of domestic slavery. In the course of time almost

all trades were carried on by slaves, as also mining, and finally,

farming. But all this was the growth of the long process of centuries.

Debtors were enslaved; but Solon abolished this right of the creditor.

He likewise abolished the custom of going about armed in the community.

Generally it is a sign of a dangerous and very degraded state of

society when men carry arms as a necessity. By a strange coincidence,

since slavery has been proclaimed a moral and religious duty, the use

of bowie-knives, revolvers, and rifles becomes more and more the order

of the day in the South. Not against the slave, not against any foreign

enemy, not even against the abolitionist, do the men of the South arm

themselves, but it is against each other that they have recourse to

armed assaults in their private and public intercourse. From the South

the savage custom invades the North, and it has in some cases been

forced on peaceful Northern members of Congress in self-defence against

the assaults of their Southern colleagues.

The Ionic race had no serfs or Helots, either in Attica or elsewhere.

But in Attica, as in other Greek communities, and indeed throughout the

whole world, from among the primitive yeomen or peasants, emerged those

who, more thrifty, more successful, or more brave, accumulated wealth

in various ways. Such was one mode in which aristocracy originated.

These yeomen growing richer, acquired more land, bought out smaller

farmers, and could hire more field hands. Even before Solon the aim of

the rich was to transform freeholders into tenants, but Solon stemmed

this current for a long period of time.

Parents could sell their children into slavery; Solon reduced this

right to such daughters as willingly submitted to seduction. A poor man

could sell himself into slavery, and children exposed by their parents

were enslaved by the public authorities.

War and traffic furnished the great supplies of slaves or chattels for

the Athenians. Such chattels were from all nations and races, and the

black slaves constituted an accidental and imperceptible minority.

Witness Æsop telling the story of a rustic who bought a black slave

and unsuccessfully tried to bleach or to whitewash it. If blacks had

been common merchandise, the rustic would have been familiar with

its nature. Slavery was transmitted from parents to children, if the

prisoner of war was not ransomed or the slave not manumitted. But

at any time a slave could receive or buy his freedom, and a chattel

once liberated could not, under penalty of capital punishment, again

be violently enslaved. In the South they begin to legislate for the

re-enslavement of the liberated: the odium no longer falls on the

individual but on the whole body politic. All over the ancient world

the state watched over and protected the once enfranchised slave:

the modern slave-holding polity expels him or legislates for his

disfranchisement. In Athens, as all over Greece, the offspring of

freemen and slave-women were free.

At first slaves performed domestic service, and afterward, when their

number increased, they were employed in various trades. The state used

them in public works, sometimes to row the ships. But the greatest

number were employed to work the mills and mines of Attica. However,

the state itself did not work the mines, but rented them generally

without the slave labor; though private individuals rented them for

a term of years, together with the slaves who worked them. Slowly

chattelhood spread over the rural economy of Attica.

About the time of the Persian wars, rural property was still nearly

equally divided among the citizens. Wealth was accumulated and

represented in commerce, in various industries, and in the precious

metals. But at that time slaves nowhere outnumbered the freemen. At

the battle of Marathon the Athenians had ten thousand _hoplites_ or

heavily armed able-bodied citizens; at Platea eight thousand; and in

both battles nearly as many _peltasts_ or lightly-armed troops--poorer

citizens, but not serfs, or retainers, or slaves. Before the invasion

of Xerxes, the free population of Attica probably amounted to more than

one hundred and twenty thousand of both sexes and all ages. The slave

population is estimated at the utmost as sixty thousand.

Athens, like all the other Greek republics, colonized other countries

with the surplus of their free--mostly poor--population. Herodotus

died in such an expedition. The Dorians very likely colonized Sicily,

the Ionians Italy or Magna Grecia. Such colonizations relieved the

over-populated mother-country, extended the Hellenic culture, but

likewise, in more than one way, fostered and nursed slavery. The

Greek colonists in Sicily and in Italy, conquering or pushing into

the interior the aborigines of these lands, enslaved, kidnapped and

sold them. Then the Greek cities warred with and enslaved each other.

Such was the case between Sybaris and Crotona, or in Sicily between

Syracuse, Girgentum, etc. The rich men of Athens bought more and

more slaves, purchased the lands of the poor, substituted in various

handicrafts their gangs of slave laborers for freemen, and exported the

impoverished freemen.[13] The increase of large estates and chattels

went hand in hand with the decrease of freemen and public spirit in

Athens; and the same was the case in other large commercial cities of

Greece.

After the Persian war Athens became the wealthiest of commercial

cities, and the Athenians a conquering nation. Both circumstances

increased the number of slaves. But still the landed property was not

yet absorbed. Alcibiades owned only about three hundred _plethra_, or

about seventy-five acres of land in Attica. The wealthy slave-owners

and oligarchs were not in power, but they owned mines in Attica and

landed estates in various Greek dependencies and colonies. Slavery

prevailed in the city, and it became more and more common on the

farms. However, on the eve of the Peloponnesian war, democracy still

prevailed. The oligarchs, proud of their slaves, mines, plantations and

estates, scorned the democracy of Athens, composed of artists, yeomen,

operatives, artisans--who really formed the soul of the great Periclean

epoch.

Oligarchies are alike all over the world; in most of them,

slave-holders, however called, live upon the labor of others; all

of them scorn the laboring classes. The Southern militant planters

and their Northern servile retainers scorn the enlightened masses of

working-men, the farmers and operatives of the free states. But it is

those masses which exclusively give original signification to America

in the history of human development. Athens and the various monuments

of the Periclean epoch coruscate over doomed Hellas: so the villages

of the free states, with their schools and laborious, intelligent,

self-reliant populations, shed their rays now over the Christian

world. And the sight of such a village is a far different subject of

contemplation from that of the slave-crowded plantation.

Slavery increased rapidly in Athens, as in all the great commercial

centres, and in the adjacent isles of Greece. At the beginning of the

Peloponnesian war, Attica had a population of about twenty thousand

male adults, or a little over one hundred thousand free persons of

all ages and sexes. The whole free population of Greece is estimated

to have been at that time about eight hundred thousand souls; and the

slaves--the Spartan serfs or Helots included--perhaps outnumbered the

freemen. Thucydides says that the island of Chios had about two hundred

and ten thousand slaves, the largest number next to Sparta; then came

Athens, with nearly two hundred thousand human chattels; while other

great commercial cities of Greece, as Sycyon and Corinth, likewise

contained very large numbers.

The Peloponnesian war was waged with all the violence of a family feud.

It spread desolation, impoverishment, carnage and slavery over Greece.

Captives made by the one or the other contending party, were sold by

tens of thousands into slavery; these captives were principally the

small freeholders, the _thetes_ and _geomori_--operatives, artisans,

and, indeed, free workmen of every kind. Their number consequently

diminished, and their small estates were either bought or taken

violently by the rich, who thus simultaneously increased the number

of their chattels and their acres of land. Thus did slavery permeate

more and more the Greek social polity, until, at the epoch between

Pericles and the beginning of the Macedonian wars, the number of slaves

in Athens and Attica was nearly doubled: but the free population did

not thus increase. Large landed estates became more and more common,

till, in the time of Demosthenes, the soil of Attica, was concentrated

in comparatively few hands. At Cheronea, the Athenians fought against

Philip with mercenary troops, and even armed their slaves. But the

spirit of Marathon and of Platæa was gone, and Athens succumbed. The

gold of Philip was acceptable to the rich slave-holders, and went

principally into the hands of the oligarchs; but alas! no second

Miltiades ever emerged from their ranks.

It is supposed that at the epoch of the Macedonian conquest, the

proportion of slaves and freemen was as seven to three. Near the

beginning of the reign of Alexander, the free population of Greece

amounted to one million, and the slaves to one million four hundred

and thirty-five thousand. The census taken in Attica about that time,

under the archon Demetrius of Phaleris, gives for Athens and Attica

twenty-one thousand adult male citizens, or a little over one hundred

thousand persons of all ages and sexes, and four hundred thousand

slaves. The slave population pre-ponderated, however, only in the

wealthy part of Greece; the poorer agricultural communities, as already

mentioned, having been free from its curse. Thus Corinth had four

hundred and fifty thousand, and Ægina four hundred and seventy thousand

slaves; and this is the reason that Philip, Alexander, Antipater, and

other conquerors had such comparatively easy work in destroying Greek

liberty.

The Macedonian wars also spread desolation, slavery and ruin; and of

Thebans alone, Alexander sold over thirty thousand into slavery.

Thus ended the independent political existence of Greece and Athens.

Rich slave-holders, indeed, they still had; but they ceased to have a

history of their own, or a distinct political existence; and Greece

became a satellite successively of Macedonia, Syria, Egypt and Rome.

To conclude: in Athens, as indeed throughout Greece, the commercial

cities inaugurated domestic slavery. Slavery first penetrated into

domestic life; then entered into the various trades and industries, and

finally, almost wholly absorbed the lands and the agricultural economy.

It also penetrated into the functions of state, and various minor

offices were held by slaves--which anomaly was afterward reproduced in

Rome, especially under the emperors.

In the slave section of our own country the system has already got

possession of domestic and family life, of agriculture, and of some

of the handicrafts; and slaves are employed on some of the railroads

as brake-men and assistant-engineers. This may be a cheering proof

of the intellectual capacity of the colored race, but it proves also

the analogy which exists everywhere between the workings of slavery,

whatever may be the distance of ages or the color of the enslaved.

It was only during the period of the moral, social and political

decomposition of Greece that slavery flourished. A certain Diophantus

at one period proposed a law to enslave all the laborers, artisans and

operatives in Athens--so that those who now so loudly demand the same

thing here, had prototypes more than twenty-four centuries ago; for,

though history has transmitted to infamous memory only the name of

Diophantus, yet undoubtedly he stood not alone.

In Athens and in Greece we see the cancer growing steadily over the

whole social and political organism, until all Attica and almost the

whole of the ancient world were divided only between slave-holders and

chattels.

In the slave marts of Athens and of Corinth, and afterward in that of

Delos, the sale of chattels was conducted in precisely the same way as

it now is in Richmond, in New Orleans and in Memphis. The proceedings

of the auctioneers and the traders, of the buyers and the sellers, were

as cruel then as they are now. The same eulogies of the capacities

of able-bodied men, the same piquant descriptions of the various

attractions of the women, the same tricks to conceal bodily defects,

and similar guaranties between vender and buyer, then as now.

When, finally, laborers of almost every kind, handicraftsmen and

agriculturists, had thus become enslaved, all the freemen, both rich

and poor, were speedily swallowed up in an equal degradation. The

family became disorganized; the republics perished. This was completely

accomplished when Greece passed from Macedonian to Roman rule: then

domestic slavery flourished as never before. In that final struggle

the password of the Greek slave-holders was, "_Unless we are quickly

lost, we cannot be saved._" The non-slaveholding mountaineers of Achaia

fought against the Romans until they were almost exterminated. But

Rome conquered, and large numbers of Greeks were sold into slavery by

the Roman consuls. Paulus Emilius alone sold one hundred and fifty

thousand Macedonians and other Greeks, while the whole population of

Corinth was sold by Mummius; and Sylla depopulated Athens, the Piræus

and Thebes. The Roman rule in Greece and over the Greek world was a

fierce stimulant to the growth of domestic slavery. The Roman senate

and the Roman proconsuls especially favored the large slaveholders,

since they were the fittest persons to tolerate the yoke. The Romans

helped them to degrade and to enslave as much as possible. Rome wanted

not freemen in Greece, but slaves and obedient slave-drivers; and Roman

tax-gatherers and the farmers of public revenues sold freemen into

slavery for debt. Finally, the celebrated Cilician pirates desolated

Greece, carrying away and selling, in Delos, almost the last remnants

of the free laboring population.

A small body of free citizens now ruled immense masses of slaves. The

normal economy of nature was thus destroyed, and the depopulation

of Greece went on rapidly. At the time of Cicero, almost the whole

of Attica formed the estate of a single slaveholder, who also owned

other estates in other parts of Greece. Many militant slave oligarchs

doubtless envy that Athenian slaveholder; at any rate they are doing

their utmost to bring the Southern States to a condition similar to

that just depicted in Athens and Greece.

During the Peloponnesian wars, insurrections of slaves often took place

in Attica, especially in the mines. But the greatest slave rebellion,

as far as history has recorded, was under the Roman administration. The

revolted slaves then seized upon the fortress of Sunium, and for a long

time fought bravely for their freedom.

The Greeks, as in some degree all the peoples of antiquity, considered

domestic slavery a social misfortune to the enslavers, and an accursed

fatality inherent in human society. They never presented it under the

false colors of a normal and integral social element. The striking

analogies between the workings of slavery in the ancient world

and in the American republic, show that the disease is everywhere

and eternally the same, and that it does not _ennoble_ either the

community or the individual slaveholder, as the pro-slavery combatants

apodictically assert.

If in the despotic oriental empires, domestic and political slavery

at times played into each other's hands until they jointly destroyed

national life, _it was domestic slavery, single-handed, which did

the work in Greece_, and particularly in Sparta and Athens. Domestic

slavery enervated the nation and made it an easy prey to foreign

conquest. It converted into a putrescent mass the once great and

brilliant Grecian world.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 12: Edward A. Pollard, letter to the _Tribune_.]

[Footnote 13: So the poor whites of the South emigrate and settle in

the Western territories, and the planters magnify their plantations and

their chattels.]

XII.

ROMANS--THE REPUBLICANS.

AUTHORITIES:

_Corpus Juris, Livy, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Niebuhr, Arnold,

Savigny, Puchta, Mommsen, Jhring, Clinton, Carl Hegel, Zumpt, etc._

The primitive occupants of the Mediterranean peninsula--anciently, and

at the present time, called Italy--issued from the same Aryan stock

as peopled Greece. These immigrants, almost from the first moment of

their arrival, seem to have devoted themselves to agriculture, as all

the relics still dimly visible in prehistoric twilight certify to

this fact. Thus, the domestic legend of the Samnites makes an ox the

leader of the primitive colonies, which is only a different version of

another tradition, according to which Vitulus or Italus--a legendary

king, from whom the name of "Italy" is derived--brought about among his

subjects the transition from shepherds to farmers. The name _Italia_,

in ancient Latin, signified a _country full of cattle_. The oldest

of the Latin tribes has the name of _Siculi_, _Sicani_, reapers, and

another, _Opsci_, or field-laborers. Among the Italians (or _Italos_,

_Italiots_), the legends, creeds, laws, and manners all originate in

agriculture; while every one knows the use of the plough in the distant

background of the legendary foundation of Rome. The oldest Roman

matrimonial rite, the _confarreatio_, also has its name from _rye_.

With agriculture is primarily connected a fixed abode, and thus springs

up the love of home and family. From agricultural life arises the tribe

or clan, which is simply a community of individuals descending from

the same ancestor. In this primitive condition the field-labors and

domestic occupations were performed by various members, first of the

family, and then of the clan. The _servus_ or servant of that epoch was

no more a chattel in the Latin agricultural family and community than

was the primitive servant in the tent of the patriarchs (see "Hebrews"

and "Aryas"), or than were the servants of the first colonists in New

England, Virginia, or the Carolinas. In these primitive households

there were no duties for a chattel, for from the earliest time

agricultural and household occupations were as sacred to the yeomen and

peasants of Latium and Rome as were the domestic hearth, the father,

and the family.

From the left bank of the Tiber to the Volscian mountains, and over the

plains of the Campagna, lived the Latins--the _prisci Latini_. They

were divided into numerous distinct families or clans, which afterward

were the generators of the Roman people. The region where they first

appear, in the most ancient times, was therefore settled by separate

families, and divided into separate townships and villages. These clans

it was which afterward in "the city" constituted the primitive _tribus

rusticæ_ or rural tribes.

The _Ramnes_, _Ramneis_, _Romaneis_, _Romani_ or Romans, the founders

of Rome, were, in all probability, bold rovers and adventurers from

the various tribes and villages of Latium. They lived among the bushes

and groves of the Palatine Mount, and what they acquired by depredation

was common property. These primitive legendary Romans had no use for

slaves; they had no mart in which to sell them, and it is probable that

they neither kidnapped nor enslaved any of the neighboring villagers.

Neither legend nor history fixes positively how long these _Ramnenses_

or Romans persevered in their wild mode of life. The legend very soon

unites them with other settled families, such as the Sabine farmers and

peasantry. Then began the specific organized existence of the Romans.

The whole soil of the Roman community constituted an _ager Romanus_

or _publicus_. Every citizen, as a part of the _populus_ or state,

received therefrom a share of the public land for his private use.

When the Romans extended their dominions by subduing the neighboring

villages and districts, the lands of such districts, their pasturages,

etc., were incorporated into the _ager Romanus_, and the inhabitants

were sometimes obliged to settle in Rome or in lands in its vicinity.

From these originated the plebeians, who, under certain conditions,

received shares or lots in the _ager publicus_ or _Romanus_. The aim

of these primitive wars was neither to kidnap nor enslave the subdued

tribes, nor even to transform them into serfs or Helots, at the utmost

to make them tributaries.

To the legendary Romulus were attributed the regulations or laws which

forbade the massacre or enslavement of the male youth of conquered

villages or districts, and prohibited also the transformation of the

conquered lands into pasturages, and provided that they should be

parcelled into small homesteads for Roman citizens. At first two acres,

and afterward seven, constituted such a civic patrimony or homestead.

It was the abandonment of this law in after ages which generated

slavery and the ruin of the populace.

Only the prisoners made on the battle-field and counted among the

spoils, were sold by the state at public auction: _sub hasta_, "under

the spear," and _sub corona_, "the citizen wearing a crown"--to the

citizens or members of the community. Such prisoner, like all other

vended booty, became a _mancipium_, _res mancipia_, (from _manu

capere_, "taken, caught by the hand.") Such slaves, in all probability,

were not numerous. A more prolific source of slavery was the right to

enslave a debtor for life. The debtor became a _mancipium_; and even

when the right to enslave him was abolished, the legal formality of

catching him or touching by the hand, was maintained.

The power of the father or chief of the household--_patria

potestas_--was limitless, in the precincts of the house, over both the

family and the servants. The father, be he patrician or plebeian, could

sell his son into slavery, but the right was very seldom used. So also,

the father had the right of life and death over all his family and

household. Manumission of slaves was common; it existed from the most

ancient times. The slave could also buy his liberty. Subsequently,

in the last centuries of the republic and under the emperors, a slave

could be emancipated by various positive enactments, and the status of

the manumitted slave often passed through various gradations before

reaching absolute independence. The fortieth book of the Pandects

contains several chapters relating to manumission.

Slavery in History · 第 7 / 15 段