SERVUS (δοῦλος), a slave. (1) GREEK. Slavery existed almost
throughout the whole of Greece; and Aristotle says that a complete
household is that which consists of slaves and freemen, and he
defines a slave to be a living working-tool and possession. None of
the Greek philosophers ever seem to have objected to slavery as a
thing morally wrong; Plato in his perfect state only desires that
no Greeks should be made slaves by Greeks, and Aristotle defends
the justice of the institution on the ground of a diversity of
race, and divides mankind into the free and those who are slaves by
nature; under the latter description he appears to have regarded
all barbarians in the Greek sense of the word, and therefore
considers their slavery justifiable. In the most ancient times
there are said to have been no slaves in Greece, but we find them
in the Homeric poems, though by no means so generally as in later
times. They are usually prisoners taken in war, who serve their
conquerors: but we also read as well of the purchase and sale of
slaves. They were, however, at that time mostly confined to the
houses of the wealthy. There were two kinds of slavery among the
Greeks. One species arose when the inhabitants of a country were
subdued by an invading tribe, and reduced to the condition of serfs
or bondsmen. They lived upon and cultivated the land which their
masters had appropriated to themselves, and paid them a certain
rent. They also attended their masters in war. They could not be
sold out of the country or separated from their families, and could
acquire property. Such were the Helots of Sparta [HELOTES], and
the Penestae of Thessaly [PENESTAE]. The other species of slavery
consisted of domestic slaves acquired by purchase, who were entirely
the property of their masters, and could be disposed of like any
other goods and chattels: these were the δοῦλοι properly so called,
and were the kind of slaves that existed at Athens and Corinth. In
commercial cities slaves were very numerous, as they performed the
work of the artisans and manufacturers of modern towns. In poorer
republics, which had little or no capital, and which subsisted
wholly by agriculture, they would be few: thus in Phocis and Locris
there are said to have been originally no domestic slaves. The
majority of slaves was purchased; few comparatively were born in the
family of the master, partly because the number of female slaves
was very small in comparison with the male, and partly because the
cohabitation of slaves was discouraged, as it was considered cheaper
to purchase than to rear slaves. It was a recognised rule of Greek
national law that the persons of those who were taken prisoners in
war became the property of the conqueror, but it was the practice
for Greeks to give liberty to those of their own nation on payment
of a ransom. Consequently almost all slaves in Greece, with the
exception of the serfs above-mentioned, were barbarians. The chief
supply seems to have come from the Greek colonies in Asia Minor,
which had abundant opportunities of obtaining them from their own
neighbourhood and the interior of Asia. A considerable number of
slaves also came from Thrace, where the parents frequently sold
their children.--At Athens, as well as in other states, there was a
regular slave-market, called the κύκλος, because the slaves stood
round in a circle. They were also sometimes sold by auction, and were
then placed on a stone, as is now done when slaves are sold in the
United States of North America: the same was also the practice in
Rome, whence the phrase _homo de lapide emtus_. [AUCTIO.] At Athens
the number of slaves was far greater than the free population. Even
the poorest citizen had a slave for the care of his household, and
in every moderate establishment many were employed for all possible
occupations, as bakers, cooks, tailors, &c.--Slaves either worked on
their masters’ account or their own (in the latter case they paid
their masters a certain sum a day); or they were let out by their
master on hire, either for the mines or any other kind of labour,
or as hired servants for wages. The rowers on board the ships were
usually slaves, who either belonged to the state or to private
persons, who let them out to the state on payment of a certain sum.
It appears that a considerable number of persons kept large gangs
of slaves merely for the purpose of letting out, and found this
a profitable mode of investing their capital. Great numbers were
required for the mines, and in most cases the mine-lessees would
be obliged to hire some, as they would not have sufficient capital
to purchase as many as they wanted. The rights of possession with
regard to slaves differed in no respect from any other property;
they could be given or taken as pledges. The condition, however, of
Greek slaves was upon the whole better than that of Roman ones, with
the exception perhaps of Sparta, where, according to Plutarch, it is
the best place in the world to be a freeman, and the worst to be a
slave. At Athens especially the slaves seem to have been allowed a
degree of liberty and indulgence which was never granted to them at
Rome. The life and person of a slave at Athens were also protected
by the law: a person who struck or maltreated a slave was liable
to an action; a slave too could not be put to death without legal
sentence. He could even take shelter from the cruelty of his master
in the temple of Theseus, and there claim the privilege of being
sold by him. The person of a slave was, of course, not considered
so sacred as that of a freeman: his offences were punished with
corporal chastisement, which was the last mode of punishment
inflicted on a freeman; he was not believed upon his oath, but
his evidence in courts of justice was always taken with torture.
Notwithstanding the generally mild treatment of slaves in Greece,
their insurrection was not unfrequent: but these insurrections in
Attica were usually confined to the mining slaves, who were treated
with more severity than the others. Slaves were sometimes manumitted
at Athens, though not so frequently as at Rome. Those who were
manumitted (ἀπελεύθεροι) did not become citizens, as they might at
Rome, but passed into the condition of _metoici_. They were obliged
to honour their former master as their patron (προστάτης), and to
fulfil certain duties towards him, the neglect of which rendered them
liable to the δίκη ἀποστασίου, by which they might again be sold
into slavery. Respecting the public slaves at Athens, see DEMOSII.
It appears that there was a tax upon slaves at Athens, which was
probably three oboli a year for each slave.--(2) ROMAN. The Romans
viewed liberty as the natural state, and slavery as a condition which
was contrary to the natural state. The mutual relation of slave and
master among the Romans was expressed by the terms _Servus_ and
_Dominus_; and the power and interest which the dominus had over and
in the slave was expressed by _Dominium_. Slaves existed at Rome
in the earliest times of which we have any record; 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 mechanical 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 labours of the proprietor and of his own family. But as the
territories of the Roman state were extended, the patricians obtained
possession of large estates out of the ager publicus, since it was
the practice of the Romans to deprive a conquered people of part
of their land. These estates probably 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 labour. Through war and
commerce slaves could easily be obtained, and at a cheap rate, and
their number soon became so great, that the poorer class of freemen
was thrown almost entirely out of employment. This state of things
was one of the chief arguments used by Licinius and the Gracchi for
limiting the quantity of public land which a person might possess.
In Sicily, which supplied Rome with so great a quantity of corn,
the number of agricultural slaves was immense: the oppressions to
which they were exposed drove them twice to open rebellion, and
their numbers enabled them to defy for a time the Roman power. The
first of these servile wars began in B.C. 134 and ended in B.C. 132,
and the second commenced in B.C. 102 and lasted almost four years.
Long, however, 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 still continued to be small. Persons
in good circumstances seem usually to have had one only to wait upon
them, who was generally called by the name of his master with the
word _por_ (that is, _puer_) affixed to it, as _Caipor_, _Lucipor_,
_Marcipor_, _Publipor_, _Quintipor_, &c. 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 necessities 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 _Quot pascit servos_, “How many slaves does he keep?” Ten slaves
seem to have been the lowest number which a person could keep in the
age of Augustus, with a proper regard to respectability in society.
The immense number 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. 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 one person to keep. The
mechanical arts, which were formerly in the hands of the clients,
were now entirely exercised by slaves: a natural growth of things,
for where slaves perform certain duties or practise certain arts,
such duties or arts are thought degrading to a freeman. It must not
be forgotten, that the games of the amphitheatre required an immense
number of slaves trained for the purpose. [GLADIATORES.] Like the
slaves in Sicily, the gladiators in Italy rose in B.C. 73 against
their oppressors, and under the able generalship of Spartacus,
defeated a Roman consular army, and were not subdued till B.C. 71,
when 60,000 of them are said to have fallen in battle.--A slave
could not contract a marriage. His cohabitation with a woman was
_contubernium_; and no legal relation between him and his children
was recognized. A slave could have no property. He was not incapable
of acquiring property, but his acquisitions belonged to his master.
Slaves were not only employed in the usual domestic offices and in
the labours of the field, but also as factors or agents for their
masters in the management of business, and as mechanics, artisans,
and in every branch of industry. It may easily be conceived that,
under these circumstances, especially as they were often entrusted
with property to a large amount, there must have arisen a practice
of allowing the slave to consider part of his gains as his own; this
was his _Peculium_, a term also applicable to such acquisitions of
a filius-familias as his father allowed him to consider as his own.
[PATRIA POTESTAS.] According to strict law, the _peculium_ was the
property of the master, but according to usage, it was considered
to be the property of the slave. Sometimes it was agreed between
master and slave, that the slave should purchase his freedom with
his _peculium_ when it amounted to a certain sum. A runaway slave
(_fugitivus_) could not lawfully be received or harboured. The master
was entitled to pursue him wherever he pleased; and it was the duty
of all authorities to give him aid in recovering the 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 called _Fugitivarii_ made it their
business to recover runaway slaves. A person was a slave either
jure gentium or jure civili. Under the republic, the chief supply
of slaves arose from prisoners taken in war, who were sold by the
quaestors with a crown on their heads (_sub corona venire, vendere_),
and usually on the spot where they were taken, as the care of a large
number of captives was inconvenient. Consequently slave-dealers
usually accompanied an army, and frequently after a great battle had
been gained many thousands were sold at once, when the slave-dealers
obtained them for a mere nothing. The slave trade was also carried
on to a great extent, and after the fall of Corinth and Carthage,
Delos was the chief mart for this traffic. When the Cilician pirates
had possession of the Mediterranean, as many as 10,000 slaves are
said to have been imported and sold there in one day. A large number
came from Thrace and the countries in the north of Europe, but the
chief supply was from Africa, and more especially Asia, whence we
frequently read of Phrygians, Lycians, Cappadocians, &c. as slaves.
The trade of slave-dealers (_mangones_) was considered disreputable;
but it was very lucrative, and great fortunes were frequently
realised from it. Slaves were usually sold by auction at Rome. They
were placed either on a raised stone (hence _de lapide emtus_), or a
raised platform (_catasta_), so that every one might see and handle
them, even if they did not wish to purchase them. Purchasers usually
took care to have them stripped naked, for slave-dealers had recourse
to as many tricks to conceal personal defects as the horse-jockeys of
modern times: sometimes purchasers called in the advice of medical
men. Newly imported slaves had their feet whitened with chalk, and
those that came from the East had their ears bored, which we know was
a sign of slavery among many eastern nations. The slave-market, like
all other markets, was under the jurisdiction of the aediles, who
made many regulations by edicts respecting the sale of slaves. The
character of the slave was set forth in a scroll (_titulus_) hanging
around his neck, which was a warranty to the purchaser: the vendor
was bound to announce fairly all his defects, and if he gave a false
account had to take him back within six months from the time of his
sale, or make up to the purchaser what the latter had lost through
obtaining an inferior kind of slave to what had been warranted. The
chief points which the vendor had to warrant, were the health of
the slave, especially freedom from epilepsy, and that he had not a
tendency to thievery, running away, or committing suicide. Slaves
sold without any warranty wore at the time of sale a cap (_pileus_)
upon their head. Slaves newly imported were generally preferred
for common work: those who had served long were considered artful
(_veteratores_); and the pertness and impudence of those born in
their master’s house, called _vernae_, were proverbial. The value
of slaves depended of course upon their qualifications; but under
the empire the increase of luxury and the corruption of morals led
purchasers to pay immense sums for beautiful slaves, or such as
ministered to the caprice or whim of the purchaser. Eunuchs always
fetched a very high price, and Martial speaks of beautiful boys who
sold for as much as 100,000 or 200,000 sesterces each (885_l._ 8_s._
4_d._ and 1770_l._ 16_s._ 8_d._). Slaves who possessed a knowledge
of any art which might bring profit to their owners, also sold for a
large sum. Thus literary men and doctors frequently fetched a high
price, and also slaves fitted for the stage.--Slaves were divided
into many various classes: the first division was into public or
private. The former belonged to the state and public bodies, and
their condition was preferable to that of the common slaves. They
were less liable to be sold, and under less control, than ordinary
slaves: they also possessed the privilege of the testamenti factio
to the amount of one half of their property, which shows that they
were regarded in a different light from other slaves. Public slaves
were employed to take care of the public buildings, and to attend
upon magistrates and priests. A body of slaves belonging to one
person was called _familia_, but two were not considered sufficient
to constitute a _familia_. Private slaves were divided into urban
(_familia urbana_) and rustic (_familia rustica_); but the name of
urban was given to those slaves who served in the villa or country
residence as well as in the town house; so that the words urban and
rustic rather characterised the nature of their occupations than
the place where they served. Slaves were also arranged in certain
classes, which held a higher or a lower rank according to the nature
of their occupation. These classes are _ordinarii_, _vulgares_,
and _mediastini_.--_Ordinarii_ seem to have been those slaves who
had the superintendence of certain parts of the housekeeping. They
were always chosen from those who had the confidence of their
master, and they generally had certain slaves under them. To this
class the _actores_, _procuratores_, and _dispensatores_ belong,
who occur in the familia rustica as well as the familia urbana,
but in the former are almost the same as the _villici_. They were
stewards or bailiffs. To the same class also belong the slaves who
had the charge of the different stores, and who correspond to our
house-keepers and butlers: they are called _cellarii_, _promi_,
_condi_, _procuratores peni_, &c.--_Vulgares_ included the great
body of slaves in a house who had to attend to any particular duty
in the house, and to minister to the domestic wants of their master.
As there were distinct slaves or a distinct slave for almost every
department of household economy, as bakers (_pistores_), cooks
(_coqui_), confectioners (_dulciarii_), picklers (_salmentarii_),
&c., it is unnecessary to mention these more particularly. This
class also included the porters (_ostiarii_), the bed-chamber slaves
(_cubicularii_), the litter-bearers (_lecticarii_), and all personal
attendants of any kind.--_Mediastini_, the name given to slaves
used for any common purpose, was chiefly applied to certain slaves
belonging to the familia rustica.--The treatment of slaves of course
varied greatly, according to the disposition of their masters, but
they were upon the whole, as has been already remarked, treated with
greater severity and cruelty than among the Athenians. Originally the
master could use the slave as he pleased; under the republic the law
does not seem to have protected the person or life of the slave at
all; but the cruelty of masters was to some extent restrained under
the empire by various enactments. In early times, when the number of
slaves was small, they were treated with more indulgence, and more
like members of the family: they joined their masters in offering up
prayers and thanksgivings to the gods, and partook of their meals in
common with their masters, though not at the same table with them,
but upon benches (_subsellia_) placed at the foot of the lectus.
But with the increase of numbers and of luxury among masters, the
ancient simplicity of manners was changed: a certain quantity of
food was allowed them (_dimensum_ or _demensum_), which was granted
to them either monthly (_menstruum_) or daily (_diarium_). Their
chief food was the corn called _far_, of which either four or five
modii were granted them a month, or one Roman pound (_libra_) a
day. They also obtained an allowance of salt and oil: Cato allowed
his slaves a sextarius of oil a month and a modius of salt a year.
They also got a small quantity of wine, with an additional allowance
on the Saturnalia and Compitalia, and sometimes fruit, but seldom
vegetables. Butcher’s meat seems to have been hardly ever given
them. Under the republic they were not allowed to serve in the army,
though after the battle of Cannae, when the state was in imminent
danger, 8000 slaves were purchased by the state for the army, and
subsequently manumitted on account of their bravery. The offences
of slaves were punished with severity, and frequently with the
utmost barbarity. One of the mildest punishments was the removal
from the familia urbana to the rustica, where they were obliged to
work in chains or fetters. They were frequently beaten with sticks
or scourged with the whip. Runaway slaves (_fugitivi_) and thieves
(_fures_) were branded on the forehead with a mark (_stigma_),
whence they are said to be _notati_ or _inscripti_. Slaves were also
punished by being hung up by their hands with weights suspended to
their feet, or by being sent to work in the Ergastulum or Pistrinum.
[ERGASTULUM.] The carrying of the furca was a very common mode of
punishment. [FURCA.] The toilet of the Roman ladies was a dreadful
ordeal to the female slaves, who were often barbarously punished by
their mistresses for the slightest mistake in the arrangement of
the hair or a part of the dress. Masters might work their slaves
as many hours in the day as they pleased, but they usually allowed
them holidays on the public festivals. At the festival of Saturnus,
in particular, special indulgences were granted to all slaves, of
which an account is given under SATURNALIA. There was no distinctive
dress for slaves. It was once proposed in the senate to give slaves
a distinctive costume, but it was rejected, since it was considered
dangerous to show them their number. Male slaves were not allowed
to wear the toga or bulla, nor females the stola, but otherwise
they were dressed nearly in the same way as poor people, in clothes
of a dark colour (_pullati_) and slippers (_crepidae_). The rights
of burial, however, were not denied to slaves, for, as the Romans
regarded slavery as an institution of society, death was considered
to put an end to the distinction between slaves and freemen. Slaves
were sometimes even buried with their masters, and we find funeral
inscriptions addressed to the Dii Manes of slaves (_Dis Manibus_).