[17]
---- _Adsit
Regula peccatis quæ pœnas irroget æquas,
Nec Scuticâ dignum horribili sectere Flagello;
Nam, ut Ferulâ cædas meritum majora subire
Verbera, non vereor._
Lib. I. Sat. I. v. 117.
[18]
_Sectus flagellis hic Triumviralibus
Præconis ad fastidium._
Lib. V. Ode IV. v. 11, 12.
[19]
_Ibericis peruste funibus latus._
Lib. V. Ode IV. v. 3.
[20]
_Erunt Bucædæ invitò, potius quàm ego sim Restio._
Mostell. Act. IV. Sc. II.
[21] _Verberones_, _Subverbustos_.--The latter word literally
signifies, _burnt with blows_: a figurative expression commonly used
among the Romans, when they spoke of flagellations: thus, the words
_flagrum_ and _flagellum_, had been derived from the word _flagrare_,
which signifies _to burn_, and Horace, in a passage that will be
quoted in page 66, says, _to be burnt_ with rods (_virgis uri_) for,
_to be lashed_.
[22]
_Ad sua qui domitos deduxit flagra Quirites._
Juv. Sat. X. v. 99.
This notion of the Romans, of looking upon a scourge as a
characteristic appendage of dominion, was so general among them, as
is observed above, that they moreover supposed the gods themselves
to be supplied with whips; and even Venus had also been thought to
be furnished with one. In consequence of this supposition, Horace,
who, as we may conclude from thence, had cause to be dissatisfied
with some trick his Mistress had played him, or perhaps only with her
impertinence in general, desires Venus to chastise her with her whip,
“Do, Queen, (says he, addressing Venus) do, for once, give arrogant
Chloe a touch with your sublime whip.”
_Regina, sublimi flagello
Tange Chloën semel arrogantem._
Od. 26. Lib. III. ad Ven.
[23] The absolute dominion possessed by Masters over the persons
of their slaves, led them to use a singular severity in the
government of them. So frequently were flagellations the lot of the
latter, that appellations and words of reproach drawn from that
kind of punishment, were, as hath been above observed, commonly
used to denominate them; and expressions of this kind occur in the
politest writers: thus, we find in the Plays of Terence, an Author
particularly celebrated for his politeness and strict observance
of decorum, Slaves frequently called by the words _Verberones_,
_Flagriones_, or others to the same effect.
As for Plautus, who had been the Servant of a Baker, and who was
much acquainted with every thing that related to Slaves, and their
flagellations in particular, he has filled his scenes with nicknames
of Slaves, drawn from this latter circumstance; and they are almost
continually called in his Plays, _flagritribæ_ (a verbis, _flagrum_ &
_terere_) _plagipatidæ_, _ulmitribæ_, &c. besides the appellations of
_Bucædæ_ and _Restiones_, above-mentioned.
Sometimes the flagellations of Slaves, or the fear they entertained
of incurring them, served Plautus as incidents for the conduct of
his plots; thus, in his _Epidicus_, a Slave who is the principal
character in the Play, concludes upon a certain occasion, that his
Master has discovered his whole scheme, because he has spied him,
in the morning, purchasing a new scourge at the shop in which they
were sold. The same flagellations in general, have moreover been
an inexhaustible fund of pleasantry for Plautus. In one place, for
instance, a Slave, intending to laugh at a fellow-slave, asks him
how much he thinks he weighs, when he is suspended naked, by his
hands, to the beam, with an hundred weight (_centupondium_) tied to
his feet; which was a precaution taken, as Commentators inform us,
in order to prevent the Slave who was flagellated from kicking the
Man (_Virgator_) whose office it was to perform the operation. And
in another place, Plautus, alluding to the thongs of ox-leather with
which whips were commonly made, introduces a Slave engaged in deep
reflection on the surprizing circumstance of “dead bullocks, that
make incursions upon living Men.”
_Vivos homines mortui incursant boves!_
But it was not always upon their Slaves only that Masters, among the
Romans, inflicted the punishment of flagellation: they sometimes
found means to serve in the same manner the young Men of free
condition, who insinuated themselves into their houses, with a
design to court their Wives. As the most favourable disguise on such
occasions, was to be dressed in Slaves clothes, because a Man thus
habited was enabled to get into the house, and go up and down without
being noticed, Rakes engaged in amorous pursuits, usually chose to
make use of it; but, when the Husband either happened to discover
them, or had had previous information of the appointment given by his
faithful Spouse, he feigned to mistake the Man for a run-away Slave,
or some strange Slave who had got into his house to commit theft, and
treated him accordingly. Indeed the opportunity was a most favourable
one for revenge; and if to this consideration we add that of the
severe temper of the Romans, and the jealous disposition that has
always prevailed in that country, we shall easily conclude that such
an opportunity, when obtained, was seldom suffered to escape, and
that many a Roman Spark, caught in the above disguise, and engaged
in the laudable pursuit of seducing his neighbour’s wife, has, with
a _centupondium_ to his feet, been sadly rewarded for his ingenuity.
A misfortune of that kind actually befell Sallust the Historian. He
was caught in a familiar intercourse with Faustina, wife to Milo,
and daughter of the Dictator Sylla. The husband caused him to be
soundly lashed (_loris bene cæsum_); nor did he release him till he
had made him pay a considerable sum of money. The fact is related
by Aulus Gellius, who had extracted it from Varro. To it was very
probably owing the violent part which Sallust afterwards took against
Milo, while the latter was under prosecution for slaying the Tribune
Clodius, and the tumult he raised on that occasion, which prevented
Cicero from delivering the speech he had prepared.
An allusion is made to the above practices in one of Horace’s
Satyrs. He supposes in it, that his Slave, availing himself of
the opportunity of the _Saturnalia_, to speak his mind freely to
him, gives him a lecture on the bad courses in which he thinks him
engaged, and uses, among others, the following arguments.
‘When you have stripped off the marks of your dignity, your
equestrian ring, and your whole Roman dress, and from a Man invested
with the office of Judge, shew yourself at once under the appearance
of the Slave Dama; disgraced as you are, and hiding your perfumed
head under your cloak, you are not the Man whom you feign to be:
you are at least introduced full of terror, and your whole frame
shakes through the struggles of two opposite passions. In fact, what
advantage is it to you, whether you are cut to pieces with rods, or
slaughtered with iron weapons?’
_Tu cum projectis insignibus, annulo Equestri
Romanoque habitu, prodis ex judice Dama,
Turpis, odoratum caput obscurante lacernâ
Non es quod simulas; metuens induceris, atque
Altercante libidinibus tremis ossa pavore.
Quid refert uri virgis, ferroque necari?_
Lib. II. Sat. 7.
The above uncontrouled power of inflicting punishments on their
Slaves, enjoyed by Masters in Rome, was at last abused by them to
the greatest degree. The smallest faults committed in their families
by Slaves, such as breaking glasses, seasoning dishes too much, or
the like, exposed them to grievous punishments; and it even was no
unusual thing for Masters (as we may judge from the description of
_Trimalcion’s_ entertainment in the Satire of Petronius) to order
such of their Slaves as had been guilty of faults of the above kind,
to be stripped, and whipped in the presence of their guests, when
they happened to entertain any at their houses.
Women in particular seem to have abused this power of flagellation
in a strange manner; which caused express provisions to be made,
at different times, in order to restrain them; of which the Canon
above-quoted is an instance. It was often sufficient, to induce the
Roman Ladies to cause their Slaves to be whipped, that they were
dissatisfied with the present state of their own charms; or, as
Juvenal expresses it, that their nose displeased them: and when they
happened to fancy themselves neglected by their husbands, then indeed
their Slaves fared badly. This latter observation of Juvenal, Dryden,
in his translation of that Author’s Satires, has expressed by the
following lines:
‘For, if over night the husband has been slack, }
Or counterfeited sleep, or turn’d his back, }
Next day, be sure, the servants go to wrack.’ }
Here follows the literal translation of the passage of Juvenal, in
which he describes in a very lively manner, the havock which an
incensed Woman usually made on the above occasion. “If her husband
has, the night before, turned his back on her, woe to her waiting
Woman; the dressing Maids lay down their tunicks; the errand Slave is
charged with having returned too late; the straps break on the back
of some; others redden under the lash of the leather scourge, and
others, of the twisted parchment.”
_Si nocte maritus
Aversus jacuit, periit Libraria; ponunt
Cosmetæ tunicas; tardè venisse Liburnus
Dicitur; hic frangit ferulas; rubet ille flagellis,
Hic scuticâ._
Juv. Sat. VI.
The wantonness of power was carried still farther by the Roman
Ladies, if we may credit the same Juvenal. It was a customary thing
with several among them, when they proposed to have their hair
dressed both with nicety and expedition, to have the dressing Maid
who was charged with that care, stripped naked to the waist, ready
for flagellation, in case she became guilty of any fault or mistake,
in performing her task. The following is the passage in Juvenal on
that subject. “For, if she has determined to be dressed more nicely
than usual, and is in haste, being expected in the public gardens,
the unfortunate Psechas then dresses her head, with her own hair in
the utmost disorder, and her shoulders and breasts bare. Why is that
ringlet too high?--The leather-thongs instantly punish the crime of a
hair, and an ill-shaped curl.”
_Nam si constituit solitoque decentiùs optat
Ornari & properat, jamque expectatur in hortis,
Componit crinem, laceratis ipsa capillis,
Nuda humeros, Psechas infœlix, nudisque mamillis:
Altior hic quare cicinnus? taurea punit
Continuò flexi crimen, facinusque capilli._
These abuses which Masters, in Rome, made of the power they possessed
over their Slaves, were at last carried by them to such a pitch,
either by making them wantonly suffer death, or torturing them in
numberless different ways, that, in the beginning of the reign of the
Emperors, it was found necessary to restrain their licence.
Under the reign of Claudius (for it is not clear whether any
provision to that effect was made under Augustus) it was ordained,
that Masters who forsook their Slaves when sick, should lose
all right over them, in case they recovered; and that those who
deliberately put them to death, should be banished from Rome.
Under the Emperor Adrian, the cruelties exercised by _Umbricia_, a
Roman Lady, over her female Slaves, caused new laws to be made on
that subject, as well as the former ones to be put in force, and
Umbricia was, by a _rescript_ of the Emperor, banished for five
years. (_l. 2. in fine_, Dig. _L. I. t. 6._)
New laws to the same ends were likewise made under the following
Emperors, among which Civilians make particular mention of a
_constitution_ of Antonius Pius (_Divus Pius_); and in subsequent
times, the Church also employed its authority to prevent the like
excesses, as we may see from the Canon above-recited (_Si quæ
domina_, &c.) which was framed in the Council held at Elvira, a small
Town in Spain, that has been since destroyed. But the disorder was
of such a nature as was not to be cured so long as the custom itself
of slavery was allowed to subsist; and it has been remedied at last,
only by the thorough abolition of an usage which was a continual
insult on Humanity: an advantage which (to be, once at least, very
serious in the course of this learned and useful Work) we are
indebted for, to the establishment of Christianity, whatever other
evils certain Writers may reproach it with having occasioned.