Comment on It is crazy how Whitewashed the practice of roman slavery has become

MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• PugJesus@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  That’s not rewriting anything. That’s a long-standing principle of Roman law.

  original

  • MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    I believe you but do you have a link so I can use that quote next time?

    original

    • PugJesus@piefed.social ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/D1_Scott.htm

      1. Ulpianus, Institutes, Book I.

      Manumissions also, are part of the Law of Nations, for manumission is dismissal by the hand, that is to say the bestowal of freedom; for as long as anyone is in servitude he is subject to the hand and to authority, but, once manumitted, he is liberated from that authority. This takes its origin from the Law of Nations; since, according to natural law all persons were born free, and manumission was not known, as slavery itself was unknown; but after slavery was admitted by the Law of Nations, the benefit of manumission followed, and while men were designated by one natural name there arose three different kinds under the Law of Nations, that is to say freemen, and, in distinction to them, slaves, and as a third class, freedmen, or those who had ceased to be slaves.

      Ulpian, quoted here, was active around ~215 AD, and like most Roman jurists, was involved in expressing pre-established legal principles of Roman law.

      Florentius, who your original quote cites, is a 2nd century AD jurist, for that matter.

      I know Gaius, another 2nd century AD jurist, stated the same thing, but I’m trying to dig up the exact quote. I might give up, tbh, I don’t feel like pawing through my actual books to find the citation and search engines are just slop anymore.

      original

      • MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Thanks fam, I learned something new 👌

        original
• Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  “this is wrong, but also really useful so we’re going to do it and pretend to feel bad”

  original

  • PugJesus@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Romans, and Roman law, didn’t regard ’natural’ and ‘unnatural’ as moral categories.

    original
  • NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    I mean, I think future generations will judge us harshly.

    original

    • SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Can’t blame them. When billionaires exist, while hundreds of millions don’t have enough to eat, there’s plenty to judge.

      original
  • Brummbaer@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    That’s why I hate this idea that you can’t judge things by “modern” standards. People always knew it was wring but decided to do it anyway.

    original

    • PugJesus@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      I really don’t think you understand pre-modern societies or pre-modern ethics.

      original

      • Brummbaer@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I shouldn’t have used the word modern here, but I’m inclined to accept that there are some universal principles that rationally make sense, like not enslaving other people against their will or abolishing hierarchies.

        This makes even more sense, if you assume that sympathy is a basic human function. To break it down to a personal level, it makes even less sense to keep slaves, for example, if you are able to feel with them.

        But of course, everyone who acts in history has their reasons to rationally explain and justify their current set of morals, I’m not disputing that.

        original

        • -> View More Comments
      • okwhateverdude@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        PJ rocking up on a wild history take? You know it is gonna be spicy.

        original

        • -> View More Comments