There were people who were against slavery, but they were the exact equivalent of today’s vegans
It is crazy how Whitewashed the practice of roman slavery has become
Submitted 1 day ago by 
Grumpus_Maximus@thelemmy.club to historymemes@piefed.social
https://thelemmy.club/pictrs/image/05641917-655c-425a-88ed-897f8679fc41.jpeg
Comments
plutopos@lemmy.zip 19 hours ago
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 21 hours ago
Yes but at least they were not poor and had better life than that and some could buy their way out of slavery…
PugJesus@piefed.social 20 hours ago
Considering that purchasing their way out of slavery was an extremely high priority for most slaves, even when it left them impoverished, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that it was not a better life than being poor.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 20 hours ago
Maybe they were just bad at prioritizing?
Schmoo@slrpnk.net 22 hours ago
Historical revisionists like to find exceptions and present them as if they were the norm. There was a particular subset of slaves who served wealthy families as teachers, cooks, nannies, etc. that enjoyed a decent standard of living and were often considered a part of the family. This kind of slave contract was closer to being a sort of patronage and people with high social status but little wealth often sold themselves to wealthy families they had social connections to. The philosopher Diogenes did this and it shaped the way he viewed Roman slavery (he remarked that slaves should not try to free themselves because it’s worse to be poor; easy for him to say in his position as a well-liked and respected teacher serving a wealthy family). This kind of arrangement made up an incredibly small minority of Roman slaves.
SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org 21 hours ago
Check your privilege, Diogenes!
Quill7513@slrpnk.net 20 hours ago
Uncle Diogenes ass motherfucker
PugJesus@piefed.social 21 hours ago
This kind of slave contract was closer to being a sort of patronage and people with high social status but little wealth often sold themselves to wealthy families they had social connections to. The philosopher Diogenes did this and it shaped the way he viewed Roman slavery
That would be remarkable considering that Diogenes of Sinope was enslaved after being captured by pirates and sold to fellow Greeks.
Schmoo@slrpnk.net 20 hours ago
You probably know more about it than me, I’m just repeating it how I heard it. My understanding is that Diogenes sold himself to a wealthy family who admired him for his philosophy and wanted him to teach their kids. This was before he decided to live on the street in a clay pot, and after he fled the previous city he lived in due to being caught committing fraud (counterfeiting coins).
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
atleast
Next
PugJesus@piefed.social 1 day ago
This is such a bizarre take on both ends that I struggle with where to begin.
MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website 1 day ago
At least Justinian was on the right track when he wrote that slavery is wrong when he rewrote the laws on slavery.
- Freedom, from which men are said to be free, is the natural power of doing what we each please, unless prevented by force or by law.
- Slavery is an institution of the law of nations, by which one man is made the property of another, contrary to natural right.
So close yet so far away haha
PugJesus@piefed.social 1 day ago
That’s not rewriting anything. That’s a long-standing principle of Roman law.
MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website 19 hours ago
I believe you but do you have a link so I can use that quote next time?
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”
PugJesus@piefed.social 1 day ago
Romans, and Roman law, didn’t regard ’natural’ and ‘unnatural’ as moral categories.
NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
I mean, I think future generations will judge us harshly.
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.
Gladaed@feddit.org 1 day ago
The lower one is just as wrong. With a large part of population being slaves, prostitution is not a typical slave job.
Doesn’t mean it was all sunshine and roses, but minority ruled states tend to not torture the majority population for their own benefit.
MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 1 day ago
From Wikipedia:
Most prostitutes were female slaves or freedwomen. The balance of voluntary to forced prostitution can only be guessed at. Privately held slaves were considered property under Roman law, so it was legal for an owner to employ them as prostitutes.
In most circumstances, slave prostitutes could be freely and indiscriminately bought, used and sold. Some were slaves of slave pimps.
Sexual services were routinely offered by the slave attendants in Roman baths (*thermae*) where both male and female patrons were serviced by both male and female attendants
Sometimes, however, the seller of a female slave attached a ne serva prostituatur clause to the ownership papers to prevent her being forcefully prostituted once sold; if the new owner or any owner thereafter used her as a prostitute she would be freed. This may have been an attempt to conserve what honor was possible for the slave herself, or to remove any possibility of dishonour from the vendor, who might otherwise be thought to have played the part of a pimp, and contravened one of the most fundamental of Roman norms.
Under Hadrian, slaves were protected from being sold to pimps or gladiator schools “unless for good reason”. Septimius Severus made protection of slaves from forced prostitution a duty of the urban praetor
Seems like it was common enough that there clauses and later laws about it. ~200 years if you want to say Septimius Severus put an end to it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_ancient_Rome
People did regularly torture their slaves, even if you’re not considering the act of slavery itself torture. Do you have a reason to suggest that they did not?
Gladaed@feddit.org 1 day ago
Square Rectangle, rectangle square.
Not all slaves were abused in that way but most workers in said jobs were slaves or freed people.
phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
They seem to torture them just because. In pretty much any minority ruled states the majority were/are just generally abused. See South Africa, the US, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, India (castes), etc etc.
Gladaed@feddit.org 1 day ago
They also do a lot of labor. There is more to their existence than the worst of abuses. Looking at slavery and minority rules is abhorrent from a humanitarian perspective, but there is more to daily life than the worst of the worst.
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
I love these posts, since it’s controversial, the comments were full of interesting discussion, so much better than regular doom scrolling.