Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
2022.
Bibliography.
Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies,
Vol. 64,
Issue. 2,
p.
105.
Article contents
PUBLIC SLAVES IN ROME: ‘PRIVILEGED’ OR NOT?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2020
Extract
In the Roman world, slavery played a crucial role. Besides private slaves, owned by individual masters, and—from the beginning of the Principate—imperial slaves, who were the property of the emperors, there were also the so-called public slaves: non-free individuals who were owned by a community, such as the Roman people as a whole in Rome (serui publici populi Romani), or the citizen body of a colony or a municipium in Italy or in the provinces (serui ciuitatum). Public slaves in Rome were employed for numerous public services and acted under the authority of the Senate as assistants to public magistrates, officers or priests. Similarly, in Italian and in provincial cities, they juridically depended on the decisions of local councils and performed various activities within the civic administration, beholden to the magistrates.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 2020
Footnotes
This paper is part of the ‘Serui Publici: Everybody's Slaves (SPES)’ project, which was based at Newcastle University, and received funding under a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020–MSCA–IF–2015) under grant agreement no. 704716. I am very grateful to A. Russell, F. Santangelo, A. Wallace-Hadrill and G. Woolf for their useful comments on previous oral or written versions of this paper. Remarks and criticism from the anonymous reviewer and from B. Gibson proved invaluable.
References
1 The main studies of public slavery in the Roman world are Halkin, L., Les esclaves publics chez les Romains (Brussels, 1897; repr. 1965)Google Scholar; Eder, W., Servitus publica. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung, Entwicklung und Funktion der öffentlichen Sklaverei in Rom (Wiesbaden, 1980)Google Scholar; Weiss, A., Sklave der Stadt. Untersuchungen zur öffentlichen Sklaverei in den Städten des römischen Reiches (Stuttgart, 2004)Google Scholar.
2 Mommsen, T., Römisches Staatsrecht (Leipzig, 1887 3), 1.323; cf. 2.836Google Scholar.
3 Halkin (n. 1), 112, 120, 135.
4 Buckland, W.W., The Roman Law of Slavery. The Condition of the Slave in Private Law from Augustus to Justinian (Cambridge, 1908), 321Google Scholar.
5 Barrow, R.H., Slavery in the Roman Empire (London, 1928), 130–2Google Scholar.
6 Boulvert, G., Esclaves et affranchis imperiaux sous le Haut-Empire romain. Rôle politique et administratif (Naples, 1970), 11Google Scholar; Weaver, P.R.C., Familia Caesaris. A Social Study of the Emperor's Freedmen and Slaves (Cambridge, 1972), 215CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 Rouland, N., ‘A propos des serui publici populi Romani’, Chiron 7 (1977), 261–79, at 276Google Scholar.
8 Eder (n. 1), 122. Analogously, Rouland (n. 7) was sceptical about the possibility that public slaves were subject to the obligation of operae.
9 See n. 76 below.
10 Cf. Morabito, M., Les réalités de l'esclavage d'après le Digeste (Paris, 1981), 177Google Scholar; Fear, A.T., ‘Ciues Latini, serui publici and the Lex Irnitana’, RIDA 37 (1990), 149–66, at 163Google Scholar; Neila, J.F. Rodríguez, ‘Apparitores y personal servil en la administración local de la Bética’, SHHA 1 (1997), 197–228, at 223Google Scholar; Silvestrini, M., ‘Gli arcarii delle città’, MEFRA 117 (2005), 541–54, at 550CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
11 Weiss (n. 1), 163–79.
12 Zlinszky, J., ‘Gemeineigentum am Beispiel der serui publici’, in Finkenauer, T. (ed.), Sklaverei und Freilassung im römischen Recht. Symposium für Hans Josef Wieling zum 70. Geburstag (Berlin and Heidelberg, 2006), 317–26, at 323CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13 Sudi-Guiral, F., ‘La familia publica d'Ostie’, MEFRA 119 (2007), 421–6, at 426CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. also Gervasoni, M. Cébeillac, Caldelli, M.L. and Zevi, F., Épigraphie latine (Paris, 2006), 298Google Scholar.
14 Schumacher, L., ‘Slaves in Roman society’, in Peachin, M. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Social Relations in the Roman World (Oxford, 2011), 589–608, at 598Google Scholar.
15 Gamauf, R., ‘Slavery: social position and legal capacity’, in Plessis, P.J. Du, Ando, C. and Tuori, K. (edd.), The Oxford Handbook of Roman Law and Society (Oxford, 2016), 386–401, at 387 n. 9Google Scholar.
16 Louis, P., Le travail dans le monde romain (Paris, 1912), 61Google Scholar; Delgado, J.M. Serrano, ‘Sceleratissimus seruus publicus: un episodio de la vida municipal afectando a la familia publica’, in Homenaje a José Ma Blásquez, 3 vols. (Madrid, 1996), 3.331–44, at 344Google Scholar; Bruun, C., ‘La familia publica di Ostia antica’, in Caldelli, M.L., Gregori, G.L. and Orlandi, S. (edd.), Epigrafia 2006. Atti della XVIe Rencontre sur l’Épigraphie in onore di Silvio Panciera con altri contributi di colleghi, allievi e collaboratori (Rome, 2008), 537–56, at 549–53Google Scholar.
17 Bruun (n. 16), 552–3.
18 Weiss (n. 1), 177–9. See also Fabre, G., ‘Mobilité et stratification: le cas des serviteurs impériaux’, in Frézouls, E. (ed.), La mobilité sociale dans le monde romain. Actes du colloque. Strasbourg, novembre 1988 (Strasbourg, 1992), 123–59, at 157Google Scholar; Serrano Delgado (n. 16), 343.
19 Specific studies on public slavery in Rome are Halkin (n. 1), 15–136 and Eder (n. 1). At least 142 inscriptions from Rome (mentioning more than 154 public slaves) could be taken into account by consulting the epigraphic source lists of Halkin (n. 1), 231–2 and Eder (n. 1), 2 n. 11, 175–7, as well as Table 1 in Luciani, F., ‘Public slaves in Rome and in the cities of the Latin West: new additions to the epigraphic corpus’, in Noreña, C., Papazarkadas, N. (edd.), From Document to History: Epigraphic Insights into the Greco-Roman World (Leiden, 2019), 279–305, at 283–4Google Scholar. A complete list is now available at https://research.ncl.ac.uk/spes/. All this epigraphic evidence dates from the first century b.c. to the third century a.d.
20 CIL 12.593, line 82; cf. Crawford, M.H. (ed.), Roman Statutes, 2 vols. (London, 1996), 1.366, 1.375Google Scholar. For the problems related to the date and nature of this legal text, see Sisani, S., ‘Le istituzioni municipali: legislazione e prassi tra il I secolo a.C. e l'età flavia’, in Colognesi, L. Capogrossi, Cascio, E. Lo and Scandone, E. Tassi (edd.), L'Italia dei Flavi (Atti del Convegno, Roma, 4–5 ottobre 2012) (Rome, 2016), 9–55, at 29–47Google Scholar with previous bibliography.
21 Tac. Hist. 1.43. Cf. also Tac. Hist. 3.74 and Suet. Dom. 1: again, in a.d. 68, during the war between Flavius Sabinus and Vitellius, the future emperor Domitian was hidden in the contubernium of the aedituus of the Capitol; the social status of this attendant is not specified by the two authors, but it is possible to infer that he was a public slave. On this, see also Halkin (n. 1), 68–9.
22 Archaeological traces of rooms found under the Forum of Nerva, in a public building dating to the Late Republican Age, have been recently interpreted as chambers for public slaves even though no firm evidence survives: see Rinaldi, A., ‘Preesistenze tardo repubblicane di carattere abitativo sotto la pavimentazione del foro di Nerva (con appendice di G. Maglie)’, Scienze dell'Antichità 21 (2015), 3–32, at 23Google Scholar.
23 Cf. the contributions of J. Edmondson (‘Slavery and the Roman family’) and George, M. (‘Slavery and Roman material culture’) in Bradley, K. and Cartledge, P. (edd.), The Cambridge World History of Slavery (Cambridge, 2011), 1.337–61, at 1.343–6, and 1.385–413, at 388Google Scholar respectively.
24 Eder (n. 1), 107–8.
25 Pliny's young slaves also slept together in the paedagogium: Plin. Ep. 7.27.13.
26 Gonzalez, J. and Crawford, M.H., ‘The Lex Irnitana: a new copy of the Flavian municipal law’, JRS 76 (1986), 147–243, at 174Google Scholar (chapter 79, tablet IXA, lines 5–6).
27 Sen. Ben. 3.21; Seneca regarded as benefits either the fact that a master was indulgent to a slave or that he gave the slave the possibility of being educated like a freeborn person. Cf. also Epictetus, Diss. 4.1.37; Dig. 7.1.15.2 (Ulp. 18 Ad Sab.).
28 See also Halkin (n. 1), 15–16, 108, 140–1; Luciani, F., ‘Cittadini come domini, cittadini come patroni. Rapporti tra serui publici e città prima e dopo la manomissione’, in Dondin-Payre, M. and Tran, N. (edd.), Esclaves et maîtres dans le monde romain. Expressions épigraphiques de leurs relations (Rome, 2017), 45–64, at 47Google Scholar.
29 Frontin. Aq. 2.100.
30 Frontin. Aq. 2.118.
31 Rodgers, R.H. (ed.), Frontinus. De aquaeductu urbis Romae (Cambridge, 2004), 302Google Scholar.
32 Eder (n. 1), 108–9. See also Rodgers (n. 31), 271. It is known that public slaves in most cities of Bithynia drew a yearly emolument too; cf. Plin. Ep. 10.31–2.
33 Dig. 16.2.19 (Pap. 11 resp.).
34 Cf., for example, Sen. Ep. 80.7. For the peculium of slaves, see Watson, A., Roman Slave Law (Baltimore, 1987), 90–101Google Scholar.
35 Ulp. Fragm. 20.16. On this passage, see Avenarius, M., Der pseudo-ulpianische liber singularis regularum. Entstehung, Eigenart und Überlieferung einer hochklassischen Juristenschrift. Analyse, Neuedition und deutsche Übersetzung (Göttingen, 2005), 394–5Google Scholar.
36 CIL 6.2354.
37 CIL 6.2345 = ILS 1975; cf. CIL 6, page 3828.
38 On the municipal slaves’ uicarii, see Nicoletti, A., ‘Serui publici e uicarii in C.I. 7, 9, 1’, in Giuffrè, V. (ed.), Sodalitas. Scritti in onore di Antonio Guarino, 9 vols. (Naples, 1984–5), 3.1483–7Google Scholar; Merola, F. Reduzzi, Seruo parere. Studi sulla condizione giuridica degli schiavi vicari e dei sottoposti a schiavi nelle esperienze greca e romana (Naples, 1990), 176–9Google Scholar.
39 Cf. Halkin (n. 1), 220; Weiss (n. 1), 170–1.
40 Half of the inscriptions mentioning public slaves with partners (and/or family) (25 out of 50) are made either by the public slaves themselves or together with their partners.
41 See also Herrmann-Otto, E., Ex ancilla natus. Untersuchungen zu den ‘hausgeborenen’ Sklaven und Sklavinnen im Westen des römischen Kaiserreiches (Stuttgart, 1994), 201Google Scholar.
42 Eder (n. 1), 112.
43 Treggiari, S., Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian (Oxford, 1991), 53Google Scholar.
44 CIL 6.2335 = ILS 1967; cf. CIL 6, page 3828 (Asinia C. f. Sabina).
45 CIL 6.2329 = ILS 4992; cf. CIL 6, pages 3318, 3828. See also Rüpke, J. and Glock, A., Fasti Sacerdotum. A Prosopography of Pagan, Jewish and Christian Religious Officials in the City of Rome, 300 b.c. to a.d. 499 (Oxford, 2008), 838 no. 2698Google Scholar; Terme di Diocleziano. La collezione epigrafica (Milan, 2012), 268 no. V.5.
46 Weaver (n. 6), 295.
47 Cf. Paulus, Sententiae 2.19.6.
48 Gai. Inst. 1.80. See also Weaver, P.A., ‘The status of children in mixed marriage’, in Rawson, B. (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome (London and Sydney, 1986), 145–69, at 145–7Google Scholar.
49 CIL 6.2310 = 6.4462, cf. page 3318 (early first century a.d.); CIL 6.2311 (early first century a.d.); CIL 6.2321 (early first century a.d.); CIL 6.2363, cf. page 3318 (second century a.d.); CIL 6.2374, cf. page 3318 (first century a.d.); CIL 6.37176 = ILS 9050 = AE 1910, 70 (second century a.d.). See also Herrmann-Otto (n. 41), 200–5. The case recorded in CIL 6.2316 (early second century a.d.) is quite exceptional: Helius Afinianus, a public slave attending on the augurs, and his partner Sextia Psyche set up a funerary monument to Vivenia Helias, daughter of Lucius, mentioned as the ‘most dutiful daughter’. Apparently, she was given as a cognomen a feminine form of her father's name, but she did not take her mother's nomen, as we would expect; moreover, the presence of the patronymic is inexplicable. Another unusual case is CIL 6.2345 = ILS 1975, cf. CIL 6, page 3828 (second century a.d.): Laetus, a workman of the public water supply, and Flavia Dionysia, presumably his partner, set up this monument to his daughter Aulia Argyris, who did not take her mother's nomen.
50 The word coniunx is used in 33 out of the 50 inscriptions that mention public slaves with partners in Rome. The term maritus is attested in two cases, with uxor in only one case. Expressions such as concubina or contubernalis, which would have been the more lawful ones, are recorded once each.
51 Gai. Inst. 1.84. Cf. Weaver, P.A., ‘Gaius i. 84 and the S. C. Claudianum’, CR 14 (1986), 137–9, at 137Google Scholar. For the senatus consultum Claudianum, see Buongiorno, P., Senatus consulta Claudianis temporibus facta. Una palingenesi delle deliberazioni senatorie dell'età di Claudio (41–54 d.C.) (Naples, 2010), 311–25Google Scholar.
52 CIL 6.2343 (first century a.d.; the child is mentioned as a uerna); CIL 6.2357 = CLE 838, cf. CIL 6, page 3318 = ILS 8204 (first century a.d.); CIL 6.2361 (second century a.d.; the child is mentioned as a uerna). They might have been born before their mothers were manumitted. Cf. Herrmann-Otto (n. 41), 202–5. Rouland (n. 7), 265 n. 22 assumed that public slaves were exempt from the provisions of the senatus consultum Claudianum.
53 Schmidt, M., Spiegelbilder römischer Lebenswelt. Inschriftliches aus dem Archiv des Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum ausgewählt und kommentiert / Reflections of Roman Life and Living: Clichés from the Archive of the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Selected and with a Commentary (Berlin and New York, 2003), 28 no. 12Google Scholar (late first century a.d.). On this inscription and its implications, see Edmondson, J., ‘Glimpses inside the familia publica at Augusta Emerita (Mérida)’, in Monils, J. Carbonell and Pascual, H. Gimeno (edd.), A Baete ad fluuium Anam: Cultura epigráfica en la Bética Occidental y territorios fronterizos. Homenaje al profesor José Luis Moralejo Álvarez (Alcalá de Henares, 2016), 65–81Google Scholar; Luciani (n. 19), 298; Luciani, F. and Urbanová, D., ‘Cursing not just the body. Some remarks on a defixio from Nomentum in the light of the role of female public slaves in the Roman world’, Epigraphica 81 (2019), 421–42, at 440–1Google Scholar.
54 Weiss (n. 1), 24–8.
55 Halkin (n. 1), 15–22, 32–5; Eder (n. 1), 14; Weiss (n. 1), 19–23.
56 Mommsen (n. 2), 1.323 n. 2. Similarly, Weaver (n. 6), 214–15.
57 At least 36 out of more than 154 public slaves are epigraphically attested with no agnomen.
58 Contra, Weaver (n. 6), 214–15.
59 Gonzalez and Crawford (n. 26), 171 (chapter 72, tablet VIIIB, lines 1–30).
60 Luciani (n. 28), 46.
61 Varro, Ling. 8.82–3.
62 Livy, 4.61.7–10.
63 App. B Ciu. 1.100. Cf. also Hinard, F., Les proscriptions de la Rome républicaine (Rome and Paris, 1985), 84Google Scholar; Santangelo, F., Sulla, the Elites and the Empire. A Study of Roman Policies in Italy and the Greek East (Leiden, 2007), 95–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
64 Thein, A., ‘Rewards to slaves in the proscriptions of 82 b.c.’, Tyche 28 (2013), 164–75, at 164–5Google Scholar.
65 Cic. Balb. 11.28; Dig. 49.15.5 (Pomp. 37 ad Q. Muc.).
66 Münzer, F., ‘Cn. Publicius Menander; M. Publicius Scaeva; Publicia’, in RE 23.2 (1959), 1902 no. 24Google Scholar.
67 Gardner, R., Cicero. The Speeches: Pro Caelio, De prouinciis consularibus, Pro Balbo (London and Cambridge MA, 1958), 660Google Scholar; Bellardi, G., Le orazioni di M. Tullio Cicerone (Turin, 1975), 694Google Scholar.
68 Halkin (n. 1), 39, 150–2; Eder (n. 1), 116–17.
69 CIL 6.2340 = ILS 1973, cf. CIL 6, page 3828. Cf. SupplIt. Imagines 2 (Rome, 2003), 474–5 no. 3108, 570–1 no. 3353 (a modern copy of the inscription is now preserved at the Antiquarium Comunale del Celio in Rome).
70 Only two cases may be considered: Tiberius Claudius Velox, mentioned by CIL 6.32444 = ILS 4164, could be interpreted as a public freedman, but his onomastics and his function of hymnologus primus M(atris) D(eum) I(daeae) e[t] Atti[d]is publicus are not to be intended as indisputable proofs; an analogous case would be that of Tiberius Claudius Glyptus, hymnologus de campo Caelemontano, attested by CIL 6.9475.
71 Eder's estimate ([n. 1], 120) of 40–60 manumissions of public slaves in Rome per year, based on Cicero's well-known remark that slaves might expect to be manumitted after seven years of enslavement (Cic. Phil. 8.11), refers to the Late Republic only. See also Bradley, K.R., Slaves and Masters in the Roman Empire. A Study in Social Control (Oxford, 1987), 85Google Scholar, who argued that there are no grounds for believing Cicero's statement to be generally valid.
72 Cf. Weiss (n. 1), 194–247.
73 So far, there is no evidence of public slaves who were purchased (or repurchased) by private masters and then possibly manumitted.
74 Dig. 40.3.3 (Pap. 14 resp.); cf. also Mouritsen, H., The Freedman in the Roman World (Cambridge, 2011), 201 n. 361CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Chapter 72 of the Lex Irnitana attests to the payment of a sum for the manumission of public slaves: Gonzalez and Crawford (n. 26), 171, 192–3 (chapter 72, tablet VIIIB, lines 12–14). On possible traces of this practice in epigraphic sources, see Luciani (n. 28), 46, 63–4.
75 Waldstein, W., Operae libertorum. Untersuchungen zur Dienstpflicht freigelassener Sklaven (Stuttgart, 1986)Google Scholar.
76 Gonzalez and Crawford (n. 26), 171, 192–3 (chapter 72, tablet VIIIB, lines 23–4).
77 Weiss (n. 1), 164–6; Luciani (n. 28), 47–56.
78 See n. 8 above.
79 See n. 65 above.
80 See n. 69 above.
81 Mouritsen (n. 74), 201 n. 361.
82 CIL 6.2086, lines 62–6 (11 December a.d. 155). Cf. Scheid, J., Recherches archéologiques à la Magliana. Commentarii fratrum arualium qui supersunt. Les copies épigraphiques des protocoles annuels de la confrérie arvale (21 av.–304 ap. J.-C.) (Rome, 1998), 238Google Scholar.
83 See notes 29–30 above.
84 Isid. Etym. 15.14.2, 19.33.4.
85 Gell. NA 12.3.3. See also Hyg. Grom. Lim. const. 167.17–19 La. = 132.20–133.1 Th. Cf. TLL 7.2.1427.69–1428.18; Guillaumin, J.-Y., Les arpenteurs romains, I, Hygin le Gromatique, Frontin (Paris, 2005), 171–2Google Scholar.
86 On this and, more generally, on the iconography of Roman public slaves, see Luciani, F., ‘Notes on the external appearance of Roman public slaves’, in Binsfeld, A. and Ghetta, M. (edd.), Ubi servi erant? Die Ikonographie von Sklaven und Freigelassenen in der römischen Kunst (Stuttgart, 2019), 37–51Google Scholar, in which the hypothesis that public slaves had the right to wear the toga is also discussed and eventually rejected.
87 See Weiss, A., ‘Limocincti in Irni. Zur Ergänzung des Duumvirnparagraphen 18 der Lex Irnitana’, ZPE 135 (2001), 284–6, at 284Google Scholar; Weiss (n. 1), 31–3; Luciani (n. 86), 42–3.
88 Weiss (n. 1), 170–2; Luciani (n. 28), 57–63.
89 Serrano Delgado (n. 16), 343; Weiss (n. 1), 179.
90 On imperial slaves and freedmen in literary sources, see Weaver (n. 6), 281–95.
91 Stat. Silu. 3.3. Cf. Weaver, P., ‘The father of Claudius Etruscus: Statius, Siluae 3.3’, CQ 15 (1965), 145–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Newlands, C.E., Statius’ Silvae and the Poetics of Empire (Cambridge, 2004), 220–3Google Scholar.
92 On this episode, see Livy 1.7.14, 9.29.9–11, 9.34.17–19; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.40.5; Val. Max. 1.1.17; Festus, Gloss. Lat. 270; Lactant. Diu. inst. 2.7.15; Serv. 8.179 (cf. also 269); Macrob. Sat. 3.6.13; [Aur. Vict.] Orig. 8.5; [Aur. Vict.] De uir. ill. 34.1–2. Cf. Cassola, F., I gruppi politici romani nel III secolo a.C. (Trieste, 1962), 129Google Scholar; Palmer, R.E.A., ‘The censors of 312 b.c. and the state religion’, Historia 14 (1965), 293–324Google Scholar; Biondo, B., ‘I Potizi, i Pinari e la statizzazione del culto di Ercole’, in Franciosi, G. (ed.), Ricerche sulla organizzazione gentilizia romana, 3 vols. (Naples, 1988), 2.189–210Google Scholar; Humm, M., Appius Claudius Caecus. La République accomplice (Rome, 2005), 642–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rüpke, J., Religion in Republican Rome. Rationalization and Ritual Change (Philadelphia, 2012), 107CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Varro, Ling. 6.54. A praetor urbanus overseeing the cult of Hercules at the Ara Maxima is also mentioned in CIL 6.313 = ILS 3402 = CLE 228 from Rome (third century a.d.), with reference to the Potitii too. On public slaves attending on a praetor, see Val. Max. 7.3.9.
93 Livy, Per. 77 (seruus natione Gallus); Vell. Pat. 2.19 (seruus publicus natione Germanus); Val. Max. 2.10.6 (seruus publicus natione Cimber); Plut. Mar. 39.1–2 (ἱππεὺς δὲ Γαλάτης τὸ γένος ἢ Κίμβρος); App. B Ciu. 1.61 (Γαλάτην ἄνδρα); [Aur. Vict.] De uir. ill. 67.4–5 (percussorem Gallum); Oros. 5.19.7 (percussorem).
94 Gell. NA 13.13.4.
95 Cic. Phil. 8.24, 13.26. Cf. also Traina, G., ‘Notes classico-orientales 4–5’, Electrum 10 (2005), 89–93Google Scholar; Manuwald, G., Cicero, “Philippics” 3–9 (Berlin and Boston, 2007), 996CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
96 Gai. Inst. 1.13–15, 1.25–6.
97 Gai. Inst. 1.27. Cf. also Buckland (n. 4), 544–6.
98 Weaver (n. 6), 97–104.
99 See the references at notes 17–18 above.
- 1
- Cited by