Download Manumission basics - Amazon Web Services

Amy Sommer
“Houses of Mortals and Gods: Latin Literature in Context”
NEH Summer Institute 2006
THE LIFE OF THE LOWER CLASSES: FREEDMEN AND FREEDWOMEN
Introduction
 Methodology for investigating lives of the lower classes comes from women’s
studies and ethnography, which examines the ‘other,’ i.e. the people who are
written about, but did very little of the writing themselves. Roman literature and
law was constructed by those in power. Joshel calls this “listening to silence.”
(Joshel Ch. 1)
Manumission basics
 Minimum age according to Lex Aelia Sentia (4 AD) was 30, although there is
evidence that this statute was not always enforced. Female slaves especially
tended to be freed at an earlier age (Pomeroy 195).
 Two ways of being manumitted:
o Appear before a magistrate with your master. Magistrate touches you with
a rod and declares your freedom.
o In owner’s will [he gets to appear generous and leaves the consequences to
his heirs] (Shelton 190)
 New law in 2 BC [Lex Fufia Caninia]: master can free no more
than 100 slaves in his will. Does not seem to be a limit on the
number he can free while still alive (Shelton 194).
 Augustus’ motivation for introducing this legislation,
according to Suetonius, was “to keep the people pure and
unsullied by any taint of foreign and servile blood.” This
may not be accurate, however, as Augustus himself freed
countless slaves during his lifetime (Bradley 87).
 Likelihood of being manumitted increased if:
o Your owner was wealthy.
o You were the owner’s personal attendant, and thus became personally
acquainted with your owner.
o You did not bring personal profit to your owner (i.e. laborer, prostitute,
gladiator) (Shelton 190).
 Other ways of gaining freedom:
o Buy your freedom—original purchase price or agreed-upon price
 Save tips (or bribes if you worked in the civil service) (Shelton
190). A slave’s small savings was called a peculium.
 A female slave usually amassed a peculium slower than a male
slave, because of her role within the house. However, Columella
in his 1st century AD treatise on farming [de Re Rustica, ca. 60
1

AD] stated that producing 4 slave children was enough to equal her
purchase price (Pomeroy 195-196).
o A freedman could buy you—often a freed parent would purchase his/her
children who were born into slavery, or a freed person would purchase
his/her lover and marry him/her (Shelton 191).
Nomenclature: A freedman kept the praenomen and nomen of his master; his
slave name became his cognomen (Shelton 203).
o e.g. If Felix had been a slave in the home of Marcus Tullius Cicero, his
freedman name would be Marcus Tullius Felix.
o Slave names were arbitrary and seem to have been chosen by the masters,
or sometimes the slave dealers. Therefore, a Greek name did not
necessarily mean that the slave was Greek (Joshel 36-37).
Legal rights/restrictions of freedmen
 Rights granted to freedmen by Lex Aelia Sentia (4 AD—completed the work of
the Lex Fufia Caninia of 2 BC):
o Became Roman citizen
o Contract proper Roman marriage
o Have legitimate children
o Make contracts binding in their own name
o Sell or transfer property
o Write a will
o Sue and be sued in their own right (Joshel 32)
 Restrictions:
o Freedmen could vote, but could not run for public office, and they could
not join the equestrian or senatorial orders, even if they met the property
requirements (Shelton 195).
o According to Florence Dupont, freedmen could not interact with freeborn
citizens, except in their business transactions (Dupont 66). While that
may have been the case for many freedmen, it was not universally true. In
his presentation on Roman dining, for example, Ken Wright quoted
sources that described freedmen dining alongside freeborn citizens at
dinner parties. Certainly these interactions must have depended on the
master’s relationship with his former slaves (now his clients), his
magnanimity, and/or his desire to flaunt his multitude of clients.
o The next generation, though, were considered freeborn and therefore were
free of these restrictions (Shelton 195).
 Other disadvantages (from Joshel):
o They were hindered by the “stigma of a servile past” and their continued
obligations to their former master (details to follow) (Joshel 32).
o Once freed, they were forced to live in accordance with Roman culture,
and could not live out the customs of their homeland without ridicule
(Joshel 32).
 My thought: would this have been an issue for them, or is Joshel
imposing modern ideals of multiculturalism on the ancient world?
Compare even 19th-century America, when many European
2
immigrants were very quick to give up their cultural identity to
assimilate into the melting pot of America. Freedmen in Rome
may have been the same way. They may even have surrendered
their cultural heritage as soon as they became slaves.
o They didn’t have “socially acknowledged” parents, and this was a source
of dishonor (Joshel 32).
o Difficult to have a family of their own, due to laws for marriage and
children (next topic):
 Depending on the age at which a woman was freed (legal age was
30), she may be past her best childbearing years (Joshel 33).
Female slaves were often freed earlier than age 30, despite the law,
but only when the master wanted to marry her and start a family
(Shelton 195).
Marriage and children
 Mixed marriages between slave and freed still were not legally recognized.
o Children received their status through their mother: if the mother was a
slave, the children were slaves.
o If the mother was freed but the father was still a slave, they were freeborn
but illegitimate.
o Children were not always freed with their parents.
o If a man bought his family out of slavery, they were considered his liberti
under the law, NOT his wife and children (Joshel 33).
 Not uncommon for a master to free a female slave in order to marry her. There
were laws regulating the practice:
o From The Digest of Laws 23.2.28 (Marcianus,) 29 (Ulpian):
 1. A patron cannot force a freedwoman to marry him against her
will.
 2. However, if the patron manumitted her for this reason
(marriage), she must marry him (Shelton 194).
 However, it was not socially acceptable for a freeborn woman to free a male slave
and marry him. Septimius Severus (reigned 193-211) actually outlawed this
practice (Pomeroy 196).
 It was acceptable for men of the lower classes to marry women of slave or freed
class, but Augustan legislation actually prevented citizens of senatorial rank from
marrying freedmen and women (Pomeroy 195).
Ongoing interaction with former master—good and bad
 Still dependent on former owner as a client—owed them loyalty and a certain
number of days’ work (Shelton).
 Terminology: the act of manumission was called a beneficium (favor or kindness);
in return, freedmen were expected to demonstrate obsequium toward their former
masters (compliance and accommodation to the will of another) (Joshel 33).
 The work that the freedmen were still expected to perform for their former master
(operae) was negotiated before manumission and confirmed by oath afterward
(Joshel 34).
3



o The courts intervened and put limits on the patrons’ ability to demand
work from their former slaves, but they never completely denied this work
to the patrons (Joshel 57).
After receiving their freedom:
o Many continued working for their former masters as paid employees.
o Others found other employment.
o Some borrowed money from former owners or patrons and started their
own businesses (Shelton 191).
Negative—treated as better than slaves, but not quite free, especially in respect to
their bodies:
o Like slaves, freedmen and women were bound to have sex with the master
or his sons, if he requested it (Dupont 118).
o Roman law allowed freeborn citizens to take to court anyone who
endangered their physical integrity under the term iniuria (Joshel 27-28).
Freedmen, however, were not to waste the court’s time when such iniuria
came at the hands of their former master. Ulpian defends this policy by
citing the freedman’s servile past (Joshel 34).
Positive—patron could help them achieve success as freedmen and women.
There is evidence of these positive relationships in funerary inscriptions:
o e.g. CIL 14.2298 (ILS 1949): “Marcus Aurelius Zosimus, freedman of
Marcus Aurelius Cotta Maximus and business agent for his patron. I was
a freedman, I confess; but in death I have been honored by my patron
Cotta. He generously gave to me the equivalent of an equestrian’s fortune.
He ordered me to raise my children, he helped support them, and he was
always generous to me with his money. He provided dowries for my
daughters as if he were their father. He obtained for my son Cottanus the
rank of military tribune which he proudly held in the imperial army. What
did Cotta not do for us? And now he has with sadness paid for this
message which can be read on my tombstone” (Shelton 203).
Occupations and work
 Occupations, as indicated in tomb inscriptions:
o Construction worker (Shelton 201)
o Auctioneer and herald (Shelton 201)
o Teacher—Suetonius tells us about the Thracian Staberius Eros who taught
Brutus and Cassius and (it was rumored) the sons of proscribed men
during the time of Sulla for no charge [A Book about Schoolteachers 13]
(Shelton 202).
o Slaughterer (Shelton 202)
o Maid ( Shelton 202)
o Most freedwomen were working class—shopkeepers, artisans, domestic
service, spinning wool (sometimes in a small industry). They used the
training they had received as slaves (Pomeroy 199-200).
o Working-class men worked in the textile industry also, as weavers and
weighers of balls of wool (Pomeroy 200).
o Men and women worked in laundries and in grain mills (Pomeroy 200).
4

o There is evidence for a female landlady and a female moneylender in
Pompeii (Pomeroy 200).
o Freedwomen (often from the east) sold exotic goods, like dyes and
perfumes (Pomeroy 200).
o Sellers of clothing and food, butchers, fisherwomen/vendors (Pomeroy
200)
o Inscriptions show everything from “seller of nails” and “dealer in beans”
to “commercial entrepreneur” and “physician” (Pomeroy 200)
o Many were waitresses, and often prostitutes, too.
 These women left political graffiti—so they knew how to write
(Pomeroy 201).
 Women who worked in inns and taverns were exempted from the
Lex Iulia de Adulteriis, just like prostitutes. Constantine modified
the law so that the mistress (domina) of an inn or tavern could be
charged with adultery, unless “she was in the habit of serving the
drinks herself.” Then she was exempt from the law, just like the
common barmaids (Treggiari).
Cicero’s opinion on vulgar occupations [i.e. pretty much everything involving
work] (de Officiis 1.42, 2.25]: We generally accept as true the following
statements about trades and occupations, with regard to which are suitable for
gentlemen and which are vulgar. First of all, those occupations are condemned
which bring upon you people’s hatred, such as tax collecting and usury. Also
vulgar and unsuitable for gentlemen are the occupations of all hired workmen
whom we pay for their labor, not for their artistic skills; for which these men,
their pay is itself a recompense for slavery. Also to be considered vulgar are retail
merchants, who buy from wholesale merchants and immediately turn around and
resell; for they would not make a profit unless they lied a lot. And nothing is more
shameless than lying. All craftsmen, too, are engaged in vulgar occupations, for a
workshop or factory can have nothing genteel about it. And the most shameful
occupations are those which cater to our sensual pleasures, “fish sellers, butchers,
cooks, poultry raisers, and fishermen,” as Terence says. Add to these, if you like,
perfume makers, dancers, and all of vaudeville.
However, occupations which involve a greater degree of intelligence or
which provide no small service—such as medicine or architecture or teaching of
liberal arts—these are proper for men whose social position they suit. (footnote:
this means lower class) Trade, however, if it is small scale, must be considered
vulgar; but if it is large scale, and involves importing many different items from
throughout the world, and bringing many things to many people without lying or
misrepresentation, it should not be greatly censured. Indeed it appears that largescale trade could even be praised under the most stringent law of respectability if
a man engaging in it, once he was tired of it, or rather once he felt satisfied that he
had achieved his goals, then moved himself from the harbor to a country estate, as
he had often moved from the deep sea into a harbor. For, of all the occupations
from which profit is accrued, none is better than agriculture, none more profitable,
none more delightful, none more suitable to a free man. . . .
5


When Cato was asked what was the most profitable aspect of property
ownership, he replied, “Raising livestock with great success.” And then? “Raising
livestock with some success.” And after that? “Raising livestock with little
success.” And fourth? “Raising crops.” And when the person asking questions
said, “What about moneylending?” Cato replied, “What about murder?” (Shelton
129-130).
Very little literary evidence about working conditions and job requirements
(Shelton 131).
Most freedmen and women lived in poverty. Some, however, became quite
wealthy:
o “Buying respectability” [CIL 11.5400 (ILS 7812)]: “Publius Decimus
Eros Merula, freedman of Publius, physician, surgeon, and oculist,
member of the Board of Six (footnote: a community group involved in
public building projects). For his freedom he paid 50,000 sesterces. For
his membership on the Board of Six he contributed 2000 sesterces to the
public treasury. He donated 30,000 sesterces for the erection of statues in
the temple of Hercules. For building roads he contributed 37,000
sesterces to the public treasury. On the day before he died, he left an
estate of [illegible] sesterces” (Shelton 205).
o One of the best known freedwomen was Volumnia Cytheris, a former
actress in the mime who became a courtesan. She was wealthy enough to
be discriminating about her affairs: Brutus the Tyrannicide, Marcy
Antony, and the elegist Cornelius Gallus among them (Pomeroy 198).
Attitudes toward/biases against freedmen
 Dionysius of Halicarnassus (died in 8 BC, before the Leges Fufia Caninia and
Aelia Sentia regulated manumission) thought that too many slaves were being
manumitted to augment the reputation of their master, and too many slaves were
buying their freedom with money acquired by illegal means; thus, many of these
new citizens were of questionable moral fiber. “I think. . . that the magistrates
should scrutinize each and every person who is manumitted each year and find
out who they are and for what reason and in what manner they have been freed. . .
Those whom they find worthy of citizenship. . . they should allow to remain in the
city, but they should expel from the city the foul and polluted herd” [Roman
Antiquities 4.24.8] (Shelton 194-195).
 Freeborn citizens often resented freedmen for several reasons:
o Didn’t like having foreigners voting in their elections.
o Thought freedmen were stealing their jobs.
o Thought they would corrupt Roman society with their foreign customs
(Shelton 195).
 Trimalchio and his friends are a stereotype of the wealthy freedman—vulgar,
ostentatious, completely unrefined. Very few freedmen actually attained this kind
of wealth; most lived in poverty. Ambitious freedmen often went into business
or banking because they were not allowed in politics. Freeborn citizens thus
thought of them as greedy (Shelton 196).
6



According to literary sources, some freedmen were very susceptible to
extravagance and unwise spending.
o Horace’s take on freedmen’s spending habits: “One morning he steps out
of a place, the next out of a hovel.”
o Other freedmen were quickly absorbed into Roman society by living more
plainly and emulating their freeborn neighbors. Within a generation,
people would forget that they were freedmen.
 Cicero’s secretary Tiro was one of these—he lived to be over 100
and bought a small farm with all of the money he had stored up in
his lifetime of slavery (Dupont 67-68).
It also seems to have been a common belief that freedwomen lacked the
“matronly restraint” of freeborn Roman women, and therefore were more
unfettered in their public interactions with young men (Dupont 181).
We must question how much is true concerning these beliefs about both spending
and sexual habits. Most likely they are stereotypes perpetuated by the upper
classes, but like all stereotypes, they are based in some sort of truth.
Abundance of freedmen in population
 In his book The Ancient Economy (1973), Moses Finley proposes, based on tomb
inscriptions, that in the early imperial period there were more freedmen in Rome
than freeborn citizens. However, there is not enough other data to prove his thesis
(Shelton 195).
 Tenney Frank’s conclusion in “Race Mixture in the Roman World” (1916): nearly
90% of Rome’s permanent inhabitants were of slave stock.
o Much disputed (especially by Italian scholars), but no one has produced
data to disprove it (Taylor 113).
 These statements are based primarily on the abundance of funerary inscriptions
that honor freedmen. They are also supported by Tacitus:
o Tacitus said that the number of freeborn citizens was declining steadily
(Ann. IV. 27) and that the senators were reluctant to require freedmen to
wear a special garment, because it would call attention to the lack of
freeborn citizens in the city (Ann. XIII.27) (Taylor).
 Lily Ross Taylor (1961 article) asserts that there must have been more freeborn
than freedmen.
o She thinks that there are so many funerary inscriptions because freedmen
were so proud of their new status and their acquisition of the three names,
and they wanted to advertise it.
Grain dole and the realities of poverty in Rome
 Very poor freedmen and freedwomen were probably worse off than slaves, unless
their master felt some impetus to help them (Pomeroy 202).
 We know very little about the lives of poor Romans. Families who were too poor
to support all of their children often had to put their kids up for adoption, sell
them into slavery, or expose them (Shelton 35).
 Freedmen and poor freeborn Romans would sometimes force their children to
prostitute themselves in the Suburra.
7



o Some of these young freedmen could actually ingratiate themselves
among the nobility who then became their protectors and provided them
with education in literature and the arts, e.g. Roscius the comedian, Livius
Andronicus, Terence, and Publilius Syrus a mime-writer (Dupont 228).
Grain dole:
o 122 BC: Gaius Gracchus introduced legislation: government would keep a
supply of grain at Ostia and sell it in monthly rations to Roman citizens at
a low fixed price.
o 58 BC: Publius Clodius Pulcher made these monthly grain handouts free, a
move that made him popular with the lower classes.
o Tacitus records uprisings against Tiberius in 32 AD and Claudius in 51
AD when the people heard about grain shortages (Shelton 137).
Truth about the grain dole: the ration was only enough to feed one man (thus men
like Clodius used it to get votes). Without additional income, there wasn’t enough
to feed his wife and children. Women were not included in the grain dole
(Pomeroy 202).
Augustus and Trajan established government assistance (congiaria and alimenta)
for children, but they favored boys (future soldiers).
o Pliny was among private benefactors who supported poor children.
o These programs were short-sighted, because poor families would not raise
girls, since they didn’t bring in as much welfare as boys, which led to a
shortage of women to give birth to future soldiers.
o Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius were among those who established
alimentary funds, both public and private, solely for girls (Pomeroy 203204).
Ostia: a freedmen town
 Ostia had a larger percentage of freedmen than any other Italian city. Many of
them were freed by the emperor (Frank).
 Ostia was a working-class town where freedmen could build a respectable life and
profit from their work (Frank).
 Freedmen in Ostia could attain prominence as Augustales and seviri:
o Becoming a sevir required money. Inscriptions list occupations for some
of these men, including wine merchant, woodworkers, and men involved
in shipping trades.
o The Augustales were a “freedman’s guild of distinction.” According to
Tenney Frank, “This act [of appointing freedmen to the guild] invited
amity, created an interest in the city, inspired self-confidence, and
demonstrated that Roman society could make a respectable place for them.
. . Ostia is one of the best places in which to study the educative power of
this remarkable social institution, which did much to save the Roman
world from the worst consequences of slavery” (Frank).
8
Works Cited
Bradley, K.R. Slaves and Masters in the Roman Empire: A Study in Social Control.
New York: Oxford UP, 1987.
Dupont, Florence. Daily Life in Ancient Rome. Trans. Christopher Woodall. Oxford:
Blackwell, 1992.
Frank, Tenney. “The People of Ostia.” The Classical Journal Vol. 29, No. 7 (April
1934). 481-493.
Joshel, Sandra R. Work, Identity, and Legal Status at Rome: A Study of the
Occupational Inscriptions. Norman, OK: Oklahoma UP, 1992.
Pomeroy, Sarah B. “Women of the Roman Lower Classes.” Goddesses, Whores, Wives,
and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity. New York: Schocken Books, 1975.
Shelton, Jo Ann. As the Romans Did: A Sourcebook in Roman Social History. New
York: Oxford UP, 1988.
Taylor, Lily Ross. “Freedmen and Freeborn in the Epitaphs of Imperial Rome.”
American Journal of Philology Vol. 82, No. 2 (April 1961). 113-132.
Treggiari, Susan. “Lower Class Women in the Roman Economy.” Florilegium Vol. 1
(1979). http://www.uwo.ca/english/florilegium/vol1/treggiari.html.
9