Capt Ajax said:
You contridict yourself with both arguements.....first there were no slaves, then they were some in the middel ages.........Life is nasty brutish and short, but not as nasty as I say it was???
-use the quoting system; its simple, and its easy to use
1)contadict myself? Only if you look at it from an obtuse angle, straining to make a point out of it;
-I didnt say thier were no slaves only that you were mistaken in thinkign that Rome used slaves for purposes such as rowing galleys; or, any other military occupation, for that matter, including military building was undertaken by the army exclusivlly; slave labour wasnt used.
-more over, in my secodn statement you seek to to comment on, I am completlyl accurate; you wish to depict Roman slavery and stock and chattel whips and chains life and death extreams; its simply wasnt so; after the serviel wars, the slvaes had significant rights granted to them; you couldnt kill them without due cause, and indeed, doing so may very well see
you killed, even if you did, as you woudl have had to proove the fact to a Roman court of law; Slaves were bonded to thie rmasters, but not thie revery whim, as if a status of living that was so depolrable as you might describe existed, a slave could appeal to a court that they were being treated so
Check out the book:
"The Private Life of the Romans" by Harold Whetstone Johnston
Here is an exert:
"Legal Status of Slaves. The power of the master over the slave, dominica potestās (§ 26), was absolute. The master could assign to the slave laborious and degrading tasks, punish him even unto death at his sole discretion, sell him, and kill him (or turn him out in the street to die) when age or illness had made him incapable of labor. Slaves were mere chattels in the eyes of the law, like oxen or horses. They could not legally hold property, they could not make contracts, they could testify in court only on the rack, they could not marry."
if this is the information presented in that particuler book, then its rather absurd; the situation wasnt even that bad before the servile wars, let alone after them.
Reference:
"Octavian was left with some 700 ships of various sizes, ranging from heavy transports to light galleys (liburnae, which were his private property and which he manned with slaves and freedmen of his personal service. - No Roman citizenry ever handled an oar !"
http://www.roman-empire.net/army/leg-fleet.html"
Were all oarsman slaves....NO, Were some slaves oarsman....YES.
"Roman EMpire. net" is hardley a source I would give credence to
if you want a real picture into the Roman military, i suggest the Osprey series of books on the sunject; made primarilly for war-game enthusiasts, they are none the less exreamlly well; and most authors dont even make mention of the fact that Roman rowers werenr slaves, as it was a commonality amoungst both the Greeks and Etruscans from which Rome learned the arts of naval warfare (contrary to popula rbelife, Rome had been engaged in naval action well before the Punic wars with carthage)
essentially, this quote sums it up'
The main function of the classis or fleet was to combat piracy and to support the operations of the other armed services. The imperial navy maintained two larger fleets based in the Mediterranean with smaller squadrons operating on the North Sea, Black Sea and the major rivers. Ravenna and Misenum were the main naval bases in the mare nostrum though ships were regularly detached to other ports. There existed some dedicated fleet installations along the river Rhine and Danube, but most were attached to bases of the frontier armies. The ships used by the imperial navy comprised both oared warships and transports as well as sailing craft used mainly for logistical support.
The vessels of the Roman navy were not manned by the slave rowers of popular imagination. All personnel serving in the imperial fleet were classed as soldiers, regardless of their function. Though the fleet had its own marines, these troops were used for boarding parties rather than amphibious assaults. The status of the sailors and marines of the Roman navy is somewhat unclear, though the fleet is generally regarded as the least prestigious branch of service. The fleet recruited freeborn citizens and peregrini as well as freedmen. Soldiers that did not possess Roman citizenship received this privilege after a minimum of 25 years of service.
A ship's crew, regardless of its size, was organised as a centuria with one officer responsible for sailing operations and a centurio for the military tasks. Among the crew were usually also a number of principales and immunes, some of which were identical to those of the army and some of which were peculiar to the fleet. Command of fleets was given to equestrian praefecti, those of the fleets based at Ravenna and Misenum having the largest prestige. The total strength of the Roman navy is not known with any exactitude, though it was reportedly some 40.000 strong during the reign of Diocletian. The Ravenna and Misenum fleets were each at least numerous enough to furnish the required number of men for a new legio.
Naval forces were used to create both auxiliary units, the cohortes classiariorum and cohortes classicae, and legionary formations, the legiones I and II Adiutrices. In addition men were also transferred to the auxilia or legiones on an individual basis. The fleet squadrons in at least the Danubian provinces may have recieved direct support from army units, as there is evidence available that a number of legionary soldiers received training as epibatae or liburnarii for service as marines.
It is a good thing that you are not my personal slave Xen, because I would pay good coin to have you gang raped by a traveling band of homesexual Sythian Circus Preformers for my mere amusment, or at the very least have you flogged for your insolence................I say that not to be mean, but to make a point. If you were my slave I COULD do such things.
well in all likelly hodd, it woudl be I who was the master, and you who were the slave
and a lucky thing to, as I dont feel particulerlyl bothered to break the law and risk my own neck at the chance Imperial authority might take notice and seem to dish out due punishment (somthing the Roman government was keen on doing) out to those who broke its laws, merelly to teach a slave a lesson. lets say you did do this to me; it woudl be easy for me to file an appeal, and win my freedom; your investment ina slave would be ruined, and you yourself would likelly be punished because fo your actions.
)
