The role of old slaves at Rome

[Agent327]

Interesting article on a neglected topic:

There is remarkably littie evidence about care for the elderly and infirm in classical Latin literatura. The article argües that one reason for this is that in the classical city - unlike the temple-centred cultures of the Ancient Near East - the contrast between the well-off and the needy was not as important as a means of organising ideas about social relations as was the polarity between slave and free. By ascríbing old age or infirmíty to slaves, Latin writers are reinforcing their marginality , their exclusión from the norm of the healthy adult male citizen. Consequently statements about oíd slaves should be seen as symbolic rather than as descriptions of social reality.

In full: http://www.scribd.com/doc/274054761/Servi-Senes-the-Role-of-Old-Slaves-at-Rome (sing in required to read or download)

Altough sources are scarce on the topic, it suggests two things: old slaves were not expected to work (falling in the same price category as slave age 8 and younger), as well as being despised (at least by Romans). While the latter may strike us as crude, there is a tendency to consider the old a burden to society in our own time -. if only economically. (Another coincidence is that a person of 60-65 would be considered old: senex.)

 

[Flying Pig]

I think it's probably worth bearing in mind a couple of points. The first is that 'slavery' was a really quite diverse area of occupation - a slave could be working on chain-gangs in mining or farming and be kept in truly awful conditions under harsh discipline, or he could be a highly-educated private secretary to an urban aristocrat and treated almost like a friend or surrogate son - the classic example of the latter being Cicero's Tiro. The second is that the low price of old slaves might not necessarily mean that they were not expected to work - it's entirely possible that the harsher occupations (especially mining) only bought young slaves, but worked all of their slaves until they died. Retirement wasn't something that many people in pre-modern societies would have been able to enjoy.

 

[Agent327]

I'm sure that's true, but the article is about people that did manage to reach retirement age. Not mortality rate among slaves, which is a far more popular topic - though not perhaps among classic historians. One suggestion made is that slaves reaching an age where their productivity would have become below par, so to speak, might be given sinecures. Another possibility is manumission. At any rate, the topic is rather what, if any, care for the elderly (or ill) slave did Roman society provide?

 

[MilesGregarius]

Outside care by one's own family, how much care did Roman society provide for aged citizens? The only state social relief of which I am aware, the corn dole (in Rome, at least; unsure if similar was provided elsewhere,) was not tied to age.

As for slave-owners caring for their aged or infirm property, I'm inclined to assume most slaves that did survive long enough to become senex probably held positions, as Flying Pig mentions, that made them more akin to family, or at least employee, rather than pure property. Roman society being patronage based, I would suspect that slave-owners took care of their long time servants, whether manumitted or not, as much as a status obligation as from any sense of morality or human kindness.

I doubt many slaves lived to a ripe old age in the salt mines, on a galley, or even tending the fields.

Where this leaves "middle-class" slaves such as craftsmen and the like, I haven't the foggiest.

 

[Flying Pig]

I'm sure that's true, but the article is about people that did manage to reach retirement age. Not mortality rate among slaves, which is a far more popular topic - though not perhaps among classic historians. One suggestion made is that slaves reaching an age where their productivity would have become below par, so to speak, might be given sinecures. Another possibility is manumission. At any rate, the topic is rather what, if any, care for the elderly (or ill) slave did Roman society provide?

As I said, that may well have happened in the relatively humane areas of slavery, where slaves had plenty of direct contact with their masters and were able to form something of a bond. So we're talking about domestic slaves, for example. It may even have applied to slaves working on a private farm; it represents a better return on investment to re-role somebody rather than killing them with work. I severely doubt, though, that slaves working in silver mines ever had that happen.

Outside care by one's own family, how much care did Roman society provide for aged citizens? The only state social relief of which I am aware, the corn dole (in Rome, at least; unsure if similar was provided elsewhere,) was not tied to age.

Formally, zero, though I imagine there would have been some level of informal support from a person's neighbours if they found themselves elderly and alone, say through the death of their children - remember that Roman children never 'left home', but the son lived in his father's house until his father died, and the father was considered the head of the household for his whole life. That said, there are several stories of impoverished elderly people (usually military veterans) receiving support from emperors, which perhaps says that there was some expectation that at least some aged citizens could turn to the (human embodiment of the) state for help, even if it was on the basis of asking a favour rather than accessing a government service.

 

[Agent327]

I'm getting the impression posters didn't actually bother reading the article. Of course the subject is not 'slaves in the mines', as there's no literary evidence on that. The article can only discuss such rare evidence as slave owners cared to write about.

As per care for the infirm, Roman society did indeed have some hospitals, though the evidence does not suggest one was present in every city. Far from it. As said, the evidence about the old and the sick among slaves isn't particularly plentiful, so any conclusions can only be tentative. But care for the elderly and the sick (including slaves) did exist, that much is certain from the literary and epigraphical evidence.

 

[Flying Pig]

To my mind, the article's area of interest is neither here nor there - if we're interested in slaves in general, then we can discuss slaves in general. Which literary/epigraphical evidence are you using for 'care for the elderly and the sick'? You could raise the example of healing shrines, but those AFAIK were primarily a Greek phenomenon, as those often wrote up examples of slaves using their services on their 'advertising' stelae. That's a different proposition, though, to any notion of a 'retirement home'.

 

[Agent327]

I thought the article's 'area of interest' was pretty clear. But, of course, if you don't bother to read it, feel free to discuss slavery in general.

 

[Flying Pig]

As you pointed out in the OP, it's behind a sign-in, and I'm not keen to give my email out to another potential set of salesmen for the privilege of reading it.

 

[Agent327]

Well, I'd post the whole darn thing if it weren't 18 pages. A bit long for posting.