274 
SLAVE. 
other authors are of opinion, that the Roman name servi 
might come from that of serbi; as that of slaves from Sclavi, 
a people. 
The term for a slave born and bred in the family, was 
verna; equivalent to scurra, denoting the petulance and 
impudence of these slaves. They seem to have been entitled 
by custom to privileges and indulgences beyond others. 
Among the Romans, when a slave was set at liberty, he 
changed his name into a surname; he took the nomen or 
prenomen of his master, to which he added the cognomen 
he had been called by when a slave. 
Among those who were denominated slaves in the more 
lax and general use of the term, we may reckon those who 
were distinguished among the Romans by the appellation of 
“ mercenarii,” so called from the circumstance of their hire. 
These were free-born citizens, mentioned in the law-books 
by the name of liberi, and thus contradistinguished from the 
alieni, or foreigners, who, from the various contingencies of 
fortune, were under a necessity of recurring for support to 
the service of the rich. To this class belonged those who, 
both among the Jews and Egyptians, are recorded in the 
sacred writings (Gen. ch. xlvii. Levit. xxv. 39, 40). The 
Grecian Thetes (^rc?, see Horn. Odyss. A. 642), were also 
of this description. The situation of these persons resembled 
that of our servants; a contract subsisting between the par¬ 
ties, and most of the subordinate dependants having a right 
to demand and obtain their discharge if they were ill used 
by their masters. 
Among the ancients there was another class of servants, 
which consisted wholly of those who had suffered the loss 
of liberty from their own imprudence. Such were the Gre¬ 
cian prodigals, who were detained in the service of their 
creditors, till the fruits of their labour were equivalent to 
their debts; the delinquents, who were sentenced to the oar; 
and the German enthusiasts, mentioned by Tacitus, who 
were so addicted to gaming, that when they had parted with 
every thing, also staked their liberty and their persons. 
“ The loser,” says the historian, “ goes into a voluntary ser¬ 
vitude; and though younger and stronger than the person 
with whom he played, patiently suffers himself to be bound 
and sold. Their perseverance in so bad a custom is styled 
honour. The slaves thus obtained, are immediately ex¬ 
changed away in commerce, that the winner may get rid of 
the scandal of his victory.” The two classes now enume¬ 
rated, comprehend those that may be called voluntary 
slaves, and they are distinguished from those denominated 
involuntary slaves. 
The connection between victory and servitude, which 
prevailed among the nations of antiquity, has uniformly 
existed, in one country or another, to the present day. 
Accordingly, the first class of involuntary slaves, included 
those who were “ prisoners of war.” The practice of re¬ 
ducing prisoners of war to the condition of slaves, subsisted 
both among the eastern nations and the people of the West; 
for as the Helots became the slaves of the Spartans, merely 
from the right of conquest, so prisoners of war were reduced 
to the same situation by the other inhabitants of Greece. 
The Romans, also, were actuated by the same principle; 
and all those nations which contributed to overturn the 
empire, adopted a similar custom ; so that it was a general 
maxim in their polity, that those who fell under their power 
as prisoners of war, should immediately be reduced to the 
condition of slaves. 
The slaves of the Greeks were generally, or very com¬ 
monly, barbarians, and imported from foreign countries. 
By the civil law, the power of making slaves is esteemed a 
right of nations, and follows, jure gentium, as a natural con¬ 
sequence of captivity in war. “ Jure gentium servi nostri 
sunt, qui ab hostibus capiuntur.” Justinian, 1. i. 5. 5. i. 
This is the first origin of the right of slavery assigned by 
Justinian, Inst. i. 3, 4., whence slaves are called mancipia 
quasi ??ianu capti. 
The Lacedaemonians, say some, or, as others say, the As¬ 
syrians, first introduced the practice; which the Romans not 
only approved of, but they even invented new manners of 
making slaves : for instance, a man bom free among them 
might sell his freedom, and become a slave. This voluntary 
slavery was first introduced by a decree of the senate in the 
time of the emperor Claudius, and at length was abrogated 
by Leo. 
The Romans had power of life and death over their 
slaves, which no other nations had; but this severity was 
aftewards moderated by the laws of the emperors; and by 
one of Adrian it was made capital to kill a slave without a 
cause. 
The slaves were esteemed the proper goods of their mas¬ 
ters, and all (hey got belonged to them : but if the master 
were too cruel in his domestic corrections, he was obliged to 
sell his slave at a moderate price. 
The custom of exposing old, useless, or sick slaves in an 
island of the Tyber, there to starve, seems to have been 
pretty common in Rome; and whoever recovered alter 
having been so exposed, had his liberty given him, by an 
edict of the emperor Claudius, in which it was likewise for¬ 
bidden to kill any slave merely for old age or sickness. 
(Suet, in Claud.) Nevertheless, it was the professed maxim 
of the elder Cato, to sell his superannuated slaves for any 
price, rather than maintain what he deemed an useless bur¬ 
then. (Plut. in Caton.) The ergastula, or dungeons, 
where slaves in chains were forced to work, were very com¬ 
mon all over Italy. Columella (1. i. c. 6.) advises that they 
be always built under ground; and recommends it as the 
duty of a careful overseer, to call over every day the names of 
these slaves, in order to know when any of them had de¬ 
serted. Sicily was full of ergastula, and was cultivated by 
labourers in chains. Eunus and Athenio excited the servile 
war, by breaking up these monstrous prisons, and giving 
liberty to 60,000 slaves. 
In the ancient and uncivilized ages of the world, “ piracy” 
was regarded as an honourable practice; and this was sup¬ 
posed to give a right of making slaves. “ The Grecians,” 
says Thucydides (1. i.) “ in their primitive state, as well as 
the contemporary barbarians, who inhabited the sea-coasts 
and islands, addicted themselves wholly to it: it was, in 
short, their only profession and support.” The writings of 
Homer are sufficient to establish this account; as they shew 
that this was a common practice at so early a period as that 
of the Trojan war. The reputation which piracy seems to 
have acquired among the ancients, was owing to the skill, 
strength, agility, and valour, which were necessary for con¬ 
ducting it with success; and the erroneous notions that were 
thus entertained concerning it led to other consequences im¬ 
mediately connected with the slavery of the human species. 
Avarice and ambition availed themselves of these mistaken 
notions; and people were robbed, stolen, and even mur¬ 
dered, under the pretended idea that these were reputable 
adventures. But in proportion as men’s sentiments and 
manners became more refined, the practice of piracy lost its 
reputation, and began gradually to disappear. The prac¬ 
tice, however, was found to be lucrative; and it was con¬ 
tinued, with a view to the emolument attending it, loug after 
it ceased to be thought honourable, and when it was sinking 
into disgrace. The profits arising from the sale of slaves 
presented a temptation which avarice and interest could not 
resist; many were stolen by their own countrymen, and 
sold for slaves; and merchants traded on the different coasts 
in order to facilitate the disposal of this article of commerce. 
The merchants of Thessaly, if we may credit Aristophanes, 
(Plut. Act ii. Sc. 5.) who never spared the vices of the 
times, were particularly infamous for this latter kind of de¬ 
predation ; the Athenians were notorious for the former ; 
for they had practised these robberies to such an alarming 
degree of danger to individuals, that it was found neces¬ 
sary to enact a law, which punished kidnappers with death. 
From the above statement it appears, that among the an¬ 
cients there were two classes of involuntary slaves; one con¬ 
sisting of those who were taken publicly in a state of war; 
and another composed of those who were privately stolen in 
a state of peace. To which might be added a third class, 
comprehending the children and descendants of the former. 
The 
