The Institution of Slavery: A comparison of Ancient Peoples of Italy, Greece and the Levant and North America.

Slavery was a rather strange system in the US. The belief that some cultures were superior to others was a major factor in the impending growth of slavery. They consequently believed it was their right to rule over less advanced cultures, which led to the institution’s growth. Slaves were considered the lowest members of society in ancient times because they lacked rights and chances to be exploited. (Walter 126). The institution of enslavement differed greatly between Italy, Greece, the Levant, Rome, and North America. Despite the numerous disparities, Greece, Italy, and the Levant Rome operated under the similar realms and Ideals, while the institution in North America was based on related ideas. Despite the prevalence of the institution in the regions, the process never became moral and was a sham on society, and a pain on individuals.

First, a key distinction in slavery between the two groups was racial alignment. Slavery in Greece, Rome, and Italy did not have any aspects of racism. Many individuals subjected to slavery at the time were mostly victims of war, violence and other circumstances. On the other hand, slavery in North America was largely a racial affair (Rebecca 102). All slaves were of black origin, with most of them exported from Africa (Paul 87). In North America, it was illegal to enslave a fellow white, while in the same breadth, blacks had no rights nor freedom. In countries such as Greece, Italy or the Levant Rome, it was normal for a fellow countryman to enslave others who looked just like them. In North America therefore, slavery grew in the same realms as racism, and development of the latter was the growth of the former.

Further, slaves in North America were considered as property. The concept meant that the landowners got to count their wealth cumulative of the number of slaves in terms of masses and their wellbeing. Significantly, the concept also made it possible for their owners to hold onto many slaves and treat them as they saw fit. The economy in the south was majorly dependent on the strength possessed by the slaves for labor and other manual work, such as working in mines. On the other hand, slaves in ancient Greece, Italy, and the Levant were seen as fellow humans to an extent. Their owners though had rights to their possession would give them meaningful roles and responsibilities, with many having the slaves in charge of their establishments and enterprises. While the slaves held in North America would be exposed to limited instances of light, slavery in Greece and Rome was a social norm (Pounds and Norman 89).

In Greece, Italy, and Rome, there were instances where people could not escape the possibilities of becoming slaves in times of war and conflict. The system was based on the legal ownership of one human being by another, and they were all considered property. However, different from North America, slaves in the region were considered as humans, with many treated with some degree of paternalism. Most were considered as invaluable members of different families, being elevated to important positions within those families. For instance, some would act as nurses, craftsmen, or writers. At the time, considering the reason for the enslavement, war or conflict, slavery was considered as the best alternative to the enslaved. They would, therefore, serve their masters with respect.

A difference lies in the termination of slavery to the enslaved between those in ancient Greece, Italy and the Levant and those in North America. In Greece and surrounding countries, since slaves were treated with some degree of fairness, they were able to consequently buy back their freedom from their masters. Normally, this would take a minimum of about seven years. With the expansion of countries such as Rome as a consequent of war, the slaves became an important component of its economic prosperity, with the wealthy eventually moving into big cities and leaving the slaves to tend to their property. With these opportunities, the slaves were able to rely on their relevance in the system, and with it, garner enough to press for their freedom. Contrastingly, in Northern America, slaves had no rights to marry, seek relief from harsh owners, or even opportunities to accumulate enough to buy their freedom (Eric 76). The institution was based on a classic capitalist society where everyone tried to make good their ideas and success (Deirdre 56). The only slaves who could potentially manage to get their right to freedom were the ones who presented challenges and became burdens to their masters, such as the sick, the elderly, or those who were deemed unnecessary in financial terms.

Additionally, the institution of slavery in Greece, Italy, and the Levant was well institutionalized in the Catholic Church. The slaves received protection from the church and laws had been institutionalized to ensure their protection. At the time, Judaism and Christianity reinforced the notions that slavery and its economic benefits were not only human but also natural (Kecia 43). Further, Christianity emphasized the ideal that if the slave was Christian by religion, they should be treated as brother or sister. Slavery was considered a moral alternative to economic and financial challenges. Further, the institution of servitude was justifiable by law and could be seen as a normal form of punishment.

There are many narratives that express different perspectives on slavery. Many were aimed at eliciting the sympathy from their readers, grow individual aspects of humanitarianism, and enforcing the religious doctrines of brotherhood. For instance, Aristotle took the defense of slavery as a medium to provide care for certain individuals, which reduced the moral implication of having humans as slaves for keeps. Aristotle considered the institution a necessary evil in keeping the society in a balance, and although the paradigm was criticized, he made a notable contribution to their liberation.

Additionally, slavery, especially in Greece, Italy, and the Levant, was enforced by families. Parents, particularly those that were unable to provide for their children would find masters to sell their children to. In this ancient set-up, marriage was never as a sacred affair but legitimized by a sale agreement (Bradley et al. 15). Marriage through the sale of the bride to the groom was naturally recognized and respected, with most taking the form of slavery. In the same way, the sold woman was legally expected to play the role of the wife to their master, and provide to the needs of the bride.

The institution of slavery provides a great deal of insight into the various institutions that existed in ancient times. The institution proves invaluable lessons on historical occurrences and events and aspects of morality. From the paper, it is evident that there were notable similarities and differences between the slavery in ancient Greece, Italy and the Levant and North America, and despite the economic and social benefits accrued to the masters, the process neither became human, nor moral.

Works Cited

Ali, Kecia. Marriage and slavery in early Islam. Harvard University Press, 2010.

Bradley, Keith, and Paul Cartledge, eds. The Cambridge World History of Slavery: Volume 1, The Ancient Mediterranean World. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Elkins, Stanley M. Slavery: A problem in American institutional and intellectual life. University of Chicago Press, 2013.

Lovejoy, Paul E. Transformations in slavery: a history of slavery in Africa. Vol. 117. Cambridge University Press, 2011.

McCloskey, Deirdre N. Bourgeois equality: How ideas, not capital or institutions, enriched the world. University of Chicago Press, 2016.

Pounds, Norman John Greville. An economic history of medieval Europe. Routledge, 2014.

Scheidel, Walter. “The comparative economics of slavery in the Greco-Roman world.” Slave Systems, Ancient and Modern(2008): 105-126.

Scott, Rebecca J. Degrees of freedom: Louisiana and Cuba after slavery. Harvard University Press, 2009.

Wolf, Eric R. Europe and the People without History. Univ of California Press, 2010.