In his discussion of natural slavery in the first book of the Politics (1254a17–1254b39), Aristotle notoriously assimilates human slaves to non-human animals. Natural slaves, Aristotle maintains (1254b16–20), are those who differ from others in the way that the body differs from the soul, or in the way that an animal differs from a human being; and into this category fall ‘all whose function is bodily service, and who produce their best when they supply such service’. The point is made more explicit in the argument (1254b20–4) that the capacity to be owned as property and the inability fully to participate in reason are defining characteristics of the natural slave: ‘Other animals do not apprehend reason but obey their instincts. Even so there is little divergence in the way they are used; both of them (slaves and tame animals) provide bodily assistance in satisfying essential needs’ (1254b24–6). Slaves and animals are not actually equated in Aristotle's views, but the inclination of the slave-owner in classical antiquity, or at least a representative of the slave-owning classes, to associate the slave with the animal is made evident enough. It appears again in Aristotle's later statement (1256b22–6) that the slave was as appropriate a target of hunting as the wild animal.
1 cf. also Arist., Met. 1075a20–2: in the household slaves and animals show little responsibility and generally act at random. Quotations: trans. Barker. For discussion of Aristotle's views, see Brunt, P. A., ‘Aristotle and slavery’, in Studies in Greek History and Thought (1993), 342–88; Garnsey, P. D. A., Ideas of Slavery from Aristotle to Augustine (1996), 110–15.
2 Xenophon: Pomeroy, S. B., Xenophon Oeconomicus: A Social and Historical Commentary (1994), 319, compares Cyrop. 8.43–4. Columella quotation: trans. Ash. Andrapodon: Finley, M. I., Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology (1980), 99; Harvey, F. D., ‘Herodotus and the man-footed creature’, in Archer, L. (ed.), Slavery and Other Forms of Unfree Labour (1988), 42–52, at 42.
3 Aristotle's evidence: cf. Pol. 1253b: ‘the slave is an animate article of property’ (Barker). Note also Pl, Plt. 289b; Chrys., Dio, Or. 15.24. Lex Aquilia: see Crawford, M. H. (ed.), Roman Statutes (1996), 723–6 (J. A. Crook). First provision: translation as in Crawford (loc. cit.) from the reconstructed text (cf. Crook, J. A., ‘Lex Aquilia’, Athenaeum 62 (1984), 67–77, especially 72 for the inclusion of pecudem in the first provision); whether the third provision originally specified damage to slaves and animals is unknown (Crawford, op. cit., 726), but note Gai., , Inst. 3.217 (cf. 3.212, 3.219); Dig. 126.96.36.199. Compilers: see Dig. 9.2 passim. Edict of the Aediles: Dig. 188.8.131.52, 21.1.38 pr. For criticism of treating slaves as beasts of burden, see Plut., Cato Maior 5.
4 Common phenomenon: Jacoby, K., ‘Slaves by nature? Domestic animals and human slaves’, Slavery & Abolition 15 (1994), 89–99, at 89–90, followed by D. B. Davis, ‘The problem of slavery’, Introduction to Drescher, S. and Engermann, S. L., A Historical Guide to World Slavery (1998), ix–xviii (first published as ‘At the heart of slavery’, New York Review of Books 43.16 (October 17, 1996), 51–4). Arab poet: al Mutannabi, quoted by Lewis, B., Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry (1990), 59–60. David Cooper: quoted from Jordan, W. D., White Over Black: American Attitudes Toward the Negro 1550–1812 (1973), 276.
5 See Jordan, op. cit. (n. 4), 3–43, 232–4, 482–511; Davis, D. B., The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture (1966), 453–64. For animalizing views of Blacks in Muslim sources, see Lewis, op. cit. (n. 4), 52–3.
6 Origins: Lovejoy, A. O., The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea (1936), 52–8. Racial prejudice: Sherwin-White, A. N., Racial Prejudice in Imperial Rome (1967); Snowden, F. M. Jr., Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Blacks (1983); Thompson, L. A., Romans and Blacks (1989). Natural world: cf. Beagon, M., Roman Nature: The Thought of Pliny the Elder (1992), esp. 124–58. Hierarchically ordered: for texts on the theme of the supposed superiority of animals to human beings, predicated on the opposite starting assumption, see Lovejoy, A. O. and Boas, G., Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity (1935), 389–420. Commodification: also present in later European attitudes towards Africans but inextricably enmeshed with racial views. Caesar's capture: Plut., , Caes. 1.4–2.4; Suet., , Jul. 74.1.
7 Opening pages: Met. 1.6–8. Major themes: Schlam, C. C., The Metamorphoses of Apuleius: On Making an Ass of Oneself (1992), 58–66. On slavery in the Metamorphoses, see also Annequin, J., ‘Métaphore de l'esclavage et esclavage comme métaphore’, in Brulé, P. and Oulhen, J. (eds), Esclavage, guerre, économie en Grèce ancienne: Hommages à Yvon Garlan (1997), 101–19; cf. also Fitzgerald, W., Slavery and the Roman Literary Imagination (2000), 87–114.
8 Transformation: Gianotti, G. F., ‘Asini e schiavi: zoologia filosofica e ideologie della dipendenza nelle “Metamorfosi” apuleiane’, Quaderni di storia 9 no. 18 (1983), 121–53, draws attention (127–8) to relevant Platonic correspondences (e.g. Phdr. 249b, Ti. 91d–92c, Phd. 81c (especially interesting for its reference to the ass)). Firmly established: a comprehensive portrait of Lucius is not given at the beginning of the Metamorphoses but is only revealed gradually through various passing references; for the relevant details up to the moment of transformation, see Met. 1.1, 1.2, 1.20, 1.23, 1.24, 1.26, 2.2, 2.3, 2.31, 3.11, 315. ‘Quis ille?’: on the fundamental theme of identity, see Bakhtin, M. M., The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, edited by Holquist, M. (1981), 111–29; for a summary of the problem of who is speaking at the beginning of the novel, see Harrison, S. J., Apuleius: A Latin Sophist (2000), 228, with references. Decurial sector: Lucius is never so identified, but it is clear that he belongs to the same social level as, for instance, the decurion introduced at Met. 10.1 or the Corinthian magistrate Thiasus, introduced at Met. 10.18; see Mason, H. J., ‘The distinction of Lucius in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses', Phoenix 37 (1983), 135–43, who makes the suggestion that Lucius may even have been of senatorial origin, and cf. Harrison, op. cit., 215–20, who sees Lucius as an aspirant sophist. Background: Millar, F. G. B., ‘The world of the Golden Ass’, JRS 71 (1981), 63–75 = Harrison, S. J. (ed.), Oxford Readings in the Roman Novel (1999), 247–68 (a fundamental study).
9 Asinine form: Met. 3.24: ‘sed plane pili mei crassantur in setas, et cutis tenella duratur in corium, et in extimis palmulis perdito numero toti digiti coguntur in singulas ungulas et de spinae meae termino grandis cauda procedit. Iam facies enormis et os prolixum et nares hiantes et labiae pendulae; sic et aures inmodicis horripilant auctibus. Nec ullum miserae reformationis uideo solacium, nisi quod mihi iam nequeunti tenere Photidem natura crescebat.’ See Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7), 99–112, on the theme of animal and human in the Metamorphoses, but with no reference to slavery (cf. 7 briefly). Gianotti, art. cit. (n. 8), maintains that loss of freedom is a key ethical theme in the novel. Ugliness: cf. Hopkins, K., ‘Novel evidence for Roman slavery’, P&P 138 (1993), 3–27, at 13, 15, on the appearance of Aesop; and for some examples of a Roman taste for deformed slaves, see Garland, R., The Eye of the Beholder: Deformity and Disability in the Graeco-Roman World (1995), 46–8.
10 Met. 3.26–9 (note especially 3.25, ‘humano gestu simul et uoce priuatus’; 3.26, ‘perfectus asinus et pro Lucio iumentum’). Descent: cf. the literary use of animal metaphors to connote an absence of civilization observed by T. Wiedemann, ‘Between men and beasts: barbarians in Ammianus Marcellinus’, in Moxon, I., Smart, J. D. and Woodman, A. J. (eds), Past Perspectives: Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing (1986), 189–229; the connection made by Dupont, F., The Invention of Literature: From Greek Intoxication to the Latin Book (1999), 190–1, between Lucius' change of form and a putative abandonment of erotic interest for storytelling seems to me highly implausible. Topical: cf. Bradley, K. R., Slaves and Masters in the Roman Empire: A Study in Social Control (1987), 123–6. Tamed: confirmed at Met. 4.2, ‘pecori’; cf. 7.13, ‘iumentorum’.
11 Unrecognizable: Met. 3.26, ‘agnitione’. Isolated: Met. 3.27, ‘in solitudinem’; cf. 4.1, ‘solitudo’. Aware: Met. 3.26, ‘pro Lucio iumentum’. Shaming: Met. 3.26, ‘contumelia’. Learns: Met. 3.26, ‘melior me sententia reuocauit’. Resign: Met. 3.29, ‘casum praesentem tolerans’. Ability: cf. Sen., , Ep. 47.3; on loss of voice and loss of identity, see Finkelpearl, E. D., Metamorphosis of Language in Apuleius: A Study of Allusion in the Novel (1998), 192; the effect is not the same in Ovid's Metamorphoses; see Solodow, J. B., The World of Ovid's Metamorphoses (1988), 190–1.
12 Met. 7.17 (cruel boy), cf. 7.18, 7.20; 8.15 (herdsmen), cf. 8.16; 8.27 (Syrian priests), cf. 8.28, 8.30, 9.4; 9.32 (market-gardener), cf. 9.33; 9.39 (swaggering soldier), cf. 10.1; 10.13 (slave chefs); 7.15, 9.11 (mill). Long understood: see Moritz, L. A., Grain-Mills and Flour in Classical Antiquity (1958), 65, for a list of passages from Plautus connecting slaves with punishment in the mill; cf. Millar, F. G. B., ‘Condemnation to hard labour in the Roman Empire, from the Julio Claudians to Constantine’, PBSR 52 (1984), 124–47, at 143–4. Cf. Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7), 99.
13 Met. 6.25 (lame); 7.17, 7.28, 8.30, 9.15 (sadistic); 6.28 (Charite); 7.23–4 (castration); 7.21–2 (bestiality); 7.27 (mother). See also Met. 3.29, 4.3, 4.4, 7.15, 7.25, 9.11. Cf. Schlam, op. cit (n. 7), 72–3: ‘Being beaten is the Ass's most frequent experience.’ Answerable: on the association between beating and servitude, see Finley, op. cit. (n. 2), 93–5; cf. Saller, R. P., ‘Corporal punishment, authority, and obedience in the Roman household’, in Rawson, B. M. (ed.), Marriage, Divorce, and Children in Ancient Rome (1991), 144–65.
14 Syrian priests: Met. 8.26; cf. Hopkins, art. cit. (n. 9), 16–17, on the sale of Aesop. Corinthian noblewoman: Met. 10.19–22. Willing victim: cf. the reference in Lewis, op. cit. (n. 4), 97, to ‘a Persian manuscript of the famous Masnavi of Rumi, completed in Tabriz in about 1530, illustrating an episode in the poem in which a woman discovers her maidservant copulating with an ass and tries, with disastrous results, to do the same’ (Illus. 22). It is notable that scenes of sexual union between women and quadrupeds (perhaps asses) appear on Greek lamps of the imperial age from Athens and Corinth, and may have a connection with a pre-Apuleian version of the ass story; see Ph. Bruneau, ‘Illustrations antiques du coq et de l'ane de Lucien’, BCH (1965), 349–57. Publicly exhibiting: Met. 10.23, 10.29 (note ‘ingentique angore oppido suspensus’, ‘clades ultimas’), 10.34–5 (note ‘praeter pudorem obeundi publice concubitus’). Cf. Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7), 72–3. For sources on the sexual exploitation of slaves, see Kolendo, J., ‘L'esclavage et la vie sexuelle des hommes libres à Rome’, Index 10 (1981), 288–97.
15 Times: Met. 8.23–5, 9.10, 9.31, 10.13, 10.17. Unrealistically: Duncan-Jones, R., The Economy of the Roman Empire (1974), 249. Protest: Met. 7.3. Vent: Met. 8.29. Fable: Phaedr. 1.15. Suicide: Met. 7.24, 10.29. Pleasure: Met. 7.26, ‘tacitus licet serae uindictae gratulabar’. On the pyschological effects of sale, note the response of the Tolpuddle martyr James Hammet when asked why he refused to talk about his experiences as a convict labourer: ‘If you'd been sold like a sheep for £1 would you want to talk about it?’ (Thompson, E. P., Making History: Writings on History and Cultur (1994), 191).
16 Met. 7.3, 7.27 (fellow-slave); 9.11 (mill); 9.32 (new owner); 11.15 (Mithras, ‘servile pleasures’ (on which see the Appendix)); 7.12 (non-existent: ‘contempta mea praesentia quasi uere mortui’; cf. 3.29, ‘nihil a mortuo differebam’). For the notion of slavery as social death, see Patterson, O., Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study (1982); cf. in a different sense Gianotti, art. cit. (n. 8), 136–7. Bowersock, G. W., Fiction as History: Nero to Julian (1994), 109, draws a connection between death and ‘the servility of a captive’ through Apuleius’ use of the phrase ‘postliminio mortis’ at Met. 10.12 (cf. 2.28, 3–25).
17 ‘Cappadocian’: Met. 8.24 (cf. Mart. 6.77, 10.76). ‘Novice servant’: Met. 8.26. Servile vocabulary: Met. 8.24, ‘ciuem Romanum pro seruo’, ‘bonum et frugi mancipium’; 8.26, ‘seruum … pulchellum’, ‘hominem seruulum’, ‘seruum’, ‘uicarius’. Sales documents: for a catalogue of 157 attestations of donkey sales from Egypt (mid-second century B.C.–sixth/seventh century A.D.), see Litinas, N., ‘P. Lond. III 1 128: sale of a donkey’, ZPE 124 (1999), 195–204. Familia: Met. 9.13 (which to my mind resolves the doubts of Millar, art. cit. (n. 12), 129–30, on the workers' servile status). Iconographic sources: Moritz, op. cit. (n. 12), 78–9; cf. 100. Tomb: E. Nash, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome (1981), II, 329–32.
18 Varro: Rust. 2.1.14, 2.6.1–6, 3.17.6. Columella: Rust. 7.1.1–3. Pliny, : NH 8.167–70. On the ordinary ass, see White, K. D., Roman Farming (1970), 293–4, 299–300; Toynbee, J. M. C., Animals in Roman Life and Art (1973), 192–7; cf. at great length RE VI, 1 s.v. ‘Esel’ (Olck). Agents: asses are required of the city of Sagalassus in Pisidia for official imperial use, in the event of an absence of mules, in an inscription from the early reign of Tiberius published by Mitchell, S., ‘Requisitioned transport in the Roman Empire: a new inscription from Pisidia’, JRS 66 (1976), 106–31; with the common abuse of local facilities (Mitchell, art. cit., 114–15) cf. Met. 9.39. Graffito: CLE 1978, shown in Bonner, S. F., Education in Ancient Rome: From the Elder Cato to the Younger Pliny (1977), 123 (fig. 12); cf. Moritz, op. cit. (n. 12), 83. Terracotta: shown in Bonner, op. cit., 124 (fig. 13). Poor food: for references to the Ass's food supply, see Met. 3.29, 4.3, 7.14, 7.15, 9.32, 10.13, 10.16; cf. Heath, J. R., ‘Narration and nutrition in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses', Ramus 11 (1982), 57–77. Very symbol: Artem. 1.24, 1.37; cf. Gianotti, art. cit. (n. 8), 131–2.
19 Docility: Met. 8.24, ‘de mansuetudine’; cf. 10.35, ‘tam mansuetum … asinum’. Other instruments: Bradley, op. cit. (n. 10), passim. Note that Jacoby, art cit. (n. 4), draws a parallel between the domestication of animals following the Neolithic Revolution and the rise of slavery (especially in Mesopotamia), thereby characterizing slavery as a domestication of human beings in which the urge to control was as strong as in the domestication of wild beasts. The parallel has much appeal, but the overall argument, covering an enormous amount of time and space, is clearly very speculative. It is accepted wholeheartedly by Davis, art. cit. (n. 4). Significantly the ‘progressive juvenilization’ morphologically visible in domesticated animals is not evident in historical slave populations.
20 Harriet Jacobs: Yellin, J. F. (ed.), Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl Written by Herself, by Harriet A. Jacobs (1987), 44, 28 (my emphasis; cf. 52 ‘She selected the most brutalized, over whom her authority could be exercised with less fear of exposure’). Frederick Douglass: Gates, H. L. Jr., The Classic Slave Narratives (1987), 282. Cowper, H. Augustus: Conrad, R. E., Children of God's Fire: A Documentary History of Back Slavery in Brazil (1983), 71–6.
21 Bolted: cf. Dig. 184.108.40.206. Proverbial: Plaut., Pseud. 135; Ov., , Am. 2.7.15–16. Gardener, : Met. 4.3. Photis, : Met. 3.26. Many occasions: Met. 3.29 (emperor), 4.4 (rooted), 6.26 (run away; cf. also 6.27), 7.24, 10.29 (suicide), 7.28 (dung), 8.16 (hide), 9.1 (slave cook), 9.2 (bolts again), 9.11 (mill), 9.26–7 (takes revenge), 10.13–14 (pilfers), 10.35 (once more), 4.5 (tricks, schemes, dissembling); cf. also 8.25.
22 Human mind: see Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7), 153 n. 5 for passages stressing the Ass's ‘sensus humanus’. Sleep: cf. Met. 9.2. Human responses: K. R. Bradley, Slavery and Society at Rome (1994), 107–31, with reference to comparative material. Acquiescent: Met. 4.5; 3.29.
23 Reality: cf. Davis, art. cit. (n. 4), xv. Enticed: Bradley, op. cit. (n. 10), passim. Reward: Met. 7.15; cf. 7.16 (‘liber asinus laetus’). Quadruped: Met. 4.1, 6.27, 6.28, 7.3 (note ‘in bestiam et extremae sortis quadripedem’ with Bakhtin, op. cit. (n. 8), 121 for the notion that the condition of the ass was lower than that of the slave); cf. also 7.27, 11.12. Forms of behaviour: Bradley, op. cit. (n. 22), 107–31; cf. Cartledge, P. A., ‘Rebels and Sambos in Classical Greece: a comparative view’, in Cartledge, P. A. and Harvey, F. D. (eds), Crux: Essays Presented to G. E. M. de Ste. Croix on his 75th Birthday (1985), 16–46. Valued: cf. Met. 8.29: the Ass as a valuable piece of livestock to be tracked down if stolen.
24 Influential view: Winkler, J. J., Auctor & Actor: A Narratological Reading of Apuleius's The Golden Ass (1985). Another: Shumate, N., Crisis and Conversion in Apuleius' Metamorphoses (1996); cf. Bradley, K. R., ‘Contending with conversion: reflections on the reformation of Lucius the Ass’, Phoenix 52 (1998), 315–34. Yet another: Finkelpearl, op. cit. (n. 11). Full complexity: Bakhtin, op. cit. (n. 8), 115 (for a sound introductory study, see Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7, 1992); cf. Harrison, op. cit. (n. 8), stressing the importance of ‘literary entertainment and cultural display’ (259) in the work). Fundamental pattern: Bakhtin, op. cit. (n. 8), 118; cf. 121 (the Christianizing terminology is problematical, but that may be the responsibility of the translators rather than the author ipse). Faced squarely: for discussion of the problem of slavery in antiquity, see Garnsey, op. cit. (n. 1); cf. Bradley, K. R., ‘The problem of slavery in classical culture’, CP 92 (1997), 273–82.
25 Domestic entourages: Met. 2.19; 4.24, 7.13; 8.31, 9.2; 10.13, 10.15, 10.16, 10.17, 10.20. Rural slaves: Met. 7.15–16, 7.17–28, 8.1, 8.15–23; 9.10–13. Lucius himself: Met. 2.31, 3.27; cf. 11.18, 11.20. Milo: Met. 1.21, 1.23, 1.26. For a list of slave personnel in the Metamorphoses and Apuleius' other writings, see Norden, F., Apulejus von Madaura und das römische Privatrecht (1912), 72 n. 1. Adulterous steward: Met. 8.22. Herdsmen: Met. 8.15–23. Terrified cook: Met. 8.31. Note how at Met. 9.2 Myrmex is depicted as a typical thieving slave — one who will steal shoes at the baths, and who becomes the object of violence from a free citizen without any discomfiture on his owner's part (cf. Glancy, J. A., ‘Slaves and slavery in the Matthaean parables’, Journal of Biblical Literature 119 (2000), 67–90, at 80). Called: Bakhtin, op. cit. (n. 8), III. Commit suicide: Bradley, op. cit. (n. 22), 44, 48, 110, 111–12. Run away: Bradley, op. cit. (n. 22), 117–21, 126–8. Vedius Pollio: Syme, R., ‘Who was Vedius Pollio?’, JRS 51 (1961), 23–30 (= Roman Papers II (1979), 518–29), at 23–4, 29; cf. Bradley, op. cit. (n. 10), 121, 126. Cowper: Conrad, op. cit. (n. 20), 73–5.
26 Date of composition: Schlam, op. cit. (n. 7), 12. Adapted: Schlam, op. cit., 22–8. Aspects: Onos 15, 16, 18, 19, 22, 24, 29, 30, 42 (beatings); 16, 19, 28, 34, 37, 39, 41 (labour); 35, 42, 43, 46, 48 (disposal). Mirrors: Millar, art. cit. (n. 8).
27 Maturity: for details of Apuleius' biography, see Sandy, G. M., The Greek World of Apuleius: Apuleius and the Second Sophistic (1997), 1–36; Harrison, op. cit. (n. 8), 1–10. Slave-owner: Apul., Apol. 17; cf. Hunink, V. (ed.), Apuleius of Madauros Pro Se De Magia (1997), II, 68–71. Four hundred: Apul., Apol. 93–4.
28 Trade: Law, R. C. C., ‘The Garamantes and trans Saharan enterprise in classical times’, Journal of African History 2 (1967), 181–200. It is worth noting that slaves are mentioned together with with various animals (and other commodities) — horses, mules, asses, cows, bulls, pigs, sheep, goats — in the Zarai tariff inscription (CIL VIII.4508); cf. T. Frank (ed.), An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, Volume IV (1938), 80–2 (R. M. Haywood). Epigram: Anth. Lat. 183; cf. Snowden, op. cit. (n. 6), 83–4; Thompson, op. cit. (n. 6), 36–8. Mosaics, objects of art: Desanges, J., ‘The iconography of the Black in ancient North Africa’, in Vercoulter, J., Leclant, J., Snowden, F. M. Jr., and Desanges, J. (eds), The Image of the Black in Western Art (1976), I, 260–5; Dunbabin, K. M. D., The Mosaics of Roman North Africa (1978), 274, 275 (cf. 162); Snowden, op. cit. (n. 6), 88. Blásquez, J. M., ‘Representaciones de esclavos en mosaicos africanos’, L'Africa romana 12 (1998), 1029–36. Perpetual appeal: it is enough to refer in general to relevant scenes from the Column of Trajan and the Column of Marcus Aurelius (see Hannestad, N., Roman Art and Imperial Policy (1988), 160–1, 238–41), and for local manifestations of the image in Tripolitania to the Arch of Marcus Aurelius at Oea and the Arch of Septimius Severus at Lepcis Magna. Extent: Desanges, op. cit., 254, 257 (highly sceptical); cf. Snowden, op. cit., 123 n. 71. Nineteenth century: Wright, J., ‘Murzuk and the Saharan slave trade in the 19th century’, Libyan Studies 29 (1998); cf. Lewis, op. cit. (n. 4), 11–13, 41, 57–9, 72–3. Slave witnesses: Apul., , Apol. 44.6–7, 45.1. Trial: cf. Bradley, K. R., ‘Law, magic, and culture in the Apologia of Apuleius’, Phoenix 51 (1997), 203–23. Daily life: cf. Plin., , HN 17.41 on the ass used for ploughing in Byzacium.
29 Novel evidence; cf. Hopkins, art. cit. (n. 8). Tamed animals: Yellin, op. cit. (n. 20), 21, 22, 48, 76, 92, 106, 156; cf. 161, on considerate treatment from sympathetic Northerners: ‘How gratifying this was, can be fully understood only by those who have been accustomed to be treated as if they were not included within the pale of human beings.’ ‘Wild beast of Slavery’: Yellin, op. cit., 35. Tiger: Yellin, op. cit., 199, Jacobs writing in reference to her daughter: ‘I thought of what I had suffered in slavery at her age, and my heart was like a tiger's when a hunter tries to seize her young.’ Rose, : Met. 3.29, ‘spe salutis alacer’; 4.1, ‘candens … rosarium’; 11.13, ‘rosis amoenis’.
30 Suggestion: Davis, art. cit. (n. 4), xviii (quoted), Issue: Bradley, art. cit. (n. 24), 282.
* The original version of this paper was read at the Second M. I. Finley Colloquium on Ancient Economy and Society held at Darwin College, Cambridge, in June 1999; I am grateful to Walter Scheidel, its organizer, for inviting me to participate. The paper has benefited from comments made by members of the audience in Cambridge, and also from audiences at Duke University, York University (Toronto), and Stanford University. Helpful remarks on the manuscript were also offered by the Editorial Committee. For financial support of the research on which the paper is based I wish to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Killam Trusts. To Professor Francis M. Newton of Duke University I owe a special debt, and offer him the final version of the paper as a personal tribute.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.
Usage data cannot currently be displayed