Scribble Hub Forum

I am merely paraphrasing Roman authors. Ethical concerns about slavery were a common theme in Roman society.

Evil Lol , nope, I accept you earlier answer.

I have place that in you character sheet, as you characteristic, that is who you are now.

And I thank voidiris for letting us know they 100% got your back and agrees fully. Because they fully understand the implications.

?

Nuance is one of my virtues I value.

You should remember that back in Roman times there were several kinds of slavery: debt slavery, born into slavery, religious slavery...

Slavery was not a permanent state as it is understood to be nowadays, and slaves had rights. Sometimes, they were treated better than "free" people. Others, they were not. It was a strange situation to be placed, and you could earn your freedom most times.

Debt slavery was abolished 326 BCE through the Lex Poetelia Papiria de nexis.

They had no rights as they were objects, reduced to property not to people.

If they had rights, then merely as organs of the pater familias.

And here is where you are mistaken. Property is to be treated right, not to be mistreated. People did not break their tables just because they had anger issues. They would not beat on debt slaves because a debt slave is your slave only so long it is in debt to you. That did not mean it was not beat, not only because someone was in a bad mood.

It is why it is called peonage and not slavery. You never had a reductio through an obligatio. Meanwhile, tell me about the property aspect of Aquilian liability claims for damages against slaves?

What about calling for damage others inflicted on your property?

Slaves fell under the application of the lex Aquiliana.

Of course, they did. It was when they were wrongfully killed. WRONGFULLY.

Let me just put this: I understand that with time, values change. I'm not going to demand that humanity has the same moral and laws throughout all its history as they have right now. In fact, I even doubt if the ones we practice nowadays are the "best" ones. What I believe to be true nowadays does not immediately makes it superior to anything others believe in, nor should it make a universal truth.

Therefore, I understand very well that there are possible reasons for the Slaves to have been rightfully killed back then. Which makes it different from me judging nowadays using my values. You are talking about Roman times. Therefore, use Roman values, and not your Values of nowadays. If you want to mix both values, you are making a complete mess of things.

What is your point, chicken?

The Aquilian Law talks about wrongful killing of slaves. It does not matter what I believe is wrong or not with my 21st century values. But rather what I would believe with my values of the then of the time of the law values. Roman values.

You are rambling. What is your position? And how does it matter?

You asked about the law. If this is not what you asked, then excuse me, I have more to do. Have a good day.

Only thing that matter to me, is because a2 made no indication they are paraphraising, nor any advocacy nor analysis of the Roman values initially. My evaluation of a2 as a person is thathat they are an ancient Roman.

Thu need to go marry a goth. And doesn't belong in civilized society.