Research Paper on:
Roman Empire's Freed Slaves

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
must look at the context in which one was made a slave and what role the slave played in a culture before pinning such hard and fixed definitions on them.  In Rome, for example, slaves were not so much seen as sub-human, but actually had the ability to become freedmen. Or were they? If one looks closely at the various  reports and laws from the day, one will see that though they were not considered slaves any longer, the freedmen were anything but completely free. The bottom line, here,  is incentive. Why would any slave owner want to free his/her slave? In the days of Romes glory, slaves were treated differently than they were in the south in the  United States. There is little comparison. True, these people were in bondage to their owners, but in opposition to the circumstances of the black slave in the US south, the  slave of a Roman citizen was educated, trained at various skills, and as such could be freed to bring in some sort of ongoing revenue to the household. Perhaps  it is because there was not such a large distinction in skin color during the Roman Era, but it seems as if slaves were not considered sub-human, but more rather  unfortunate. The interesting thing about Rome was that political clout was everything. Who one knew could either get one killed, or elected to the Senate. Therefore, if one threw enough  parties, said the right things, it was possible for the slave to rise to great heights as both a slave and eventually on his own as a freedman. The one  thing that freedmen never were granted, however, was citizenship. However, if they married, the children would be considered Roman(Shelton 1998). Slavery, especially to the Western mindset is an abhorrent