As far as I can currently tell, there are three types of slaves in what I’ll call the legends of early Rome.
First, some important leaders, including very famous characters like Romulus, as well as lesser known leaders such as Servius Tullius and Caeculus, are described by some ancient writers as slaves. In Plutarch’s retelling of the Romulus story, he imagines Romulus and Remus growing up as shepherds, which is standard, but he also specifically imagines Romulus and Remus growing up as slaves.
Second, because slaves were essential to the economic and domestic lives of Romans in the third century BCE onwards, it is unsurprisingly that they imagined their ancestors similarly using slaves. For Livy, slaves are fundamental to proving just how seriously Lucretia takes her status as a matrona. For when her husband spies on her in order to win a drunken bet, she is at home with her slaves spinning wool. Likewise, the reason that she stops resisting her rapist Tarquin is because he threatens to kill her and a slave, and then arrange their bodies to imply that he had killed them in delecto flagrente. While rape is bad for Lucretia, indeed, calling her family to avenge her is not enough, she has to kill herself as well, the threat of her family’s reputation being ruined by the rumor that she had slept with a slave is apparently even worse.
The third option is to be a slave who begins something. A great example is the slave Vindicius, whose loyalty to the Roman state prompts Romans to begin the practice of granting citizenship to the slaves that it frees. So far, I have found two other examples. Now here is a dream which is mentioned by all our historians, by the Fabii and the Gellii and, most recently, by Coelius: During the Latin War when the Great Votive Games were being celebrated for the first time the city was suddenly called to arms and the games were interrupted. Later it was determined to repeat them, but before they began, and while the people were taking their seats, a slave bearing a yoke was led about the circus and beaten with rods. After that a Roman rustic had a dream in which someone appeared to him and said that he disapproved of the leader of the games and ordered this statement to be reported to the Senate. But the rustic dared not do as he was bid. The order was repeated by the specter with a warning not to put his power to the test. Not even then did the rustic dare obey. After that his son died and the same vision was repeated the third time. Thereupon he became ill and told his friends of his dream. On their advice he was carried to the Senate-house on a litter and, having related his dream to the Senate, his health was restored and he walked home unaided. And so, the tradition is, the Senate gave credence to the dream and had the games repeated.
Cicero, De divitione, 1.55; cf. Val. Max. 1.7.4, Livy 2.36
In this story, the slave’s body functions in two ways. First, his punishment and ridicule are entertainment for the Romans. True, it is the intended entertainment: apparently, during the hustle and bustle of Romans retaking their seats, a man led and beat a yolked slave about the circus. Cicero provides no comment as to how the Romans reacted to this, but given the large number of jokes involving the beating of slaves in Roman comedy, it is likely that Cicero expected his readers to imagine the audience laughing at this spectacle.
Second, the slave’s presence offends the gods. The language here is important, as Cicero describes the divinity in the slave’s dream reporting that “he disapproved of the leader of the games”. That is, the divinity who was meant to be honored by the Great Votive Games, understood the slave to be the leader of the games because he appeared first. The elevation of this slave to the status of a ritual leader angers the god, not the violence directed at the slave’s body.
This anonymous slave is passive throughout the story. The object of ridicule, the object of the gods’ disgust, the pain that the slave feels is elided as the story transforms into one of a reluctant prophet. But whereas Jonah sailed away to avoid fulfilling God’s instructions, the rustic, named Tiberius Atinius in other versions of the story, simply stays home and refuses to bring what he knows to the Senate.
Unstated in Cicero’s version of the story is the divide between plebeians and patricians. Here, Livy is useful, as his use of the story contextualizes it in the long history of conflicts and resolutions between plebeians and patricians.
As a plebeian, Tiberius Atinius lives on the margins of society and fears the patrician Senate, preferring to endure first the death of his son and then crippling illness. In Cicero’s rendition of the story, this fear is unfounded, as the Senate readily welcomes his divine revelation: the reconciliation of the patricians and plebeians has already occurred, so Atinius’ fear is unfounded.
First, some important leaders, including very famous characters like Romulus, as well as lesser known leaders such as Servius Tullius and Caeculus, are described by some ancient writers as slaves. In Plutarch’s retelling of the Romulus story, he imagines Romulus and Remus growing up as shepherds, which is standard, but he also specifically imagines Romulus and Remus growing up as slaves.
Second, because slaves were essential to the economic and domestic lives of Romans in the third century BCE onwards, it is unsurprisingly that they imagined their ancestors similarly using slaves. For Livy, slaves are fundamental to proving just how seriously Lucretia takes her status as a matrona. For when her husband spies on her in order to win a drunken bet, she is at home with her slaves spinning wool. Likewise, the reason that she stops resisting her rapist Tarquin is because he threatens to kill her and a slave, and then arrange their bodies to imply that he had killed them in delecto flagrente. While rape is bad for Lucretia, indeed, calling her family to avenge her is not enough, she has to kill herself as well, the threat of her family’s reputation being ruined by the rumor that she had slept with a slave is apparently even worse.
The third option is to be a slave who begins something. A great example is the slave Vindicius, whose loyalty to the Roman state prompts Romans to begin the practice of granting citizenship to the slaves that it frees. So far, I have found two other examples. Now here is a dream which is mentioned by all our historians, by the Fabii and the Gellii and, most recently, by Coelius: During the Latin War when the Great Votive Games were being celebrated for the first time the city was suddenly called to arms and the games were interrupted. Later it was determined to repeat them, but before they began, and while the people were taking their seats, a slave bearing a yoke was led about the circus and beaten with rods. After that a Roman rustic had a dream in which someone appeared to him and said that he disapproved of the leader of the games and ordered this statement to be reported to the Senate. But the rustic dared not do as he was bid. The order was repeated by the specter with a warning not to put his power to the test. Not even then did the rustic dare obey. After that his son died and the same vision was repeated the third time. Thereupon he became ill and told his friends of his dream. On their advice he was carried to the Senate-house on a litter and, having related his dream to the Senate, his health was restored and he walked home unaided. And so, the tradition is, the Senate gave credence to the dream and had the games repeated.
Cicero, De divitione, 1.55; cf. Val. Max. 1.7.4, Livy 2.36
In this story, the slave’s body functions in two ways. First, his punishment and ridicule are entertainment for the Romans. True, it is the intended entertainment: apparently, during the hustle and bustle of Romans retaking their seats, a man led and beat a yolked slave about the circus. Cicero provides no comment as to how the Romans reacted to this, but given the large number of jokes involving the beating of slaves in Roman comedy, it is likely that Cicero expected his readers to imagine the audience laughing at this spectacle.
Second, the slave’s presence offends the gods. The language here is important, as Cicero describes the divinity in the slave’s dream reporting that “he disapproved of the leader of the games”. That is, the divinity who was meant to be honored by the Great Votive Games, understood the slave to be the leader of the games because he appeared first. The elevation of this slave to the status of a ritual leader angers the god, not the violence directed at the slave’s body.
This anonymous slave is passive throughout the story. The object of ridicule, the object of the gods’ disgust, the pain that the slave feels is elided as the story transforms into one of a reluctant prophet. But whereas Jonah sailed away to avoid fulfilling God’s instructions, the rustic, named Tiberius Atinius in other versions of the story, simply stays home and refuses to bring what he knows to the Senate.
Unstated in Cicero’s version of the story is the divide between plebeians and patricians. Here, Livy is useful, as his use of the story contextualizes it in the long history of conflicts and resolutions between plebeians and patricians.
As a plebeian, Tiberius Atinius lives on the margins of society and fears the patrician Senate, preferring to endure first the death of his son and then crippling illness. In Cicero’s rendition of the story, this fear is unfounded, as the Senate readily welcomes his divine revelation: the reconciliation of the patricians and plebeians has already occurred, so Atinius’ fear is unfounded.