The social classes

As was said in chapter 2, by the close of the third century BC the old patrician aristocracy had been replaced by a new type of nobility, made up of a small number of wealthy patrician and plebeian families, whose members monopolised the highest offices of the state.

Since the Roman senate consisted largely of members of leading families who had served as magistrates, this new nobility was referred to as the senatorial class (ordo senatorius). In the ordo senatorius were included all the descendants of families which had been represented in the senate, whether or not members of the immediate family were senators at a given time. The position which a person occupied within the senatorial class depended largely upon the rank of the state offices which members of his family had held.²¹ Despite the divisions that existed within the ordo senatorius and the antagonisms that often developed between its members, community of economic and political interests tended to promote solidarity among the senatorial families. The chief source of these families' wealth was landed property, as senators were debarred by custom and law from engaging in trade and industry and were not allowed to enter into contracts with the state for the collection of taxes and other public revenues. Thus, under the lex Claudia of 213 BC senators were forbidden to engage in commercial activities other than the selling of the produce of their own estates.²² Senators who had served as army commanders usually received a large share of the spoils of war and were able to take possession of large tracts of land in the conquered countries. However, the fact that many senators had large financial interests in the provinces did not make for disinterested public administration of the provinces. Senators who served as provincial governors had plenty of opportunities to gain wealth by means that were not honest and, as they had almost unlimited power and were free from the restraint of public opinion, they often yielded to the temptation.

Political and economic developments led to the emergence, during the second century BC, of a new social class in Rome, which became known as the equestrian class (ordo equester).

The term equites originally ^{^[525]}[526] referred to those citizens who were rich enough to be included into the eighteen centuries of knights (centuriae equitum), which constituted the cavalry of the Roman army. As was noted in chapter 3, these citizens made up the prestigious equestrian centuries of the centuriate assembly.^{^[527]} After the wars of the mid-republican period, the term equites gradually ceased to be associated with military service and came to denote the powerful class of rich merchants and entrepreneurs many of whom made their fortune by exploiting the opportunities brought about by Rome's wars of expansion. An active and very visible minority within the equestrian class acquired their wealth by entering into contracts with the Roman state for the carrying out of various public operations. These included, for example, the construction of public buildings and roads, the operation of publicly owned mines, the provisioning of the Roman army and the collection of taxes and other public revenues. Many equestrians were also active in shipping, especially in the transportation of agricultural products from the provinces to Rome. Traditionally activities such as these were regarded as undignified and therefore unsuitable for members of the senatorial nobility. The lex Claudia, mentioned above, greatly facilitated the formation of the equestrian class which, however, was not fully recognised as a distinct social order before the passing of the lex Sempronia iudiciaria in 122 BC.^{^[528]}

Below the equites lay the aristocracy of the various communities in Italy and the provinces, whose members were usually faithful supporters of Rome and had adopted the Roman culture and way of life. Slightly lower down in the social hierarchy were the members of the lower middle class: the small landowners in the country and the artisans and small traders in the cities.

Although their economic situation was markedly worse, to the same class belonged also the bulk of the urban and rural proletariat, whose only means of support was what they could get from the state in the form of grants, or from the wealthy families to which many of its members had attached themselves as clients. As Rome's urban proletariat was susceptible to political manipulation and prone to violence, it came to constitute a serious threat to political stability, especially during the last century of the republican era.^{^[529]}

Slaves and freedmen

By far the most vulnerable group in society were the slaves (servi). In the early republican period the number of slaves in Rome was relatively small and most agricultural works and ordinary trades were carried out by freedmen. But from the early third century BC the slave population began to grow rapidly and, in the later Republic, slave labour had become a predominant factor in economic life. Large numbers of foreign slaves were brought into Italy during the period of the Punic Wars and, as the demand for slave labour continued to grow, more followed in the course of the Roman campaigns in the East.^{^[530]} Besides the wars, another source of slaves were the large slave markets of the East, such as the one on the island of Delos in the Aegean.^{^[531]} Moreover, as the children of slave families were themselves slaves by birth, the slave population continued to grow and, by the end of the republican age, probably more than one third of the whole population of Italy consisted of slaves.^{^[532]} The living conditions of slaves varied considerably, depending upon their personal skills and education as well as their place of work. By and large, the urban slaves were treated better than those living on country estates or working in the mines, and were more frequently released from slavery.^{^[533]} In general, however, the vast majority of slaves, especially those working on the large estates, lived in misery and were treated with brutality by their masters.

The deep resentment felt by slaves against their Roman masters erupted in a series of large-scale uprisings during the late second and early first centuries BC.

A slave had no personal rights, being regarded in the eyes of the law as a thing (res). Thus, if he was killed or injured by another this was dealt with by the law not as a wrong done to the slave but as damage to his master's property.^{^[534]} Moreover, if one's slave caused damage to another's property, the master of the slave had to make amends to the person whose property was damaged or to surrender the slave to the authorities for punishment.^{^[535]} As to the penalties inflicted upon slaves, these varied considerably depending upon the seriousness of the offence committed and the circumstances of the case. Among the most common and least severe forms of punishment were flogging and the transference of the slave from the city to a country estate where living conditions were much harsher. If a slave had committed a more serious offence he was forced to perform the hardest labours, often in chains, or was confined to an underground cell. Slaves found guilty of grave crimes were usually sentenced to death by crucifixion.^{^[536]}[537]

A slave could be released from slavery by his master (manumissio) in three different ways: by a formal announcement by the master in public and before a higher magistrate (usually a praetor) that the slave was free (v indicia); after the enrolment of a slave as a Roman citizen by the censor, on the master's request (censu); and under his master's will {testamentd)^ After his liberation a slave was referred to as libertinus (freedman) and had, in theory at least, all the rights and obligations of a Roman citizen.^{^[538]} In practice, however, freedmen and their descendants were viewed as socially inferior by those with no slaves in their ancestry and were virtually excluded from all the important offices of the state. A large part of Rome's urban proletariat was formed by liberated slaves. Nevertheless, many freedmen succeeded in earning a steady living through their involvement in trade, industry and the arts, and some even gained access to positions of power, especially in the last century of the Republic and during the early Empire.^{^[539]}

<< | >>

↑

Source: Mousourakis George. The Historical and Institutional Context of Roman Law. Routledge,2003. — 480 p.. 2003

The social classes

More on the topic The social classes: