A slave is an individual under the complete social, political, and economic control of another entity; someone whose existence belongs solely to this other entity. Slaves were not to be considered as full human beings, deserving of the same rights and protections as free citizens, as shown by the jurist Gaius: “The principal distinction made by the law of the persons is this, that all human beings are either free or slaves (Gaius, Institutes, book , chapter 8).” They were, quite literally, a different class of human being, one which faced harsher punishments and fewer protections. This inequality under the law was the defining feature of what made a slave a slave.
Slaves were offered little to no protection under the law from harm either by outsiders or their masters. When a slave was harmed by a third party, the harmer often faced a less …show more content…
The Code of Hammurabi, written in the late seventeen-hundreds B.C., offers an example of this unequal treatment. “If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out (Hammurabi, Code of Hammurabi, n.196).” Yet the same crime, the removal of an eye by force, done to a slave holds a much less severe punishment: “If he puts out the eye of a man’s slave, or breaks the bone of a man’s slave, he shall pay one-half of its value (Hammurabi, Code of Hammurabi, n.199).” The reason for this inequality is that slave was not a full citizen or person, he was the property of a full citizen or person. The charge against the offender was really a charge of destruction of property. A master could sue the third party for damages, but this suit often held no benefits for the slave. In fact, the suit might not even be seen in court. Ulpian wrote in the Digest that “the Praetor ought to extend his investigation to include the quality of the
Slaves were offered little to no protection under the law from harm either by outsiders or their masters. When a slave was harmed by a third party, the harmer often faced a less …show more content…
The Code of Hammurabi, written in the late seventeen-hundreds B.C., offers an example of this unequal treatment. “If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out (Hammurabi, Code of Hammurabi, n.196).” Yet the same crime, the removal of an eye by force, done to a slave holds a much less severe punishment: “If he puts out the eye of a man’s slave, or breaks the bone of a man’s slave, he shall pay one-half of its value (Hammurabi, Code of Hammurabi, n.199).” The reason for this inequality is that slave was not a full citizen or person, he was the property of a full citizen or person. The charge against the offender was really a charge of destruction of property. A master could sue the third party for damages, but this suit often held no benefits for the slave. In fact, the suit might not even be seen in court. Ulpian wrote in the Digest that “the Praetor ought to extend his investigation to include the quality of the