The Freedman in Roman The Freedman in Roman SocietySociety

After ManumissionAfter Manumission Freed still carried many moral and mental deficiencies associated with slaveFreed still carried many moral and mental deficiencies associated with slave Even if adopted by a freeborn, legally had to remain a freedmanEven if adopted by a freeborn, legally had to remain a freedman freedman could never become equal to an freedman could never become equal to an ingenuus ingenuus - idea was that he - idea was that he

continued to need help and supervision by his former mastercontinued to need help and supervision by his former master Manumission did not terminate relationship between ex-slave and former Manumission did not terminate relationship between ex-slave and former

mastermaster Slave became Slave became libertus/libertalibertus/liberta Owner became Owner became patronus/patrona patronus/patrona Associated freedman with social institution of Associated freedman with social institution of clientelaclientela and the and the familiafamilia (Roman (Roman

household)household) PatronusPatronus – from – from paterpater, denotes both someone who freed a slave and the senior, denotes both someone who freed a slave and the senior Freedman expected to behave like a son, although not related by bloodFreedman expected to behave like a son, although not related by blood Received pseudo-filiation (libertination), i.e. Gaii filiusReceived pseudo-filiation (libertination), i.e. Gaii filius Received gentilicial Received gentilicial nomennomen of patron; in Republic also common the same of patron; in Republic also common the same

praenomenpraenomen of patron; perpetuated patron’s name – may have been as of patron; perpetuated patron’s name – may have been as important as actual blood-line (if family was prominent)important as actual blood-line (if family was prominent)

Tomb inscription of A. Plautius Euhodus: Tomb inscription of A. Plautius Euhodus: “access to this tomb is restricted to “access to this tomb is restricted to my children and freedmen and their descendants who are called Plautiusmy children and freedmen and their descendants who are called Plautius .”.”

The patron-freed bondThe patron-freed bond Protected in Roman law: Protected in Roman law: lex Pompeia lex Pompeia (55/52 BC) made a (55/52 BC) made a libertuslibertus who had killed his who had killed his patronuspatronus

liable for parricide;liable for parricide; Lex colonia genitivaeLex colonia genitivae: no one could be forced to give evidence against: son-in-law, father-in-: no one could be forced to give evidence against: son-in-law, father-in-

law, stepfather, stepson, patron or freedman, or cousin;law, stepfather, stepson, patron or freedman, or cousin; Lex Iulia de vi Lex Iulia de vi – listed all those who could not give evidence in court against each other in – listed all those who could not give evidence in court against each other in

criminal proceedings – including patrons and freedmencriminal proceedings – including patrons and freedmen Both parties (patron and freed) obliged in law to assist the other in times of need, including Both parties (patron and freed) obliged in law to assist the other in times of need, including

providing economic support.providing economic support. Lex Aelia SentiaLex Aelia Sentia: requires patrons to support freedmen in need – if they fail to do so, could : requires patrons to support freedmen in need – if they fail to do so, could

lose right to services and share of freedman’s estate. lose right to services and share of freedman’s estate. Pseudo-filial position of freedman allowed patron claims on his estatePseudo-filial position of freedman allowed patron claims on his estate XII Tables: if freedman died intestate with no heirs, patron or his descendants inherited XII Tables: if freedman died intestate with no heirs, patron or his descendants inherited

(represented the agnates of the (represented the agnates of the libertuslibertus since ex-slaves had no legal ancestors of his own). since ex-slaves had no legal ancestors of his own). More demands developed 118 BC – 74 BC praetorian rule entitled patron to half of More demands developed 118 BC – 74 BC praetorian rule entitled patron to half of

freedman’s property if he had a will but no natural heirs; receive all if he had no will.freedman’s property if he had a will but no natural heirs; receive all if he had no will. Augustan period: lex Papia Poppeia (AD 9): gave patron share of freedman’s property even if Augustan period: lex Papia Poppeia (AD 9): gave patron share of freedman’s property even if

he had natural heirs.he had natural heirs. 3 children would eliminate the patron’s claim to property.3 children would eliminate the patron’s claim to property. Quasi-son position created asymmetric claim: patron was statutory heir of freedman, but not Quasi-son position created asymmetric claim: patron was statutory heir of freedman, but not

the other way around.the other way around. Patron’s claim was protected by law even if freedman received freeborn legal status through Patron’s claim was protected by law even if freedman received freeborn legal status through

the the ius anulorumius anulorum - -

The ParadoxThe Paradox Despite humble status of freedman - fully integrated in social environment where stigma of Despite humble status of freedman - fully integrated in social environment where stigma of

servility did not count. servility did not count. Shame associated with close contact with social inferiors did not exist between patron and his Shame associated with close contact with social inferiors did not exist between patron and his

own freedmen; different rules in own freedmen; different rules in familiafamilia; ; Illustrated by sexual relations between patron and freedwomen: no legal attempt to limit patron’s Illustrated by sexual relations between patron and freedwomen: no legal attempt to limit patron’s

intimacy with own intimacy with own libertaelibertae; marriage acceptable (except in senatorial order).; marriage acceptable (except in senatorial order). Law permitted early legal manumission of a man’s own female slave for the purpose of marriage;Law permitted early legal manumission of a man’s own female slave for the purpose of marriage; (Augustan period – Lex Iulia et Papia); freedwoman could not refuse marriage to her (Augustan period – Lex Iulia et Papia); freedwoman could not refuse marriage to her patronuspatronus; ; In contrast – In contrast – patronaepatronae marrying their own freedmen was frowned upon – and regarded as marrying their own freedmen was frowned upon – and regarded as

adulterous. adulterous. In late antiquity such unions were outlawed and punished.In late antiquity such unions were outlawed and punished. Women in unions with someone else’s slaves – could lose their free or freed statusWomen in unions with someone else’s slaves – could lose their free or freed status

Note: Fundamental difference between one’s own slaves and ex-slaves and those of othersNote: Fundamental difference between one’s own slaves and ex-slaves and those of others Within Within familiafamilia, freedmen are deeply involved in all aspects of patron’s affairs. , freedmen are deeply involved in all aspects of patron’s affairs. Elite invested much trust and confidence in their freedmen: appear as advisors and confidants of Elite invested much trust and confidence in their freedmen: appear as advisors and confidants of

senators and emperors; appears patrons were expected to have no secrets from their freedmen; senators and emperors; appears patrons were expected to have no secrets from their freedmen; conversely – freedmen always expected to act with knowledge and permission of their patronsconversely – freedmen always expected to act with knowledge and permission of their patrons

In Conclusion: freedman is completely integrated into In Conclusion: freedman is completely integrated into familiafamilia of his patron – in this environment of his patron – in this environment stigma of servitude unimportant - stigma of servitude unimportant -

Freedmen had important position within elite network - go-betweens, passed on news and Freedmen had important position within elite network - go-betweens, passed on news and information to third partiesinformation to third parties

Model of freed as pseudo-son answers practical and ideological problems raised by integration of Model of freed as pseudo-son answers practical and ideological problems raised by integration of former slaves into society. He was member of patron’s former slaves into society. He was member of patron’s familiafamilia, carried his name, tied by life-long , carried his name, tied by life-long bond, rooted in patron’s role as pseudo father, benefactor, giver of life.bond, rooted in patron’s role as pseudo father, benefactor, giver of life.

Controlling FreedmenControlling Freedmen Ideal versus realityIdeal versus reality The ideal patron - the paternal figure: many did not The ideal patron - the paternal figure: many did not

conform to ideal: female patrons, freedmen as patrons, conform to ideal: female patrons, freedmen as patrons, etc., etc.,

Not every freedman respected Not every freedman respected patronus/patrona patronus/patrona - - system needed legal controlsystem needed legal control

Focus on controlling behaviour of ex-slave, not on patron Focus on controlling behaviour of ex-slave, not on patron (no law every limited male or female owners’ right to (no law every limited male or female owners’ right to manumit their slaves – all patrons had equal rights) manumit their slaves – all patrons had equal rights)

Freedmen/women freed by testament represented a Freedmen/women freed by testament represented a separate category: separate category: orciniorcini = their patron resided in the = their patron resided in the underworld and could not provide the paternal guidance underworld and could not provide the paternal guidance of a patron; if no other heirs around, if household sold, of a patron; if no other heirs around, if household sold, etc., might be on his own.etc., might be on his own.

Formal patronal rightsFormal patronal rightsand punishments of and punishments of libertuslibertus

Patron had no defined powers over his freedmenPatron had no defined powers over his freedmen Had rights and privileges: freedman prohibited from damaging patron or his Had rights and privileges: freedman prohibited from damaging patron or his

reputation in any way; not use abusive language, no physical violence, could reputation in any way; not use abusive language, no physical violence, could not sue patron or his children; had duty to support their patrons, especially in not sue patron or his children; had duty to support their patrons, especially in illness (all these were duties of reciprocal bonds – same as between parent and illness (all these were duties of reciprocal bonds – same as between parent and children)children)

Patron entitled to Patron entitled to obsequiumobsequium (dutiful respect from his freedman); (dutiful respect from his freedman); Freedmen who failed: liberti ingrati had to go before a court which considered Freedmen who failed: liberti ingrati had to go before a court which considered

each caseeach case Augustus – Augustus – lex Aelia Sentia lex Aelia Sentia - - accusatio liberti ingratiaccusatio liberti ingrati – only patron or his son – only patron or his son

could bring charge;could bring charge; Patrons could also sue for Patrons could also sue for iniuria iniuria (damages); insolence(damages); insolence Official punishments: reprimands, flogging; if he conspired against patron could Official punishments: reprimands, flogging; if he conspired against patron could

be sent to the mines; sent into exile for a periodbe sent to the mines; sent into exile for a period Societas Rutiliana – entitled patron to half of the freedman’s income as Societas Rutiliana – entitled patron to half of the freedman’s income as

punishment in addition to punishment in addition to operaeoperae (services) (services) Difficult, however, for patron to reverse manumission – only applied to most Difficult, however, for patron to reverse manumission – only applied to most

severe crimes – even under bad emperorssevere crimes – even under bad emperors Note: Patrons had access to court procedures - but few statutory rights over Note: Patrons had access to court procedures - but few statutory rights over

their freedmen; had few means to coerce their freedmen; duties vague - as their freedmen; had few means to coerce their freedmen; duties vague - as obsequiumobsequium, , reverentiareverentia, and , and pietaspietas = respectful duties, familial love, etc., = respectful duties, familial love, etc.,

Cicero and HilarusCicero and Hilarus Hilarus, freedman of CiceroHilarus, freedman of Cicero accused him of undermining Cicero’s accused him of undermining Cicero’s

reputation in Asia. Freedman had joined reputation in Asia. Freedman had joined the governor of Macedonia, levying funds the governor of Macedonia, levying funds among the provincials, claiming part was among the provincials, claiming part was for Cicero. Governor of Macedonia was for Cicero. Governor of Macedonia was Antonius Hybrida – Cicero asked his Antonius Hybrida – Cicero asked his friend Atticus to investigate and get friend Atticus to investigate and get Hilarus out of Macedonia.Hilarus out of Macedonia.

Point is – Cicero had little legal support to Point is – Cicero had little legal support to do something about the activities of his do something about the activities of his own freedman. own freedman.