Introduction
Byzantine slavery operated within a complex legal system rooted in Roman law and refined through imperial decrees and religious influence. The codification of laws, particularly under Emperor Justinian I, played a pivotal role in shaping the status of enslaved individuals, delineating their rights, and imposing restrictions on their social and legal agency. This article explores how Byzantine law defined slavery, the interplay between legal codes and societal practices, and the evolving conditions of enslaved persons.
Justinian's Code and Its Influence
The Corpus Juris Civilis (Body of Civil Law), compiled under Justinian I in the 6th century CE, served as the cornerstone of Byzantine legal thought. Drawing heavily from Roman jurisprudence, it formalized principles that governed slavery, including ownership, manumission, and the limited legal personhood of enslaved individuals. Key provisions included:
Enslaved as Property: Slaves were classified as "res" (things) under Roman law, granting owners near-total control over their lives.
Manumission Processes: Laws outlined procedures for freeing slaves, such as testamentary manumission (through a master's will) or coemptio (a contract allowing slaves to purchase freedom).
Legal Protections: While slaves lacked full rights, the code introduced safeguards against extreme cruelty, such as prohibiting masters from killing enslaved individuals without legal consequences (Codex Justinianus 3.1.7).
The Status of Enslaved Individuals
Byzantine law recognized slavery as a mutable status, allowing for both enslavement through war, debt, or birth and pathways to freedom. Enslaved individuals were categorized as:
Servi: Full slaves with no legal autonomy, typically prisoners of war or victims of forced capture.
**Ancillae": Often domestic servants, who might gain limited legal recognition over time.
Dediticii: Slaves who fled to Byzantine territory and were re-enslaved, often with heightened restrictions.
The legal framework distinguished between enslaved persons and other servile groups, such as coloni (tenant farmers), ensuring that slavery remained a distinct and hierarchical institution.
Rights and Protections in Byzantine Law
Despite their marginalization, enslaved individuals in Byzantium were not entirely devoid of rights. Legal codes and imperial rescripts provided:
Manumission by the Church: Ecclesiastical courts encouraged religiously motivated emancipation during sacraments like baptism or confession (Novella 123).
Marriage and Family Rights: Enslaved couples could form unions recognized by the church, though children inherited their mother's enslaved status.
Property Ownership: Some slaves were permitted to hold property through their master's allowance, often to facilitate eventual manumission.
Legal Recourse: Enslaved persons could appeal to authorities for protection against extreme abuse, though success depended on judicial discretion (Laws of Leo VI, the Wise).
Restrictions and Limitations
Byzantine law imposed severe restrictions on enslaved individuals to maintain social hierarchies:
Legal Discrimination: Enslaved people could not testify in court against free persons, serve in the military, or hold public office.
Punishments for Rebellion: Acts of resistance, such as fleeing or assaulting a master, were met with corporal punishment or execution (Ecloga of Emperor Leo III, 726 CE).
Economic Barriers: Even freed slaves (liberti) faced social stigma and were often excluded from elite professions.
The Role of the Church and Later Legal Developments
The Byzantine Church influenced slavery through moral teachings that advocated gradual abolishment of harsh practices. Imperial laws, such as the Ecloga (726 CE) and Basilika (888 CE), reflected this shift by emphasizing proportional justice and expanding opportunities for manumission. However, slavery remained economically entrenched, particularly in agrarian and domestic sectors.
Conclusion
The legal framework of Byzantine slavery was a dynamic interplay of Roman legal tradition, Christian ethics, and imperial pragmatism. While Justinian's Code and subsequent Byzantine laws codified the subordinate status of enslaved individuals, they also provided incremental avenues for emancipation and limited protections. This duality ensured that slavery persisted as both a legal institution and a contested moral issue throughout the Byzantine era.