'Masters in the prescribed texts treat their slaves cruelly.'
How far do you agree with this statement?
Model answer
Slaves appear in all the prescribed texts, usually in the background, serving, cleaning or being threatened with punishment. Some masters are openly cruel, others present themselves as kind. I will argue that the texts show cruelty as common and the threat of violence as constant, but they also present kindness as the ideal, so the statement is only partly true.
The clearest cruel master is Larcius Macedo in Pliny 3.14. Pliny calls him 'an arrogant and cruel master', and his slaves' attack - beating him in the bath and throwing him onto the scorching floor - suggests how much they hated him. In Petronius, the threat of violence is everywhere in Trimalchio's house. As the guests arrive, a slave throws himself at their feet to be saved from a flogging because the steward's clothes, worth hardly ten sesterces, were stolen from him at the baths. When the pig is served apparently ungutted, Trimalchio shouts 'Strip him!' and the cook stands miserably between two torturers, who are on hand even at a dinner party. Even Encolpius, a guest, whispers that the cook should not be forgiven. Slaves are also treated as property on a vast scale: Trimalchio has so many that not one in ten knows his master. Pliny himself, though he presents himself as kind, believes that slaves who kill do so out of 'wickedness', and approves of the hunt for Macedo's attackers.
On the other hand, several masters treat their slaves well. Pliny's Letter 5.19 shows real care for his freedman Zosimus: he praises his honesty and talents, speaks of long affection, sent him to Egypt to recover and now arranges for him to stay at Paulinus' estate at Forum Julii. He describes himself as a 'father of the household', gentle like the father in Homer. In 2.6 he treats freedmen as guests at his dinners. Horace, at his country dinners in 2.6, feeds his 'cheeky home-born slaves' with the food from his own table - a relaxed and affectionate picture. Even Trimalchio is not simply cruel: the steward lets the slave off for the guests' sake, the cook's punishment is a staged joke, and he is rewarded with a drink and a silver crown while the slaves applaud. Trimalchio, of course, is a former slave himself, whose rise from the slave market is painted on his walls.
We should also notice the authors' attitudes. Cruelty is usually criticised: Pliny condemns Macedo's arrogance, and Petronius mocks Trimalchio and Encolpius. But all the authors write from the masters' side, and the slaves never speak for themselves. Even the 'kind' masters have total power: Pliny's affection for Zosimus is linked to the 'services' he performs, and Horace's home-born slaves are still property.
Overall, I partly agree. The texts show that cruelty, flogging and fear were a normal part of slavery, and Macedo's household shows its violent results. But they also show kind masters, and they present kindness as the ideal. The real point is that masters could choose to be kind or cruel, because slaves were completely in their power.
Explanation
Top answers use a wide range of examples - Macedo, Trimalchio's cook and the slave at the door, Pliny's Zosimus, Horace's home-born slaves - and evaluate them, noticing that all the authors write from the masters' viewpoint. A one-sided list of cruel or kind masters cannot go above Level 3.
