preview

Roman Slave Revolts

Decent Essays

Diodorus’ account of the slave revolts in Sicily documents a growing wealth divide between the economic classes throughout the Roman Republic. This growing economic disparity, coupled with the escalating maltreatment of slaves by their masters, incited and undergirded the outbreak of the slave revolt in the 130s BCE and in 104 BCE. During these two revolts, rebel slave groups wreaked havoc across Sicily. While both revolts achieved early success, they ultimately struggled when faced by Rome’s vastly superior armies sent to suppress them. The Romans eventually became too powerful, which led to the downfall of the revolts. While the first and second slave wars are extremely similar, their specific developments are not. The first war was one …show more content…

The rebels also had an unfortunate theme of being betrayed during sieges, organized by Pubilius and Nerva in the respective wars. In both begins of war, the slaves were able to group together to take down a single master, in what formed a domino effect of recruitment for the revolt. Damophilos is killed to start the first war and the master of Varius is killed to spark the second. The rebels’ aimed was to sustain mass chaos and harm towards the masters that had enslaved them and treated them with disgust. In order to do this, the rebels terrorized the countryside of Sicily, while holding strong positions to fight battles as Varius did before Nerva could launch an immediate march at the small rebellion. The rebels of the second war certainly learned from the first revolt because, this time, Salvius ordered his men to pillage the countryside to acquire horses and other animals. Additionally, Salvius’ early focus to seize resources allowed him to outfit his cavalry and infantry. Salvius also was a more effective commander than Eunus as he was able to outmaneuver his opponents on the battlefield. An example of this occurred during a battle at Morgantina in e being when he proclaimed that the rebels were not to kill any man who threw down his arms, thus resulting in a mass surrender …show more content…

The increased wealth that the masters had acquired through owning more land and slaves had not only made the slaves envious, but the common people too. However the two groups reacted differently during this time. The common people used the chaos of the rebellion to seize the possessions of the rich and burn the vast landholdings of the rich all out of envy. While the rebels did their fair share of plundering and savagery, the reason for their doing this was rooted in the direct oppression and abuse at the hands of the masters. They had revenge as a reason for their revolt, while the common folk were simply frustrated and jealous of the growth in power and authority that the masters had obtained during these past few years. This was also why the actions of rebels were surprising to a great many. This rebellion was not one that lashed out at everyone, the rebels only sought vengeance against those that had done them wrong, and spared those that had shown compassion and care; a specific case being Damophilos, his wife, and his daughter. Damophilos and his wife were known to be especially cruel and enjoyed punishing their slaves, however their daughter always was kind to the slaves and helped them when she could. So during the revolt, the slaves showed much distain for Damophilos and his wife, but cared for the daughter sparing her of any abuse, and allowed to go stay

Get Access