Slavery in ancient Greece

An Ethiopian slave attempts to break in a horse, date unknown, National Archaeological Museum of Athens

It is difficult to estimate the number of slaves in ancient Greece, given the lack of a precise census and variations in definitions during that era. It seems certain that Athens had the largest slave population, with as many as 80,000 in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, on average three or four slaves per household. In the 5th century BC, Thucydides remarked on the desertion of 20,890 slaves during the war of Decelea, mostly tradesmen. The lowest estimate, of 20,000 slaves, during the time of Demosthenes, corresponds to one slave per family. Between 317 BC and 307 BC, the tyrant Demetrius Phalereus ordered a general census of Attica, which arrived at the following figures: 21,000 citizens, 10,000 metics and 400,000 slaves. However, some researchers doubt the accuracy of the figure, asserting that thirteen slaves per free man appear unlikely in a state where a dozen slaves were a sign of wealth, nor is the population stated consistent with the known figures for bread production and import. The orator Hypereides, in his Against Areistogiton, recalls that the effort to enlist 15,000 male slaves of military age led to the defeat of the Southern Greeks at the Battle of Chaeronea (338 BC), which corresponds to the figures of Ctesicles.

According to the literature, it appears that the majority of free Athenians owned at least one slave. Aristophanes, in Plutus, portrays poor peasants who have several slaves; Aristotle defines a house as containing freemen and slaves. Conversely, not owning even one slave was a clear sign of poverty. In the celebrated discourse of Lysias For the Invalid, a cripple pleading for a pension explains "my income is very small and now I'm required to do these things myself and do not even have the means to purchase a slave who can do these things for me." However, the huge individual slave holdings of the wealthiest Romans were unknown in ancient Greece. When Athenaeus cites the case of Mnason, a friend of Aristotle and owner of a thousand slaves, this appears to be exceptional. Plato, owner of five slaves at the time of his death, describes the very rich as owning fifty slaves.

Thucydides estimates that the isle of Chios had proportionally the largest number of slaves.

Part of a series on
Slavery
Contemporary Child labour Child soldiers Conscription Debt Forced marriage Bride buying Child marriage Wife selling Forced prostitution Human trafficking Peonage Penal labour Contemporary Africa 21st-century jihadism Sexual slavery Wage slavery
Historical Antiquity Egypt Babylonia Greece Rome Medieval Europe Ancillae Byzantine Empire Kholop Serfs History In Russia Emancipation Thrall Muslim world Contract of manumission Ottoman Empire Avret Esir Pazarları Barbary Coast slave trade pirates Sack of Baltimore Slave raid of Suðuroy Turkish Abductions Concubinage history Ma malakat aymanukum Avret Esir Pazarları Harem Abbasid harem Ottoman Imperial Harem Jarya/Cariye Odalisque Qiyan Umm walad 21st century Atlantic slave trade Bristol Brazil Database Dutch Middle Passage Nantes New France Panyarring Spanish Empire Slave Coast Thirteen colonies Topics and practice Conscription Ghilman Mamluk Devshirme Blackbirding Coolie Corvée labor Field slaves in the United States Treatment House slaves Saqaliba Slave market Slave raiding Child soldiers White slavery Naval Galley slave Impressment Pirates Shanghaiing Slave ship
By country or region Sub-Saharan Africa Contemporary Africa Trans-Saharan slave trade Red Sea slave trade Indian Ocean slave trade Angola Chad Ethiopia Mali Mauritania Niger Nigeria Seychelles Somalia South Africa Sudan North and South America Americas indigenous U.S. Natives Aztec United States Field slaves female Contemporary maps partus prison labor Slave codes Treatment interregional Human trafficking The Bahamas Canada Caribbean Barbados British Virgin Islands Trinidad Code Noir Latin America Brazil Lei Áurea Colombia Cuba Haiti revolt Restavek (Encomienda) Puerto Rico East, Southeast, and South Asia Human trafficking in Southeast Asia Bhutan China Booi Aha Laogai penal system India Debt bondage Chukri System Japan comfort women Korea Kwalliso Thailand Yankee princess Vietnam Australia and Oceania Australia Human trafficking Blackbirding Slave raiding in Easter Island Human trafficking in Papua New Guinea Blackbirding in Polynesia Europe and North Asia Sex trafficking in Europe Britain Denmark Dutch Republic Germany in World War II Malta Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Spain Sweden North Africa and West Asia Afghanistan Algeria Bahrain Egypt Human trafficking in the Middle East Iran Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Libya Morocco Oman Palestine Saudi Arabia Syria Tunisia Qatar Yemen United Arab Emirates
Religion Bible Christianity Catholicism Mormonism Islam Judaism Baháʼí Faith
Opposition and resistance 1926 Slavery Convention Abolitionism U.K. U.S. Abolitionists Anglo-Egyptian Slave Trade Convention Anti-Slavery International Blockade of Africa U.K. U.S. Colonization Liberia Sierra Leone Compensated emancipation Freedman manumission Freedom suit Slave Power Underground Railroad songs Slave rebellion Slave Trade Acts International law Third Servile War 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom Abolition of slave trade in Persian gulf
Related Common law Indentured servitude Unfree labour Fugitive slaves laws Great Dismal Swamp maroons List of slaves owners last surviving American enslaved people Marriage of enslaved people (United States) Slave narrative films songs Slave name Slave catcher Slave patrol Slave Route Project breeding court cases Washington Jefferson J.Q. Adams Lincoln 40 acres Freedmen's Bureau Iron bit Emancipation Day

There were four primary sources of slaves: war, in which the defeated would become slaves to the victorious unless a more objective outcome was reached; piracy (at sea); banditry (on land); and international trade.

By the rules of war of the period, the victor possessed absolute rights over the vanquished, whether they were soldiers or not. Enslavement, while not systematic, was common practice. Thucydides recalls that 7,000 inhabitants of Hyccara in Sicily were taken prisoner by Nicias and sold for 120 talents in the neighbouring village of Catania. Likewise in 348 BC the population of Olynthus was reduced to slavery, as was that of Thebes in 335 BC by Alexander the Great and that of Mantineia by the Achaean League.

The existence of Greek slaves was a constant source of discomfort for Greek citizens. The enslavement of cities was also a controversial practice. Some generals refused, such as the Spartans Agesilaus II and Callicratidas. Some cities passed accords to forbid the practice: in the middle of the 3rd century BC, Miletus agreed not to reduce any free Knossian to slavery, and vice versa. Conversely, the emancipation by ransom of a city that had been entirely reduced to slavery carried great prestige: Cassander, in 316 BC, restored Thebes. Before him, Philip II of Macedon enslaved and then emancipated Stageira.

Piracy and banditry provided a significant and consistent supply of slaves, though the significance of this source varied according to era and region. Pirates and brigands would demand ransom whenever the status of their catch warranted it. Whenever ransom was not paid or not warranted, captives would be sold to a trafficker. In certain areas, piracy was practically a national specialty, described by Thucydides as "the old-fashioned" way of life. Such was the case in Acarnania, Crete, and Aetolia. Outside of Greece, this was also the case with Illyrians, Phoenicians, and Etruscans. During the Hellenistic period, Cilicians and the mountain peoples from the coasts of Anatolia could also be added to the list. Strabo explains the popularity of the practice among the Cilicians by its profitability; Delos, not far away, allowed for "moving myriad slaves daily". The growing influence of the Roman Republic, a large consumer of slaves, led to development of the market and an aggravation of piracy. In the 1st century BC, however, the Romans largely eradicated piracy to protect the Mediterranean trade routes.

Slave raids were a specific form of banditry that was a primary method of gathering slaves. In regions such as Thrace and the eastern Aegean, natives, or barbaroi, captured in slave raids were the primary source of slaves, rather than prisoners of war. As described by Xenophon, and Menander in Aspis, after the slaves were captured in raids, their actual enslavement took place when they were resold through slave-dealers to Athenians and other slaveowners throughout Greece. After the slaves were captured, they were sold in slave markets. From the 6th century BC on, the vast majority of slaves were bought in these slave markets.

There was slave trade between kingdoms and states of the wider region. The fragmentary list of slaves confiscated from the property of the mutilators of the Hermai mentions 32 slaves whose origins have been ascertained: 13 came from Thrace, 7 from Caria, and the others came from Cappadocia, Scythia, Phrygia, Lydia, Syria, Ilyria, Macedon, and Peloponnese. Local professionals sold their own people to Greek slave merchants. The principal centres of the slave trade appear to have been Ephesus, Byzantium, and even faraway Tanais at the mouth of the Don. Some "barbarian" slaves were victims of war or localised piracy, but others were sold by their parents.

There is a lack of direct evidence of slave traffic, but corroborating evidence exists. Firstly, certain nationalities are consistently and significantly represented in the slave population, such as the corps of Scythian archers employed by Athens as a police force—originally 300, but eventually nearly a thousand. Secondly, the names given to slaves in the comedies often had a geographical link; thus Thratta, used by Aristophanes in The Wasps, The Acharnians, and Peace, simply meant a Thracian woman. Finally, the nationality of a slave was a significant criterion for major purchasers: Ancient practice was avoid a concentration of too many slaves of the same ethnic origin in the same place, in order to limit the risk of revolt. It is also probable that, as with the Romans, certain nationalities were considered more productive as slaves than others.

The price of slaves varied in accordance with their ability. Xenophon valued a Laurion miner at 180 drachmas (i.e. about 775 grams of silver); while a workman at major works was paid one drachma per day. Demosthenes' father's cutlers were valued at 500 to 600 drachmas each. Price was also a function of the quantity of slaves available; in the 4th century BC they were abundant and it was thus a buyer's market. A tax on sale revenues was levied by the market cities. For instance, a large helot market was organized during the festivities at the temple of Apollo at Actium. The Acarnanian League, which was in charge of the logistics, received half of the tax proceeds, the other half going to the city of Anactorion, of which Actium was a part.

Buyers enjoyed a guarantee against latent defects: The transaction could be invalidated if the purchased slave turned out to be crippled and the buyer had not been warned about it.

A fragment of the Gortyn code in Gortyn, Crete

In Gortyn, in Crete, according to a code engraved in stone dating to the 3rd century BC, slaves (doulos or oikeus) found themselves in a state of great dependence. Their children belonged to the master. The master was responsible for all their offences, and, inversely, he received amends for crimes committed against his slaves by others. In the Gortyn code, where all punishment was monetary, fines were doubled for slaves committing a misdemeanour or felony. Conversely, an offence committed against a slave was much less expensive than an offence committed against a free person. As an example, the rape of a free woman by a slave was punishable by a fine of 200 staters (400 drachms), while the rape of a non-virgin slave by another slave brought a fine of only one obolus (a sixth of a drachm).

Slaves did have the right to possess a house and livestock, which could be transmitted to descendants, as could clothing and household furnishings. Their family was recognized by law: they could marry, divorce, write a testament and inherit just like free men.

Debt, especially in the agricultural field, was a very common occurrence in Ancient Greece.[16] A large portion of the Greek population was composed of peasants, of varying degrees of freedom, who survived on subsistence farming.[16] Thus, lending and borrowing, and consequently incurring debts, was central to peasant life. Peasants could incur debt for a number of reasons. First, given the nature of their agricultural labor, they often borrowed tools, livestock, or sowing material, and these debts could roll over to the next day. As soon as debts surpassed day-to-day reciprocity, it became more and more difficult for peasants to pay off their loans. Thus, the laborer became indebted to the owner of the land they were working on, becoming indebted to the creditor. Soon after, the debtor might have had to give his property, and eventually his wife, children, and ultimately himself, over to the creditor, thus becoming entirely dependent and virtually enslaved to the creditor.[16]

Prior to its interdiction by Solon, Athenians practiced debt enslavement: a citizen incapable of paying his debts became "enslaved" to the creditor. Debt bondage primarily concerned peasants known as hektēmoroi who, unable to pay their rents, worked land owned by rich landowners. In theory, debt bondage slaves would be liberated when their original debts were repaid.[17]

Solon put an end to debt bondage with the σεισάχθεια / seisachtheia, literally "the shaking off of burdens", or liberation of debts, which prevented all claim to the person by the debtor and forbade the sale of free Athenians, including by themselves.[17] Scholars believe that Solon got the idea for the cancellation of debts from Mesopotamian law.[16] Aristotle in his Constitution of the Athenians quotes one of Solon's poems:

"And many a man whom fraud or law had sold

Far from his god-built land, an outcast slave,

I brought again to Athens; yea, and some,

Exiles from home through debt’s oppressive load,

Speaking no more the dear Athenian tongue,

But wandering far and wide, I brought again;

And those that here in vilest slavery (douleia)

Crouched ‘neath a master’s (despōtes) frown, I set them free."[18]

Though much of Solon's poem is reminiscent of ”traditional” slavery, debt bondage slavery was different in that the enslaved Athenian remained an Athenian, dependent on another Athenian, in his place of birth. It is in these lines that Solon put an end to debt bondage. This measure, which received much praise in antiquity, was merely a cancellation of debts.[18] The seisachtheia were not intended to free all Greek slaves but only those enslaved by debt. The reforms of Solon left two exceptions: the guardian of an unmarried woman who had lost her virginity had the right to sell her as a slave, and a citizen could "expose" (abandon) unwanted newborn children.

The practice of manumission is confirmed to have existed in Chios from the 6th century BC. It probably dates back to an earlier period, as it was an oral procedure. Informal emancipations are also confirmed in the classical period. It was sufficient to have witnesses, who would escort the citizen to a public emancipation of his slave, either at the theatre or before a public tribunal. This practice was outlawed in Athens in the middle of the 6th century BC to avoid public disorder.

The practice became more common in the 4th century BC and gave rise to inscriptions in stone which have been recovered from shrines such as Delphi and Dodona. They primarily date to the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, and the 1st century AD. Collective manumission was possible; an example is known from the 2nd century BC in the island of Thasos. It probably took place during a period of war as a reward for the slaves' loyalty, but in most cases the documentation deals with a voluntary act on the part of the master (predominantly male, but in the Hellenistic period also female).

The slave was often required to pay for himself an amount at least equivalent to his market value. To this end they could use their savings or take a so-called "friendly" loan (ἔρανος / eranos) from their master, a friend or a client like the hetaera Neaira did.

Emancipation was often of a religious nature, where the slave was considered to be "sold" to a deity, often Delphian Apollo, or was consecrated after his emancipation. The temple would receive a portion of the monetary transaction and would guarantee the contract. The manumission could also be entirely civil, in which case the magistrate played the role of the deity.

The slave’s freedom could be either total or partial, at the master’s whim. In the former, the emancipated slave was legally protected against all attempts at re-enslavement—for instance, on the part of the former master’s inheritors. In the latter case, the emancipated slave could be liable to a number of obligations to the former master. The most restrictive contract was the paramone, a type of enslavement of limited duration during which time the master retained practically absolute rights. If a former master sued the former slave for not fulfilling a duty, however, and the slave was found innocent, the latter gained complete freedom from all duties toward the former. Some inscriptions imply a mock process of that type could be used for a master to grant his slave complete freedom in a legally binding manner.

In regard to the city, the emancipated slave was far from equal to a citizen by birth. He was liable to all types of obligations, as one can see from the proposals of Plato in The Laws: presentation three times monthly at the home of the former master, forbidden to become richer than him, etc. In fact, the status of emancipated slaves was similar to that of metics, the residing foreigners, who were free but did not enjoy a citizen’s rights.

Spartan citizens used helots, an enslaved group (that formed the majority of the population) collectively owned by the state. It is uncertain whether Spartan citizens had chattel slaves as well. There are mentions of people manumitted by Spartans, which was supposedly forbidden for helots, or sold outside of Laconia. For example, the poet Alcman; a Philoxenos from Cytherea, reputedly enslaved with all his fellow citizens when his city was conquered, was later sold to an Athenian; a Spartan cook bought by Dionysius the Elder or by a king of Pontus, both versions being mentioned by Plutarch; and the famous Spartan nurses, much appreciated by Athenian parents.

Some texts mention both slaves and helots, which seems to indicate that they were not the same thing. Plato in Alcibiades I cites "the ownership of slaves, and notably helots" among the Spartan riches, and Plutarch writes about "slaves and helots". Finally, according to Thucydides, the agreement that ended the 464 BC revolt of helots stated that any Messenian rebel who might hereafter be found within the Peloponnese was "to be the slave of his captor", which means that the ownership of chattel slaves was not illegal at that time.

Most historians thus concur that chattel slaves were indeed used in the Greek city-state of Sparta, at least after the Lacedemonian victory of 404 BC against Athens, but not in great numbers and only among the upper classes. As it was in the other Greek cities, chattel slaves could be purchased at the market or taken in war.

Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges mentions that there was a hierarchy of classes superposed one above the other in the Spartan society. If the Helots and the Laconians are left out, the hierarchy would be as follows: first there were the Neodamodes (former slaves freed), then the Epeunactae (helots who slept with Spartan widows in order to help Sparta with manpower shortage because of war casualties), then the Mothaces (very similar to domestic clients) and then the bastards (who though descended from true Spartans, were separated).

Patterson argues that the alienation of the slave from their birthplace and natal culture was the single most salient factor in determining whether a slave was socially dead or not. In Ancient Greece, a binary system of classification categorized all people into one of two categories: Greek or non-Greek. Non-Greek peoples were called barbaroi, they could have either been born outside Greece, or have born inside Greece to foreigners.[19] This dichotomy reinforced the view of non-Greeks as fundamentally "The Other". This “Othering” of foreigners very likely made it psychologically easier for Athenians to “deny personhood” to someone who was seen as essentially different from themselves, thus making it easier to enslave non-Greeks and deprive them of their humanity.[19] Consequently, barbarois became inextricably associated with slaves, and conversely, eleutheros became synonymous with Greek citizenship.[19]

The capture of prisoners of war and slave raids during warfare between Greek and non-Greek territories were two primary ways of obtaining slaves in Classical Greece.[19] This meant that the majority of the slave population was composed of non-Greeks. This relocation of slaves alienated them from the birthrights from their natal clan, village, or community, relegating the enslaved population to permanent outsiders.[20]

While it was possible for individual Ancient Greek slaves to be freed, manumission was always in the hands of the owner.[15] Slavery was heritable, meaning that even if an individual slave was granted freedom, their children would still likely be slaves.[15] The permanence of many Greek slaves subjection and the perpetuity of enslavement over generations of a family was therefore indicative of their status as unfree members of society, since their freedom was on someone else's terms and never their own.[15]

Perhaps the most salient feature of the social death of slaves was the dishonor and dehumanization they experienced at the hands of the slave-owning class. Slaves were seen as property: their only value was tied to their physical capacity for labor.[19] This is reflected in Aristotle's work Politics, in which he provides a blunt conceptualization of slaves as property: they are nothing but "living tools" and "animate property".[15] This viewpoint was shared by the rest of free Greek society.[15]

Slaves were subject to corporal punishment, while free citizens were not, further differentiating the slave class from the rest of society.[19] Flogging, verbal chastisement, and various forms of torture were characteristic of a slave's subjection.[19] There was also a legal requirement that slave testimony in court be extracted via torture.[15] Litigants would offer up their slave, who would be stretched out on a rack and whipped, and sometimes even killed, while giving their testimony.[15] It is also not surprising that slaves were subject to physical violence in the private sphere as well: owners were free to whip, torture, and even kill their slaves.[15]

Depiction of a slave seated on an altar, looking at the purse he is about to steal, c. 400–375 BC, Louvre

Very few authors of antiquity call slavery into question. To Homer and the pre-classical authors, slavery was an inevitable consequence of war. Heraclitus states that "[w]ar is the father of all, the king of all...he turns some into slaves and sets others free."[21] Aristotle also felt this way, stating "the law by which whatever is taken in war is supposed to belong to the victors."[22] He also states that it might have a few issues though, ”For what if the cause of war be unjust?”[22] If the war was because of an unfair or incorrect reason, should the victors of that war be allowed to take the losers as slaves?

During the classical period the main justification for slavery was economic.[23] From a philosophical point of view, the idea of "natural" slavery emerged at the same time; thus, as Aeschylus states in The Persians, the Greeks "[o]f no man are they called the slaves or vassals",[24] while the Persians, as Euripides states in Helen, "are all slaves, except one"—the Great King.[25] Hippocrates theorizes about this latent idea at the end of the 5th century BC. According to him, the temperate climate of Anatolia produced a placid and submissive people.[26] This explanation is reprised by Plato,[27] then Aristotle in Politics,[28] where he develops the concept of "natural slavery": "for he that can foresee with his mind is naturally ruler and naturally master, and he that can do these things with his body is subject and naturally a slave."[29] As opposed to an animal, a slave can comprehend reason but "…has not got the deliberative part at all."[30]

Alcidamas, at the same time as Aristotle, took the opposite view, saying: "nature has made nobody a slave".[31]

In parallel, the concept that all men, whether Greek or barbarian, belonged to the same race was being developed by the Sophists[32] and thus that certain men were slaves although they had the soul of a freeman and vice versa.[33] Aristotle himself recognized this possibility and argued that slavery could not be imposed unless the master was better than the slave, in keeping with his theory of "natural" slavery.[34] The Sophists concluded that true servitude was not a matter of status but a matter of spirit; thus, as Menander stated, "be free in the mind, although you are slave: and thus you will no longer be a slave".[35] This idea, repeated by the Stoics and the Epicurians, was not so much an opposition to slavery as a trivialization of it.[36]

The Greeks could not comprehend an absence of slaves. Slaves exist even in the "Cloud cuckoo land" of Aristophanes' The Birds. The utopian cities of Phaleas of Chalcedon and Hippodamus of Miletus are based on the equal distribution of property, but public slaves are used respectively as craftsmen[37] and land workers.[38] The "reversed cities" placed women in power or even saw the end of private property, as in Lysistrata or Assemblywomen, but could not picture slaves in charge of masters. The only societies without slaves were those of the Golden Age, where all needs were met without anyone having to work. In this type of society, as explained by Plato,[39] one reaped generously without sowing. In Telekleides' Amphictyons[40] barley loaves fight with wheat loaves for the honor of being eaten by men. Moreover, objects move themselves—dough kneads itself, and the jug pours itself. Similarly, Aristotle said that slaves would not be necessary "if every instrument could accomplish its own work... the shuttle would weave and the plectrum touch the lyre without a hand to guide them", like the legendary constructs of Daedalus and Hephaestus.[41] Society without slaves is thus relegated to a different time and space. In a "normal" society, one needs slaves. Aristotle argues that slaves are a necessity though, saying "Property is part of the household, ... For no man can live well or indeed live at all, unless he be provided with necessaries."[22] He also argues that slaves are the most important part of the property as they "take precedence of all the instruments."[22] This would suggest that at least some slaves would be treated well for the same reason one would take great care of their most important tools. By viewing slaves as tools of a household, it creates another reason for acceptance of slavery. Aristotle says "indeed the use of slaves and of tame animals is not very different," showing as well that at least in part, some slaves were thought of no higher than the common tamed animals in use at the time. Antiphon viewed slaves as a bit more than common animals or tools. On the topic of a man killing his own slave, he says that the man should "purify himself and withhold himself from those places prescribed by law, in the hope that by doing so he will best avoid disaster."[42] This suggests that there still is some sense of inappropriateness in killing a slave, even one owned by the killer.

Punishment of slaves would have been swift and harsh. Demosthenes viewed punishment for slaves as acceptable in the form of physical harm or injuries for all that they may have done wrong, stating "the body of a slave is made responsible for all his misdeeds, whereas corporal punishment is the last penalty to inflict on a free man."[43] This was spoken about in legal proceedings, suggesting that it would have been a widely accepted way of treating slaves.

Theatre mask of a First slave in Greek comedy, 2nd century BC, National Archaeological Museum of Athens

Slavery in Greek antiquity has long been an object of apologetic discourse among Christians, who are typically awarded the merit of its collapse. From the 16th century the discourse became moralizing in nature. The existence of colonial slavery had significant impact on the debate, with some authors lending it civilizing merits and others denouncing its misdeeds.[44] Thus Henri-Alexandre Wallon in 1847 published a History of Slavery in Antiquity among his works for the abolition of slavery in the French colonies.[45]

In the 19th century, a politico-economic discourse emerged. It concerned itself with distinguishing the phases in the organisation of human societies and correctly identifying the place of Greek slavery. According to Karl Marx, the ancient society was characterized by development of private ownership and the dominant (and not secondary as in other pre-capitalist societies) character of slavery as a mode of production.[46] The Positivists represented by the historian Eduard Meyer (Slavery in Antiquity, 1898) were soon to oppose the Marxist theory. According to him slavery was the foundation of Greek democracy. It was thus a legal and social phenomenon, and not economic.[47]

Current historiography developed in the 20th century; led by authors such as Joseph Vogt, it saw in slavery the conditions for the development of elites. Conversely, the theory also demonstrates an opportunity for slaves to join the elite. Finally, Vogt estimates that modern society, founded on humanist values, has surpassed this level of development.[48]

In 2011, Greek slavery remains the subject of historiographical debate, on two questions in particular: can it be said that ancient Greece was a "slave society", and did Greek slaves comprise a social class?[49]