From slaves to "top spot"

[TithonusSyndrome]

On inauguration day, Will Smith was quoted as saying of Barack Obama on CNN that "never before in the history of the planet has someone, a group of people, moved from the slave class of empire to be elected to the top spot." I'm simply wondering if anyone would care to volunteer examples that could falsify his statement, because I somehow get the impression that he didn't research it all that deeply.

[Thanas]

On inauguration day, Will Smith was quoted as saying of Barack Obama on CNN that "never before in the history of the planet has someone, a group of people, moved from the slave class of empire to be elected to the top spot." I'm simply wondering if anyone would care to volunteer examples that could falsify his statement, because I somehow get the impression that he didn't research it all that deeply.

In ancient rome freedmen and slaves were at times considered more powerful than the emperor himself and certainly more powerful than the aristocracy. For example, Narcissus and Pallas are descripted as largely handling affairs of state under Claudius, though how much of that is a fabrication is unclear.

However, we know that freedmen could become roman governors. Gaius Iulius Polybius, the secretary of Claudius, was reputadly as honored as the consuls. Halotus became procurator and like many freedmen very wealthy. Heck, freedmen were even allowed to dedicate roads and public buildings in their honour since Augustus.

The phenomenon is not just limited to Claudius. Some freedmen even married into the senatorial class, under Marcus Aurelius for example. Caenis, a freedwomen, became empress in all but name under Vespasian. One other (in-)famous example is Cleander under Commodus, who even commanded the praetorian guard.

So yeah, in ancient Rome freedmen could rise to the highest order. There was no emperor who had been a freedmen, though.

[TC Pilot]

Well, "elected" would be the key word there. As far as I know, Smith is right by virtue of that technicality.

Though others have risen faster. Stalin, I think, would count, considering his mother had been a serf. Often, the founders of Chinese dynasties (Ming springs to mind) started out as nothing more than peasants, too.

[Thanas]

Well, "elected" would be the key word there. As far as I know, Smith is right by virtue of that technicality.

Though others have risen faster. Stalin, I think, would count, considering his mother had been a serf. Often, the founders of Chinese dynasties (Ming springs to mind) started out as nothing more than peasants, too.

Yes, you are right, but I think you and I would both concur that this technicality does not mean much - clearly Smith was trying to do one of those "the USA are special" speeches. His main point is that children of slaves have never risen to becoming leaders in no other country, when in fact in roman times, even slaves themselves did.

[Samuel]

Wouldn't Marmalukes count as well? They seem to be the perfect example.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Wouldn't Marmalukes count as well? They seem to be the perfect example.

I guess in a strictly technical sense, Mamluks were slaves and they did take over rule of Egypt. But privileged slave-soldiers who formed the core of Egypt's military and then seized power probably belong in a somewhat different category from chattel slaves after the fashion of the American South.

We can also address the matter that, strictly speaking, Barack Obama doesn't belong to precisely the same ethnic group as other African Americans. He actually has no ancestors that were slaves. That said, I don't mean to disparage his identification as a Black American, because he definitely belongs to that group, not as a result of his descent from slaves but because of experiences during his own lifetime. Being that he was elected as a black man, he can still be viewed as a success on behalf of people descended from slaves.

Since we're doing that, I guess I'd like to ask Thanas if there was any Roman Emperor who, though not himself a freedman, was descended from at least one. But really slavery was a very different institution in the Roman Empire, and I don't think they had any tradition of enslaving only people meeting specific criteria (like, "we will enslave only Illyrians, and the large majority of all Illyrians will be slaves").

What we're really talking about is a member of an minority that was aggressively and specifically marginalized and mistreated in the history of a nation, becoming the leader of that nation. With that, it's actually fairly difficult to find very many examples that are really equivalent to what was done to African American slaves. Nelson Mandela sort of fits. Benito Juarez might be the best counter-example, because under the Spanish colonial system in Mexico indigenous peoples like the Zapotec were very badly treated and often enslaved.

[ray245]

Well, "elected" would be the key word there. As far as I know, Smith is right by virtue of that technicality.

Though others have risen faster. Stalin, I think, would count, considering his mother had been a serf. Often, the founders of Chinese dynasties (Ming springs to mind) started out as nothing more than peasants, too.

Isn't the founder of the Ming a monk as well?

[Thanas]

Since we're doing that, I guess I'd like to ask Thanas if there was any Roman Emperor who, though not himself a freedman, was descended from at least one.

Yes, certainly. Publius Helvius Pertinax, the son of the freedmen Helvius Successus, who rose through merit to the highest offices and eventually became emperor is but one example. Really, being descended from a freedmen was nothing special in rome. Based on the high proportion of freedmen and the frequent rumours (heck, one ancient comedy basically has this as the centerpiece) of freedmen and slaves having sex with nobility I would be surprised if this was not the case in many of the emperors.

But really slavery was a very different institution in the Roman Empire, and I don't think they had any tradition of enslaving only people meeting specific criteria (like, "we will enslave only Illyrians, and the large majority of all Illyrians will be slaves").

Yes, that is correct.

What we're really talking about is a member of an minority that was aggressively and specifically marginalized and mistreated in the history of a nation, becoming the leader of that nation.

Well, if we want to go down that route, what about christianity in the Roman empire? I think all the criteria fit.

Or, of course, one can make the case of Nevitta, Ricimer and the majority of the germano-roman generals, who not only were members of a minority (german settlers in the roman empire) but also very often members of enemy tribes. Of course, that is not nearly as impressive, since a concept like nationalism did not exist in antiquity.

[Stuart]

On inauguration day, Will Smith was quoted as saying of Barack Obama on CNN that "never before in the history of the planet has someone, a group of people, moved from the slave class of empire to be elected to the top spot." I'm simply wondering if anyone would care to volunteer examples that could falsify his statement, because I somehow get the impression that he didn't research it all that deeply.

Excuse the ignorance but is this statement correct? Was Barak Obama descended from 'the slave class' at all? My impression was that his mother was white and his father was Kenyan - and there were no slaves in Kenya, certainly not under British rule. So, this quote would seem to be elliptical at best.

[Thanas]

^Pablo already dealt with that in a post above yours, Stuart.

[Broomstick]

So yeah, in ancient Rome freedmen could rise to the highest order. There was no emperor who had been a freedmen, though.

Obama isn't a "freedman" either.

Since we're doing that, I guess I'd like to ask Thanas if there was any Roman Emperor who, though not himself a freedman, was descended from at least one.

Supposedly, Ceaser Augustus was the great-grandson of a freeman. That's the only one I'm aware of, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were others.

[Thanas]

Supposedly, Ceaser Augustus was the great-grandson of a freeman. That's the only one I'm aware of, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were others.

Did you read my post?

[Broomstick]

Sorry - was Publius Helvius Pertinax the orginal name of Augustus? Perhaps I'm a bit distracted and missed that. Admittedly, Roman history is not my strong point.

[Thanas]

Sorry - was Publius Helvius Pertinax the orginal name of Augustus? Perhaps I'm a bit distracted and missed that.

No. Pertinax was the emperor after Commodus, about 250 years after Augustus.

[frogcurry]

A number of the Ottomans significant leaders and Viziers in the period before the 1600's or so were, if not quite on the top spot, still near it and raised from the status of a convert to Islam and near-slave (jannisaries) status, Zaganos Pasha for example. In this sense they were similar to the roman approach.

Also the harem system meant that many of the Ottoman sultans would be the decendent of non-turkish mothers. I believe that Suleiman falls into this category.

[Setzer]

It might be fair to say that no group in history has gone from being property to providing a leader in such a short time. Through peaceful means anyway.

[Captain Seafort]

It might be fair to say that no group in history has gone from being property to providing a leader in such a short time. Through peaceful means anyway.

The US Civil War hardly counts as "peaceful means".

[Artemas]

It might be fair to say that no group in history has gone from being property to providing a leader in such a short time. Through peaceful means anyway.

The US Civil War hardly counts as "peaceful means".

Besides, Thanas and others already pointed out examples of either slaves, freedmen or sons of freedmen rising to positions that possess great deals of power. So, within 2 or 3 generations, which is certainly a shorter period of time than the 150 years since the American civil war.

Also, the christianity point does fit perfectly. From lion-fodder to ruling class is perhaps a more radical transformation than a single person rising above the tide.

[Setzer]

Well, it's not like the Civil war was a widespread rebellion by slaves where they conquered their former masters. I count winning an election as peaceful means.

[Thanas]

Also, the christianity point does fit perfectly. From lion-fodder to ruling class is perhaps a more radical transformation than a single person rising above the tide.

It does actually, but now I wish I hadn't brought it up, because what happened is that the roman state discovered "hey, christianity can be a tool" and co-opted it. So yes, in the grand scope of things it does fit, but only as a minority getting used by the majority does.

But Pertinax is an excellent counter-example.

[Pelranius]

A number of the Ottomans significant leaders and Viziers in the period before the 1600's or so were, if not quite on the top spot, still near it and raised from the status of a convert to Islam and near-slave (jannisaries) status, Zaganos Pasha for example. In this sense they were similar to the roman approach.

Also the harem system meant that many of the Ottoman sultans would be the decendent of non-turkish mothers. I believe that Suleiman falls into this category.

The Janissaries practically ran the Empire until one of the Sultans got a backbone and ordered the regular army to shell their barracks into oblivion. Still had nice music though.

Throughout history, Imperial China was often controlled by court eunuchs, especially during the terminal decline of various dynasties. I don't know if they qualify as slaves, though.

On another note, great to see Stuart around here again.

[TC Pilot]

Whenever I think this over, the first person that keeps coming to mind is the Roman Emperor Maximus Thrax, first barbarian emperor. Hardly a slave, but certainly an outsider.

[Akhlut]

What about Haiti? In spite of immense election fraud and otherwise corrupt politics, the majority of Haitian leaders are/were descended of French slaves on Hispaniola. Hell, I imagine some of them were even elected in a somewhat legitimate fashion.

For instance, Stenio Vincent seems like he was elected to the presidency with a relative minimum of election fraud (no worse than a few US presidents, at anyrate, it seems).

The other states of Central and South America probably have also had their fair share of heads of state that have slave ancestors. Porfirio Díaz, for instance, was of mixed European and Native American descent, and most Native Americans in Central and South America were usually slaves or serfs.

[Thanas]

Whenever I think this over, the first person that keeps coming to mind is the Roman Emperor Maximus Thrax, first barbarian emperor. Hardly a slave, but certainly an outsider.

Publius Helvius Pertinax - son of a freed slave, Emperor. Jesus christ, don't people even read the thread?

[TC Pilot]

God forbid your one example doesn't preclude any further discussion of any sort.