Slavery 101: Fundamentals for slave life

Once upon a time, everyone understood slavery. You either owned a slave or were one. Sure, some cultures traditionally never had slaves, but for the most part, it’s been a normal part of life. Until now.

Now slavery’s banned.

(But secretly – or not so secretly – I’m bringing it back.)

Because of this general distaste for slavery, most of us don’t really know how it works (or worked) anymore. How much do you know about it? If you have any input you’d like to add, let me know.

For now, here’s some of what I’ve learned about slavery. I’ve wanted (and needed) to write this for a long time. It’s the backdrop for bondChristian. Now that we finished the Others-oriented fruit of the Spirit series, I thought I’d go into more detail on the topic of slavery over the coming Wednesdays. This is the introduction.

What’s a slave?

A slave is someone who’s completely subservient (not the most popular word in the world) to a dominating influence. A slave obeys a master, but more than that, the master actually owns the slave as a type of property.

So the master not only can but should use the slave as a tool – that’s the entire purpose of the slave. The slave’s whole mission in life is to offer the best possible service to the master.

So what’s a master?

The master is that dominating influence. The master has complete control over the slave to do anything with the slave.

The master has an independent purpose or motivation. While the slave’s purpose is completely tied to the master, the master’s goals and ambitions might be separate and do not have to involve the slave at all.

Again, the master is supposed to use the slave to accomplish his own purposes. A master who does not use his slave to full potential is wasteful and stupid.

What’s the master/slave relationship like?

The master/slave relationship is asymmetrical. Equality is out of the question. The master is in a position of authority, and the slave is in submission. The master can entrust a slave with responsibilities, but these decisions are always made by the slave on behalf of the master.

Depending on the purposes of the master, the master can actually treat the slave very well. On the other side, though, the master could treat the slave like garbage. It all comes back to what the master wants, not the slave.

If the master treats the slave well, the slave is probably going to like the master more than if the master treated the slave badly. Either way, though, the purpose of the slave stays the same: to serve the master whether the slave likes it or not.

Both the master and slave must trust each other

The master gives the slave instructions then trusts that the slave will follow them.
The slave trusts that the master’s instructions are good and follows them.

Of course, though, the master has more control in the relationship. If the slave fails to follow instructions, the master can punish the slave or get rid of the slave altogether. But the slave still has to follow instructions even if and when the instructions fail.

So the slave is far more dependent on the master than the other way around.

Who’s responsible for what?

In general, the master is responsible for results, while the slave is only responsible for obedience. I say “only,” but obviously that’s not always (ever?) easy.

The master makes the plans. The master says what to do. If the plans work out, fantastic for the master. If not, not so fantastic for the master.
The slave follows the plans. The slave does what the master says. If the slave follows the instructions, fantastic for the slave. If not, not so fantastic.

So while “success” for the master might be measured in results, “success” for the slave is measured in obedience and submission.

That’s a key issue in slavery. The slave, as an extension of the master, represents the master. The master is accountable for what the slave does, both the good and the bad. If the slave pulls off some amazingness, the master gets the credit, but if the slave louses everything up, the master gets the blame.

The slave only gets credit or blame for obedience or disobedience.

A master and his slave is like a craftsman and his chisel

If the craftsman carves an amazing, wooden figurine, the master gets all the credit. Someone might note his fine chisel, but no one gives the chisel credit for the job well done.
If the craftsman produces some mangled mess, the master gets blamed. Someone might say, “Dude, you need to get some sharper tools,” but it’s still the craftsman’s fault for using that lousy chisel.

The master is like the craftsman here, and the slave is like the chisel. The chisel is only required to perform its specific function well: to stay sharp, to stay strong, and so on.

The slave doesn’t have to worry about the final product – just obey the master’s instructions.

How does slave property work?

As property, the slave has no rights. The master can use the slave for anything and treat the slave however he wants. In a sense, the master has the rights from the slave – the master has the rights the slave doesn’t have.

This means the slave is completely within the master’s control but also benefits from being the master’s property.

Benefits of being property

No one can mess with the slave without also messing with the master. Again, it’s like someone vandalizing the craftsman’s chisel. If the craftsman cares at all about that chisel or really his property in general, that vandal’s is in trouble. Since the master is superior to the slave, the slave has better protection as a slave than if the slave were fending for itself.

The slave enjoys part of the master’s reputation and comforts. Obviously, being the master himself is better than being the slave. But if the slave has to choose between an excellent master and no master at all, often the reputation and comfort is better than going on alone. For example, which is better, being slave to a king or free as a serf? Freedom’s not always best.

Who is that master? Whose is that slave?

This is the last point I’d like to bring up. The master is a “who” – the slave is a “whose.” Bringing everything I’ve already mentioned together, you can see how the master is defined independently, as an independent person. The slave, though, is defined by the master.

The very identity of the master and slave are different. It makes sense to ask who the master is because the master has an independent purpose, but it doesn’t make sense to ask who a slave is. Instead, we can ask whose a slave is.

And in this way, the slave is able to point directly to the master while still keeping the reputation of the master:

[Speaking of the master] Q. Who is that? A. The master
[Speaking of the slave] Q. Whose is that? A. The master’s

In each case, the focus comes back to the master… the way it should. And that is what slavery is all about.

Serving Suggestions:

(1) Go read up on slavery. Study it. There’s more to learn from slavery than you might think.

(2) Share what you find in the comments.

(3) Over the coming weeks, I’ll match slavery to Christianity. See if you can find how that might work? How do you as a Christian function as a slave?

This post is part of “The bondC guide to slavery” series. Click here to read the rest.