Bryce Hammer, Rutgers Unversity
Roman comedy uses the slave character to such an extreme extent that the role is indicative of the genre (Fitzgerald, 2000; 2019) and, moreover, the way in which the comedic slave is portrayed is central to their function (Freudenburg, 2001). Often, the comedic slave is either a trickster or a go-between for members of a familia, which entails acting outside the typical social hierarchy, usually with an eye toward mocking, duping, or defying their enslaver (McCarthy, 2004). As a means of correcting this breakdown in norms, the comedic slave is brought back under the power of the dominus by either an act of violence or the threat of it (Richlin, 2017). Although this characterization of the servus is well documented in comedy, the same phenomenon has gone relatively unmentioned in satire. In this paper, I strive to demonstrate two things: first, that Roman satire inherits and reworks the slave of Roman comedy for its own agenda; and second, and more importantly, that Juvenal expands on the adaptation of the comic servus in a revolutionary response to his cultural moment.
The dynamic of the comic slave is at play in Horace’s Satire 2.7, in which the main speaker is Davus, a slave whose primary objective is criticizing and at times humiliating his enslaver. Set during Saturnalia, the topsy-turvy event allows those of low social status, like Davus, the privilege of temporary equality with those of higher ranks, like Horace (Sharland, 2005). Throughout Davus’ tirade on the many failings of his enslaver, he alludes to the possibility that Horace would be increasingly irate with his slave and that physical violence may be the result of such anger. Indeed, when Horace once more resumes the role of narrator, he seeks to punish Davus. Here, as in comedy, the slave is brought back under the power of the enslaver. Whatever legitimate criticisms the slave may have made are silenced, and any “change” the audience might see in the depiction of typical Roman social status is brought to a swift end.
Juvenal takes the dynamic one step further. In describing an argument between husband and wife, wherein the wife is demanding that a slave be put to death and the husband is questioning whether the slave deserves such a punishment, Juvenal asks the question “Is a slave human?” (Juvenal 6.219). The husband’s perspective, that there ought to be a reason for a slave to be put to death, is equally as upsetting to the norm as the wife’s claim that her desire to see the slave dead is all the reason that is required. Finally, the audience sees a permanent change in the social hierarchy. The wife is dictating orders to the husband, the husband is defending the safety of the slave, and the slave is simultaneously depicted as more human and more object than ever before.