were compelled to labor in competition with slaves Excepting with the immensely rich, and the feeble and decreasing class of independent husbandmen, poverty was extreme. This state of things existed at a time when Home was considered mistress of the world, and the rulers of Egypt had exalted the Romans above the immortal god. .
In the latest times of the republic, we find that Julius Caesar attempted a remedy, to some extent, by enacting that of those persons who attended to cattle, a third, at least, should be freemen. In Sicily, which supplied Rome with so great a quantity of corn, the number of agricultural slaves was immense. The oppressions to which they were exposed, drove them twice to rebellion, and their numbers enabled them to defy, for a time, the Roman power. The first of these servile wars began in B. C. 134, and lasted two years; the second commenced thirty years later, and lasted four years. The Sicilians treated their slaves with extraordinary rigor, branding them like cattle, and compelling them to toil incessantly for their masters. The history of the revolt offers numerous points of resemblance to that of Chios, already related; though Eunus, the leader of the Sicilian slaves, cannot be compared with Driniacos, either for character or abilities. Eunus, by visions and pretended prophecies, excited the slaves to insurrection; and his conduct, and that of his followers, when they took possession of the city of Euna, presented a striking contrast to the moderation of the Chian slaves. They pillaged the houses, and, without distinction of age or sex, slaughtered the inhabitants, plucking infants from their mother's breasts, and dashing them on the ground. The number of the insurgents at one time amounted to 60,000 men, who, armed with axes, slings, 6takes, and cooking spits, defeated several armies. Pursuing them, however, without relaxation, the state at length prevailed, utterly crushed the insurrection, and carried Eunus a prisoner to Rome, where, according to Plutarch, he was devoured by vermin.
Long after it had become the custom to employ large gangs of slaves in the cultivation of the land, the number of those who served as personal attendants was very small. Persons in good circumstances seem usually to have had only one to wait upon them, who was generally called by the name of the master. But during the latter times of the republic and under the empire, the number of domestic slaves greatly increased, and in every family of importance there were separate slaves to attend to all the duties of domestic life. It was considered a reproach to a man not to keep a considerable number of slaves. The first question asked respecting a person's fortune, was an inquiry as to the number of his slaves. Horace seems to speak of ten slaves as the lowest number which a person in tolerable circumstances ought to keep. The immense number of prisoners taken in the constant wars of the republic, and the increase of wealth and luxury, augmented the number of slaves to a prodigious extent. The statement of Athenæus that very many Romans possessed 10,000 and 20,000 slaves, and even more, is probably an exaggeration; but a freedman under Augustus, who had lost much property in the civil wars, left at his death
