西羅馬帝國滅亡后，羅馬奴隸們發(fā)生了什么？

Víctorinox Rush
When slaves have technical skills and knowledge, they possibly survived the population collapse following the fall of the Roman Empire. Rome at its peak had more than 1 million inhabitants, while at the time of its final fall, it had less than 50,000 inhabitants. What it means is that many slaves died in population decline, whether from starvation, disease, or massacre in barbarian invasions. The surviving slaves emerged as a working class, now subject to the laws of feudalism, but with much smaller populations.
 
當奴隸擁有技術(shù)技能和知識時，他們可能在羅馬帝國滅亡后的人口崩潰中幸存下來。羅馬在鼎盛時期有超過一百萬居民，而在其最終滅亡時，居民不到五萬人。這意味著許多奴隸在人口減少中喪生，無論是因為饑餓、疾病，還是在游牧民族入侵中被屠殺。幸存下來的奴隸們成為一個工人階級，現(xiàn)在受封建制度法律的約束，但人口規(guī)模大大減少。

Stephen Cunningham
What happenned to Roman slaves following the fall of the Western Roman Empire? What happened to Roman slaves following the fall of the Western Roman Empire? absolutely nothing happened to the slaves following the fall of the Western Roman Empire. the Gauls were not interested in slaves the Gauls were only interested in how muck gold and silver that they could steal from the Western Roman Empire.
 
西羅馬帝國滅亡后，羅馬奴隸發(fā)生了什么?西羅馬帝國滅亡后，羅馬奴隸發(fā)生了什么?西羅馬帝國滅亡后奴隸們什么也沒發(fā)生。高盧人對奴隸不感興趣，他們只對能從西羅馬帝國偷到多少金銀感興趣。

Audun Nilsen
What you need to understand about this is that the near-death of the book makes any kind of assertion grasping at best, but there’s lot’s to be said at any rate, due to the large power changes that drove both the Latin people and the German people, especially, who were, and always have been, the big, European players in historic times.
 
關(guān)于這一點，你需要理解的是，書籍的幾乎消失使得任何斷言都充其量是難以抓住的，但無論如何，有很多話題值得討論，因為引領(lǐng)拉丁人和日耳曼人的重大權(quán)力變化，特別是他們，他們在歷史時期一直是歐洲的重要角色。

Rome had a vast networks of roads constructed, south and east of the Rhine, and the consequence for slavery was that secrecy became more and more difficult, and so abuse of official powers, equally, became more difficult. The long borders made civility a challenge in the best of times, and under the barracks emperors, relations, as it were, with the Germanic tribes had become so strained that raids were more than frequent; a major battle was seen every five years in the latter half of the third century. No joke to be seen with a big band of P.O.W.s around that time and slaves were, indeed, most frequently taken, from the battlefield!
 
羅馬建設了廣闊的道路網(wǎng)絡，跨越了萊茵河以南和東部地區(qū)。這導致奴隸制度的保密性越來越難以維持，因此濫用官權(quán)的行為也變得更加困難。長時間的邊境使得在最好的時候也很難保持文明。在兵營皇帝統(tǒng)治時期，與日耳曼部落的關(guān)系變得如此緊張，以至于襲擊變得非常頻繁；在第三世紀后半葉，幾乎每五年就會發(fā)生一次重大戰(zhàn)役。在那個時候，囚犯大部隊被關(guān)押，奴隸從戰(zhàn)場上被最頻繁地帶走!

A slave was the property of his master, but if you treated your slaves like what they jokingly referred to as mute tools morale would collapse, and none of that mining which Rome was so famous for would be done, so there’s no cause to believe a mature state like the ancient Roman one would have certain types of punishment of slaves as policy (they wrote very few of their laws done). It was a compromise to settle war indemnities, first and foremost, and therefore the shift from Antiquity to the Dark Ages, followed by far fewer battles and outright wars than you may be led to believe from the term, logically is expected to have been followed with a lenience in work culture, accompanied by a smaller output, as indeed we see in the rise in importance of the latifundia; in other words they went from every citizen mainly supporting himself, either directly on his own plot of land, or through a salary in one of the many careers urban life had to offer, to great estates taking care of both justice and production, which means less centralization, less organization and less expediency due to draft. City populations like in ancient times you wouldn’t see for almost 1.000 years, largely because of the Justinians plagues, and the “after-plagues”, as it were, that tend to follow large immunal breakdowns.
 
奴隸是主人的財產(chǎn)，但如果你把奴隸當作他們開玩笑所說的啞巴工具，士氣就會崩潰，羅馬著名的采礦就不會進行，所以沒有理由相信像古羅馬這樣成熟的國家會把某些類型的奴隸懲罰作為政策(他們很少寫法律)。首先，這是一種解決戰(zhàn)爭賠償?shù)耐讌f(xié)，因此從古代到黑暗時代的轉(zhuǎn)變，隨之而來的戰(zhàn)斗和直接戰(zhàn)爭比你可能從這個術(shù)語中所相信的要少得多，邏輯上預計，隨之而來的是工作文化的寬容，伴隨著較小的產(chǎn)出，正如我們在大莊園重要性的上升中看到的那樣;換句話說，他們從每個公民主要自給自足，要么直接依靠自己的土地，要么通過城市生活提供的許多職業(yè)之一的工資，到同時照顧司法和生產(chǎn)的大莊園，這意味著更少的集中，更少的組織，更少的權(quán)宜之計，因為征兵。古代的城市人口在1000年后才會出現(xiàn)，這很大程度上是因為查士丁尼瘟疫，以及“災后瘟疫”，這些瘟疫往往伴隨著大規(guī)模的免疫系統(tǒng)崩潰。

The cruelty of Rome is certainly exaggerated though though they were exceptionally severe towards P.O.W.s, though they had one ofthe lowest mean ages I’ve ever heard of anywhere in Rome at one stage, but I ca’t remember it, so I won’t state the exact number, and though life in the mines definitely was harsh - it’s exaggerated because the cruelty is one of Us and Them, and that at a time when Them were warriors hell-bent on seizing land by force of arms, and this is also very much so, I believe, because the winners, i.e. the Germans wrote history. Trade and occupational living was very much encouraged, so I think it, truly, is a safe bet to say that their cruelty was reserved for enemies of the natural order of things.
 
羅馬的殘酷行為確實有所夸大，盡管他們對囚犯戰(zhàn)俘極為嚴厲，而且在某個階段，他們的平均壽命在羅馬任何地方都是最低的，但我記不清確切的數(shù)字，所以不會給出具體的數(shù)字。在礦山里的生活確實非常艱苦，但這種殘酷行為被夸大了，因為這是我們和他們之間的對立，而在那個時候，他們是決心用武力奪取土地的戰(zhàn)士，而且我相信這也非常正確，因為勝利者，即德國人，書寫了歷史。貿(mào)易和職業(yè)生活是非常受鼓勵的，所以我真心認為，可以肯定地說他們的殘酷行為是針對那些反對自然秩序的敵人的。

Not to say that life as a day-labourer for a Roman nobleman was fine and dandy all the time, but atleast they had the concept, and you could travel freely within their borders, if only you didn’t venture too far off course. In conclusion then, a natural place for the dying culture of the plantation to have faced it’s last stand is exactly Lindisfarne, founded 635, where it’s not so cold that you can’t grow grapes, and where Irish missionaries, who were well acquainted with the debate, as it were, had been driven out not two hundred years previous;
 
不是說作為羅馬貴族的雇傭工的生活總是美好的，但至少他們有這樣的概念，而且你可以在他們的領(lǐng)土內(nèi)自由行動，只要你不走得太遠。因此，可以得出結(jié)論，一個自然的地方，種植園文化進行最后的對抗的地方正是創(chuàng)立于公元635年的林底斯法恩，那里不是太冷以至于不能種葡萄，愛爾蘭傳教士們早已熟悉這種爭論，兩百年前他們已經(jīng)被驅(qū)逐了。

they eventually christianized the region due to political pressure from the rest of the Anglo-Saxon nation, the king’s argument being that he saw little to no difference what the lables were, as long as they could keep the places of worship, the festivals and the rites, public, human sacrifice excluded. Just a qualified guess. Riga and Trondheim are another two, because they were the last Pagan capitals to fall to the power of the Pope, but I suppose the distance in time and space makes that prospect a rather fanatical one. What’s given, is that Charlemagne was, and still is, recognized as the greatest king Europe ever had, and though he didn’t eradicate slavery, he went to war with the last heathen Germans of any real power on the continent, ultimately leading to their, decisive, downfall in history, on account of a civil war amongst their own, not eighty years afterwards.
 
他們最終基督教化了該地區(qū)，這是因為來自其他盎格魯-撒克遜國家的政治壓力，國王的論點是，他幾乎看不出標簽有什么區(qū)別，只要他們能保持禮拜場所、節(jié)日和儀式的公開性，不包括人祭。這只是一個合理的猜測。里加和特隆赫姆是另外兩個例子，因為它們是最后兩個投降于教皇權(quán)威的異教首都，但我想時間和空間的距離使得這種前景變得相當不現(xiàn)實?？梢源_定的是，查理曼被認為是歐洲有史以來最偉大的國王，盡管他沒有根除奴隸制度，他卻與歐洲大陸上最后一批具有真正實力的異教德國人作戰(zhàn)，最終導致他們在歷史上的決定性失敗，原因是不到八十年后他們內(nèi)部的一場內(nèi)戰(zhàn)。

Chris Towner
Very, very difficult, since maybe the life of slaves is one of the least well-recorded in history. Well, maybe we have to start somewhere.
 
非常困難，因為奴隸生活可能是歷史上記錄最少的生活之一。也許我們得從某個地方開始說起。
 
On the whole there was a huge range of how slavery could be quantified in Rome. You might be a close friend and trusted adviser, or work in a mine in Sicily. You might have sold yourself into slavery in order to pay your debts, or have been sold by your parents in similar circumstances. Certain crimes had a punishment of slavery attached. Some slave-owners treated their slaves with respect and consideration, some abused them. Some slaves had wide and significant responsibilities, some were the lowest of the low.
 
總體而言，在羅馬，奴隸制的量化范圍非常廣泛。你可能是一個親密的朋友和信任的顧問，也可能在西西里島的礦山工作。你可能因為債務而自愿成為奴隸，或者像你的父母一樣被賣為奴隸。某些罪行的懲罰是奴役。一些奴隸主對待他們的奴隸非常尊重和體貼，而一些則虐待他們。一些奴隸擁有廣泛且重要的責任，而一些則處于社會的最低層次。

Remembering how all pervasive was Roman law, inevitably laws regarding slaves was very complex, and the least one can say is that the law tended to lean towards the freeing of slaves, a well-regarded practice. This in itself was, of course, a legal process, carried out by magistrates, and I think under Constantine (so we are approaching ‘the fall of the Roman Empire’) this could be carried out by priests, or at least bishops. I think Constantine set limits around who could be sold into slavery, and established that parents could not sell children, and there was a limit surrounding whether you could sell yourself, or maybe for how long. But interfering with a complex legal structure is not trivial.
 
羅馬法的普及程度讓與奴隸有關(guān)的法律不可避免地變得非常復雜，至少可以說法律傾向于釋放奴隸，這是一種廣受推崇的做法。當然，這本身是一個法律程序，由法官執(zhí)行，我認為在君士坦丁大帝時代（接近“羅馬帝國的衰落”），這可能由神職人員，或至少是主教執(zhí)行。我記得君士坦丁設立了關(guān)于誰可以被賣為奴的限制，并規(guī)定父母不能賣掉孩子，以及關(guān)于自己是否可以出賣自己，或者出賣自己多長時間也有限制。但是干涉一個復雜的法律結(jié)構(gòu)并不是一件簡單的事情。

Keep in mind that Rome in the time of Constantine (and elsewhere) was not some sort of monoclonal state and while many Romans were Christian and might have had a different attitude towards slavery than had gone before, many were not and would have pursued much the same customs as they had previously. The law would have sustained that.
 
請記住，在君士坦丁時代的羅馬（以及其他地方），并不是某種單一狀態(tài)，雖然許多羅馬人是基督徒，可能對奴隸制度持有與之前不同的態(tài)度，但也有許多人不是基督徒，他們可能會繼續(xù)遵循與之前相似的習俗。法律會支持這一點。

I realise I’m being very vague, and I have only a very general idea about this. However, in ancient times slavery was a widely acceptable state and it persisted well after the fall of the Empire. It is even arguable that it was as acceptable a state of life as, say, that of a worker in the cotton-mills of Britain in the 19th century, with as much chance of leading a long and comfortable life and watching your children grow.
 
我意識到我說得很含糊，我對這件事只有一個非?；\統(tǒng)的概念。然而，在古代，奴隸制度是一個廣泛被接受的狀態(tài)，在羅馬帝國滅亡后仍然存在。甚至可以爭論說，它與19世紀英國棉紡工人的生活狀態(tài)一樣被接受，有同樣多的機會過上長壽舒適的生活，看著自己的孩子成長。

Assistant
Following the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD, the fate of Roman slaves varied. Many became serfs, essentially tied to the land they worked on, as the feudal system emerged in Europe. Some were able to gain their freedom through various means, such as buying it or being granted freedom by their masters. Others continued to be enslaved under different rulers or became part of new societies that emerged after the collapse of the Roman Empire.
 
西羅馬帝國于公元476年滅亡后，羅馬奴隸的命運各不相同。隨著歐洲封建制度的出現(xiàn)，許多人成為了農(nóng)奴，基本上與他們耕種的土地綁在了一起。一些人通過購買自由或被主人賜予自由等各種手段獲得了自由。另一些人在不同統(tǒng)治者的統(tǒng)治下繼續(xù)被奴役，或成為羅馬帝國崩潰后新興社會的一部分。

David Nitzsche
Some became free, or the German tribes took some as slaves. Others kept working for their old masters. Most of the slaves had no appreciable skills and no prospects- so what choice did they have? It was also the lifestyle they were familiar with. At least, they got room and board by working for their old masters, or others. It was not long until the Church (Roman Catholic) outlawed slavery and their former owners were slowly compelled to pay them- although still very little. As Mr, Gleissner answered, many became serfs (made very little, but they had a little land and a little freedom) . After the Protestants (from the word “protest”) broke away from the Catholic Church, some of the Protestant nations eventually allowed slavery again. Unfortunately, we had race based slavery here in the United States for a time.
 
有些人變成了自由人，或者德國部落將他們中的一些人當作奴隸。其他人繼續(xù)為他們的老主人工作。大多數(shù)奴隸沒有什么可觀的技能，也沒有前景——所以他們有什么選擇呢？這也是他們熟悉的生活方式。至少，通過為他們的老主人或其他人工作，他們得到了食宿。不久之后，羅馬天主教會禁止了奴隸制度，他們的前主人逐漸被迫支付他們工資——盡管仍然非常少。正如Gleissner先生所回答的那樣，許多人成為農(nóng)奴（雖然收入很少，但他們擁有一些土地和一些自由）。在新教徒（源自“抗議”一詞）從天主教會分裂后，一些新教國家最終重新允許奴隸制度。不幸的是，在美國有一段時間內(nèi)存在基于種族的奴隸制度。

Boris Camilo Vargas
In answering the question it’s worth taking into account that later legions were quite different to the legions of the early empire. Diocletian's reforms made more legions but they were reduced to about 1000 men. This was probably to curb their political power which contributed to the crisis of the mid 200’s. Further down the line their maintenance also increasingly fell on the governors and more localised resources rather than to the centralized imperial government in Rome. This all led to the imperial army getting pretty fragmented and what legions remained probably got disbanded after the sacking of Rome by the Vandals around 450’sAD. Or got merged into guards and garrison units at Ravenna where the last western roman emperors held their court and final stronghold.
 
在回答這個問題時，值得考慮到后期的羅馬軍團與帝國早期的軍團有很大不同。戴克里先的改革增加了軍團的數(shù)量，但將它們減少到大約1000人。這可能是為了限制它們的政治權(quán)力，這也是導致公元200年代中期危機的因素之一。隨著時間的推移，軍團的維護責任也越來越多地落在各省總督和更加本地化的資源上，而不是集中在羅馬的帝國政府手中。所有這些因素導致帝國軍隊相當分裂，殘存的軍團在公元450年左右被凱爾特人破壞了羅馬后解散，或者被合并到在拉文納的衛(wèi)隊和駐軍單位中，那里是西羅馬帝國最后的皇帝舉行法庭和最后的堡壘。
 
Other than the Ravenna garrison forces, the rest of the now barely roman army was made up of Germanic foederati troops who were formerly auxiliaries but now became the main military force. These troops and their warlord commanders were nominally subjects and soldiers of the western empire but in reality they followed their own agendas until in 476 they decided they didn’t need an emperor anymore. After defeating the Ravenna garrison (which were among the last actual roman troops) they deposed the last Roman Emperor Romulus Augustulus under the pretence that he was a usurper against what they considered the last legitimate emperor, Julius Nepos.
 
除了拉文納駐軍外，現(xiàn)在幾乎成為羅馬軍隊的其余部分由日耳曼結(jié)盟軍組成，他們曾經(jīng)是輔助軍，但現(xiàn)在成為主要軍事力量。這些軍隊及其軍閥指揮官名義上是西羅馬帝國的臣民和士兵，但實際上他們追隨自己的議程，直到476年他們決定不再需要皇帝。在擊敗拉文納駐軍（他們是最后的真正羅馬軍隊之一）后，他們廢黜了最后的羅馬皇帝羅穆路斯·奧古斯都，理由是他是他們認為的最后一位合法皇帝尤利烏斯·內(nèi)波斯的篡位者。
 
In the east some legions continued to exist for a time, as can be seen with Legio V Macedonica which was mentioned in a record from the 600’s AD. But the name fell out of favour and then stopped being used as the army had evolved into more specific troop types with different designations.
 
在東部，一些軍團繼續(xù)存在一段時間，例如在公元600年左右的記錄中提到的第五馬其頓軍團（Legio V Macedonica）。但這個名稱漸漸不再流行，并且隨著軍隊演變?yōu)榫哂胁煌Q號的更具體的部隊類型，這個名稱也停止使用了。