I am sorry, but as a former anthropology major I must disagree with your statements.
First, there was indeed rampant injustice and/or deprivation between the "owners" in most slave-owning cultures I've read of. It would be a mistake to regard them as a uniformly generic and privileged class. Further, we tend to view slavery today as a constant -- once one is enslaved, that is their state for life, and the state of all their offspring. This is, however, not the case.
For example, a Greek male land-owner with many slaves would be regarded respectfully, where a Greek girl heiress with many slaves would be regarded as valuable property on the hoof. An ancient Hebrew woman slave would be regarded as a potential source of strong sons by her ancient Hebrew male owner, but the reverse would certainly not be true -- an ancient Hebrew woman who allowed herself to be impregnated by a male slave would be considered defiled, devalued, and possibly nothing more than a slave herself.
Further, many cultures allowed for slaves to purchase their freedom, or even to decide who they wanted their owner to be. In some of these cultures the children of a freeman and a slave were considered free also. Often the children of free parents, who were abandoned due to financial need, could be picked up by slave-traders and sold as slaves. Sometimes childless families would purchase slave children to raise as their own rightful heirs. Again, there were cultural rituals in place which allowed for parents to try to find and recover their now-grown and formerly abandoned children.
Is this civilized behavior? How should I know? All I can say for sure is every culture -- every culture we know of! -accreted rituals which best insured survival for its collective members. The rituals might become outdated or even cruel, but at some point those rituals came into play, and were considered necessary tradition, because they worked -- they helped their participants survive in an often harsh and unforgiving world. This is true even today, even in our respective cultures.
Finally a good anthropological viewpoint must, by definition, acknowledge that culture changes constantly through time. We may talk about "ancient Greece" or "modern America," but these statements are empirically meaningless unless we also recognize time as a factor, i.e. "ancient Greece in the time of Pericles," or "modern America in the 1950's." Anthropology includes archeology and thus, by necessity, the history of those cultures. Or, to put it in simpler terms, "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
If you're in the US, happy Thanksgiving! Hope you're enjoying our now-outdated seasonal feasting designed to fatten us up to survive the long, cold winter, and to thank our Indian hosts (whom we seem to have misplaced today) for not killing us but instead saving us from starvation through ignorance. ;)
Re: Dictionary.com:
First, there was indeed rampant injustice and/or deprivation between the "owners" in most slave-owning cultures I've read of. It would be a mistake to regard them as a uniformly generic and privileged class. Further, we tend to view slavery today as a constant -- once one is enslaved, that is their state for life, and the state of all their offspring. This is, however, not the case.
For example, a Greek male land-owner with many slaves would be regarded respectfully, where a Greek girl heiress with many slaves would be regarded as valuable property on the hoof. An ancient Hebrew woman slave would be regarded as a potential source of strong sons by her ancient Hebrew male owner, but the reverse would certainly not be true -- an ancient Hebrew woman who allowed herself to be impregnated by a male slave would be considered defiled, devalued, and possibly nothing more than a slave herself.
Further, many cultures allowed for slaves to purchase their freedom, or even to decide who they wanted their owner to be. In some of these cultures the children of a freeman and a slave were considered free also. Often the children of free parents, who were abandoned due to financial need, could be picked up by slave-traders and sold as slaves. Sometimes childless families would purchase slave children to raise as their own rightful heirs. Again, there were cultural rituals in place which allowed for parents to try to find and recover their now-grown and formerly abandoned children.
Is this civilized behavior? How should I know? All I can say for sure is every culture -- every culture we know of! -accreted rituals which best insured survival for its collective members. The rituals might become outdated or even cruel, but at some point those rituals came into play, and were considered necessary tradition, because they worked -- they helped their participants survive in an often harsh and unforgiving world. This is true even today, even in our respective cultures.
Finally a good anthropological viewpoint must, by definition, acknowledge that culture changes constantly through time. We may talk about "ancient Greece" or "modern America," but these statements are empirically meaningless unless we also recognize time as a factor, i.e. "ancient Greece in the time of Pericles," or "modern America in the 1950's." Anthropology includes archeology and thus, by necessity, the history of those cultures. Or, to put it in simpler terms, "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
If you're in the US, happy Thanksgiving! Hope you're enjoying our now-outdated seasonal feasting designed to fatten us up to survive the long, cold winter, and to thank our Indian hosts (whom we seem to have misplaced today) for not killing us but instead saving us from starvation through ignorance. ;)