Vol. 5 · pages 26–30
Essays on Untouchables and Untouchability
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 26
11
SLAVES AND UNTOUCHABLES
The age of Augustus was the beginning of a period of commercial
and industrial expansion….slaves had indeed been employed (in arts
and crafts) before, but the sudden growth of trade.... their employment
in numbers that would otherwise have been unnecessary. Romans
engaged more freely and more openly in various forms of commercial
and industrial venture. Yet, even so, the agent became more important,
for commercial activities became more widespread; and such agents
were almost necessarily slaves.... (this is so) because the bonds of
slavery (are elastic). (They could be) so relaxed as to offer an incentive
to the slave to work by the prospect of wealth and freedom, and so
tightened as to provide a guarantee to the master against loss from
the misconduct of his slave. In business contracts between slave and
master or third person seem to have been common, and the work thus
done, and no doubt, the profits were considerable.... Renting of land to
the slave has already been noticed.... and in industry much the same
system was used in various forms; the master might lease a bank, or
a business of the use of a ship, the terms being a fixed return or the
slave being paid on a commission basis 1.
The earnings of the slave became in law his peculium was saved
it might be used to a variety of purpose. No doubt in many cases this
fund was expended in providing food or pleasure. But peculium must
not be regarded merely as petty savings, casually earned and idly
spent. The slave who made his master’s business yield profits, to his
own profit too, very often, had a keen sense of the best use to make
up his own money. Often he reinvested it in his master’s business or
in enterprises entirely unrelated to it. He could enter into business
relations with his master, from whom he came to be regarded as
entirely distinct, or he could make contracts with a third person. He
could even have procurators to manage his own property and interests.
And so with the peculium may be found not only land, houses, shops,
but rights and claims.
The activities of slaves in commerce are innumerable; numbers of
them are shopkeepers selling every variety of food, bread, meat, salt,
fish, wine, vegetables, beans, aupine-seed, honey, curd, ham, ducks and
fresh fish; others deal in clothing—sandals, shoes, gowns and mantles.
In Rome, they plied their trade in the neighbourhood of the Circus
Mamimus, or the Porticus Trigemimus; or the Esquiline Market, or
the Great Mart (on the Caolian Hill) or the Suburra 2….
1 Slavery in the Roman Empire, pp. 101-102.
2 Ibid., p. 105.
PDF page 27 (printed page 12)
12 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The extent to which slave secretaries and agents acted for their
masters is shown very clearly in the receipts found in the house of
Caecillius Jucundus at Pompei 1.
That the State should possess slaves is not surprising; war, after
all, was the affair of the State and the captive might well be Stateproperty. What is surprising is the remarkable use made of public
slaves under the Empire and the extraordinary social position occupied
by them....
“ ‘Public slave’ came to mean before the Empire a slave of the State
employed in its many offices, and the term implied a given occupation
and often social position. The work of slaves of the State, slaves of
the townships, and slaves of Caesar comprises much of what would
now fall to parts of the higher and the whole of the lower branches
of the civil services and of the servants of Municipal Corporations,
working both with head and hands.... In the subordinate levels (of
the Treasury) there worked numbers of clerks and financial officers,
all freedmen and slaves. The business dealt with must have been of
vast range.... The Mint.... the immediate head was a knight, in charge
of the minting processes.... a freedman was placed; under him served
freedmen and slaves.... From one branch of State service, at any
rate, slaves were rigorously excluded, except on one or two occasions
of exceptional stress. They were not allowed to fight in the Army
because not thought worthy of honour. Doubtless other motives were
present also; it would be dangerous experiment to train too many
slaves systematically in the use of Arms. If, however, slaves served
rarely in the fighting line, they are regularly to be found in great
numbers behind it employed as servants, and in the commissariat
and transport. In the fleet slaves were common enough 2.”
II
Let us turn to the de facto position of the Negro in the United
States during the period in which he was slave in the eye of the law.
Here are some facts 3 which shed a good deal of light on his position:
“Lafayette himself had observed that white and black seamen and
soldiers had fought and messed together in the Revolution without
bitter difference. Down in Granville County, North Carolina, a full
blooded Negro, John Chavis, educated in Princeton University, was
conducting a private school for white students and was a licentiate
1 Slavery in the Roman Empire, p. 106.
2 Ibid., pp. 130-147.
3 Charles C. Johnson’s ‘The Negro in American Civilization’.
PDF page 28
13
SLAVES AND UNTOUCHABLES
under the local Preshytary, preaching to white congregations in the
State. One of his pupils became Governor of North Carolina, another
the State’s most prominent Whig senator. Two of his pupils were sons
of the Chief Justice of North Carolina. The father of the founder of
the greatest military Academy of the State attended his school and
boarded in his home …… Slave labour was used for all kinds of work
and the more intelligent of the Negro slaves were trained as artisans
to be used and leased. Slave artisans would bring twice as much as
an ordinary field hand in the market. Master craftsmen owned their
staff. Some masters, as the system became more involved, hired slaves
to their slave artisans. Many slave artisans purchased their freedom
by the savings allowed them above the normal labour expected.”
“The advertisements for runaways and sales are an index to
this skill. They received the same or better wages than the poor
white labourer and with the influence of the master got the best
jobs. The Contractors for masons’ and carpenters’ work in Athens,
Georgia in 1838 were petitioned to stop showing preference to Negro
labourers. “The white man is the only real, legal, moral, and civil
proprietor of this country and state. The right of his proprietorship
reached from the date of the studies of those whitemen, Copernicus
and Galileo, who indicated the sphericity of the earth; which
sphericity hinted to another white man, Columbus, the possibility
by a westerly course of sailing, of finding land. Hence by whitemen
alone was this continent discovered, the whitemen alone, aye, those
to whom you decline to give money for bread or clothes for their
famishing families, in the logical manner of withholding work from
them defending Negroes too in the bargain.” In Atlanta in 1858 a
petition signed by 2 white mechanics and labourers sought protection
against the black slave artisans of masters who resided in other
sections. The very next year sundry white citizens were aggrieved
that the City Council tolerated a Negro dentist to remain and
operate in their midst. ‘In justice to ourselves and the community
it ought to be abated. We, the residents of Atlanta, appeal to you
for justice’. A Census of free Negroes in Richmond County, Georgia,
in 1819 showed carpenters, barbers, boatcorkers, saddlers, spinners,
millwrights, holsters, weavers, harness makers, sawmill attendants
and steamboat pilots. A Negro shoe-maker made by hand the boots
in which President Munrow was inaugurated. Harriet Martineau
marvelled at the slave workmanship in the delicately tiled floors
of Thomas Jefferson’s home at Monticello. There still stands in the
big house of the old plantation, heavy marks of the hands of these
PDF page 29 (printed page 14)
14 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Negro craftsmen, strong mansions built of timber hewn from the
original oak and pinned together by wooden pins. Negro women
skilled in spinning and weaving worked in the mills. Buckingham in
1839 found them in Athens, Georgia, working alongside with white
girls without apparent repugnance or objection. Negro craftsmen
in the South, slave and free fared better than their brothers in
the North. In 1856 in Philadelphia, of 1637 Negro craftsmen
recorded, less than two-thirds could use their trades; ‘because of
hostile prejudice’. The Irish who were pouring into America from
the very beginning of the nineteenth century were being used in
the North on approximately the same motives of preference which
governed Negro slavery. ‘An Irish Catholic, it was argued in their
favour, seldom attempts to rise to a higher condition than that
in which he is placed, while the Negro often makes the attempt
with success. Had not the old Puritan Oliver Cromwell, while the
traffic in black slaves was on, sold all the Irish not killed in the
Drogheda Massacre, into Barbados? Free and fugitive Negroes in
New York and Pennsylvania were in constant conflict with this
group and the bitter hostility showed itself most violently in the
draft riots of the New York. These Hibernians controlled the hod
carrying and the common labour jobs, opposing every approach
of the Negro as a menace to their slight hold upon America and
upon a means of livelihood.”
III
Such was the de facto condition of the Roman slave and the
American Negro slave. Is there anything in the condition of the
Untouchables of India which is comparable with the condition
of the Roman slave and the American Negro slave? It would
not be unfair to take the same period of time for comparing the
condition of the Untouchables with that of the slaves under the
Roman Empire. But I am prepared to allow the comparison of
the condition of the slaves in the Roman Empire to be made
with the condition of the Untouchables of the present day. It is a
comparison between the worst of one side and the best of the other,
for the present times are supposed to be the golden age for the
Untouchables. How does the de facto condition of the Untouchables
compare with the de facto condition of the slaves? How many
Untouchables are engaged as the slaves in Rome were, in professions
such as those of Librarians, Amanuenses, Shorthandwriters ?
How many Untouchables are engaged, as the slaves in Rome
were, in such intellectual occupations as those of rhetoricians,
PDF page 30
15
SLAVES AND UNTOUCHABLES
grammarians, philosophers, tutors, doctors and artists? How many
Untouchables are engaged, as the slaves in Rome? Can any Hindu dare to
give an affirmative answer to anyone of these queries? The Untouchables
are completely shut out from any of these avenues in which the slaves
found so large a place. This proves how futile is the line of defence
adopted by the Hindus to justify untouchability. The pity of the matter
is that most people condemn slavery simply because they hold that for
one man or class to have by law the power of life and death over another
is wrong. They forget that there can be cruel oppression, tyranny, and
persecution, with the train of misery, disappointment and desperation
even when there is no slavery. Those who will take note of the facts
stated above relating to the de facto condition of the slaves will admit
that it is idle to condemn slavery lightly or hurriedly on the mere de
jure conception of it. What the law permits is not always evidence of the
practices prevalent in society. Many a slave would readily have admitted
that they owed everything to slavery, and many did so whether they
would have admitted it or not.
Slavery, it must be admitted, is not a free social order. But can
untouchability be described as a free social order? The Hindus who
came forward to defend untouchability no doubt claim that it is. They,
however, forget that there are differences between untouchability and
slavery which makes untouchability a worse type of an unfree social
order. Slavery was never obligatory. But untouchability is obligatory. A
person is permitted to hold another as his slave. There is no compulsion
on him if he does not want to. But an Untouchable has no option. Once
he is born an Untouchable, he is subject to all the disabilities of an
Untouchable. The law of slavery permitted emancipation. Once a slave
always a slave was not the fate of the slave. In untouchability there
is no escape. Once an Untouchable always an Untouchable. The other
difference is that untouchability is an indirect and therefore the worst
form of slavery. A deprivation of a man’s freedom by an open and direct
way is a preferable form of enslavement. It makes the slave conscious
of his enslavement and to become conscious of slavery is the first and
most important step in the battle for freedom. But if a man is deprived
of his liberty indirectly he has no consciousness of his enslavement.
Untouchability is an indirect form of slavery. To tell an Untouchable
‘you are free, you are a citizen, you have all the rights of a citizen’, and
to tighten the rope in such a way as to leave him no opportunity to
realize the ideal is a cruel deception. It is enslavement without making
the Untouchables conscious of their enslavement. It is slavery though it
is untouchability. It is real though it is indirect. It is enduring because
it is unconscious. Of the two orders, untouchability is beyond doubt the
worse.