How was Roman slavery different from American slavery in the 1800s? Both were "chattel" slavery. In real estate lingo, chattels are moveable items a seller takes with him—such as livestock. The word "chattel" comes from the French word for cows (you can hear it in the related word, "cattle"). All enslaved people in the Roman Empire were considered "chattel," meaning they were legally categorized as absolute property with few legal rights, could not refuse labor, and were treated as commodities that could be bought, sold, traded, or inherited (just like cattle). The differences are that: 1) American slavery was race-based, whereas Roman slavery usually came as the result of conquest, debt, or being born into it. 2) Roman slavery had a much more accessible legal pathway to freedom (Roman slaves were generally permitted to do outside work for pay, and were often able to save enough to buy their freedom). 3) Roman slaves were often much better educated than their masters, and were commonly entrusted with huge responsibilities. In contrast, it was illegal to educate American slaves. Thomas Sowel: "Although slavery was a worldwide institution for thousands of years, nowhere in the world was slavery a controversial issue prior to the 18th century. People of every race and color were enslaved—and enslaved others. White people were still being bought and sold as slaves in the Ottoman Empire, decades after American blacks were freed." Modern Application: For all practical purposes, slavery has been illegal in the United States since 1865. Unless a Christian is in prison, the closest application we can make today for this text is to the employee/employer relationship (or per