Now, if we consider that this was the treatment, which they judged to be absolutely proper for people of this description, and that their slaves were uniformly those, whom they termed barbarians; being generally such, as were either kidnapped from Barbary, or purchased from the barbarian conquerors in their wars with one another; we shall immediately see, with what an additional excuse their own vanity had furnished them for the sallies of caprice and passion.

To refute these cruel sentiments of the ancients, and to shew that their slaves were by no means an inferiour order of beings than themselves, may perhaps be considered as an unnecessary task; particularly, as having shewn, that the causes of this inferiour appearance were incidental, arising, on the one hand, from the combined effects of the treatment and commerce, and, on the other, from vanity and pride, we seem to have refuted them already.  But we trust that some few observations, in vindication of these unfortunate people, will neither be unacceptable nor improper.

How then shall we begin the refutation?  Shall we say with Seneca, who saw many of the slaves in question, “What is a knight, or a libertine, or a slave?  Are they not names, assumed either from injury or ambition?” Or, shall we say with him on another occasion, “Let us consider that he, whom we call our slave, is born in the same manner as ourselves; that he enjoys the same sky, with all its heavenly luminaries; that he breathes, that he lives, in the same manner as ourselves, and, in the same manner, that he expires.”  These considerations, we confess, would furnish us with a plentiful source of arguments in the case before us; but we decline their assistance.  How then shall we begin?  Shall we enumerate the many instances of fidelity, patience, or valour, that are recorded of the servile race?  Shall we enumerate the many important services, that they rendered both to the individuals and the community, under whom they lived?  Here would be a second source, from whence we could collect sufficient materials to shew, that there was no inferiority in their nature.  But we decline to use them.  We shall content ourselves with some few instances, that relate to the genius only:  we shall mention the names of those of a servile condition, whose writings, having escaped the wreck of time, and having been handed down even to the present age, are now to be seen, as so many living monuments, that neither the Grecian, nor Roman genius, was superiour to their own.

The first, whom we shall mention here, is the famous AEsop.  He was a Phrygian by birth, and lived in the time of Croesus, king of Lydia, to whom he dedicated his fables.  The writings of this great man, in whatever light we consider them, will be equally entitled to our admiration.  But we are well aware, that the very mention of him as a writer of fables, may depreciate him in the eyes of some.  To such we shall propose a question, “Whether this species of writing has not been more beneficial to mankind; or whether it has not produced more important events, than any other?”