Summary of the Article
The article “Classical Greek Ethnography and the Slave Trade,” written by Thomas Harrison, argues about the significance of the institution of slavery in forming stereotypes about foreign people in the Greek world. He also claims that the essential ethnographic data were gathered with the help of these nations (Harrison 2.12). In this piece, the author speaks about these phenomena by analyzing philosophical texts of the time and using them as evidence to confirm his stance. In this way, the main goal of this article is to draw a link between the perceptions of slaves by Greek people and their views on foreigners in general.
In order to support the standpoint mentioned above, the scholar presents his main ideas concerning the institution of slavery and its documentation. First, he writes that the strengths and weaknesses of the affected persons were consequently attributed to other individuals from their regions of origin (Harrison 5.7). Second, Harrison (10.5) states that these views led to the emergence of some sort of fashion on slaves from particular areas. Third, he claims that the emerging stereotypes were used to justify the subordinate position of these citizens (Harrison 19.2). All these considerations are underpinned by evidence from Greek literature and serve as the basis for making conclusions. Thus, in the end, the author summarizes the facts to demonstrate the role of these processes in society in the creation of “the ideology of Greek cultural superiority” connecting slaves and free people (Harrison 31.4). The findings support ethnographic research while being useful for analyzing literary sources.
Critical Analysis
Strengths and Weaknesses
The article under consideration is an effective piece of writing from the perspective of presenting an argument for any reader, regardless of knowledge of the subject. However, it is significantly limited in evidence due to the examination of a single region. In this publication, the author relies heavily on the documented cases of stereotypes about slavery and the views of Greek citizens (Harrison 3.1). This approach seems suitable for persuading the audience of the fact that the link between this institution and societal perceptions is explicit. Moreover, the orientation on other characteristics, such as gender, contributes to the creation of a clear picture of the multi-faceted nature of people’s opinions (Harrison 10.2). These strong points are accompanied by the challenge of expanding the conclusions to cover other geographical areas. It means that further examination of the subject might lead to the opposite conclusion, thereby making the discussed findings strictly region-specific.
The Goals
The mentioned strengths and weaknesses of this publication positively correlate with the way the goals of this article are achieved. Thus, the aim to claim the connection between stereotypes about foreign people stemming from the characteristics attributed to different groups of slaves was addressed but only partially. Harrison (3.1) managed to provide substantial evidence to support this standpoint; nevertheless, no source indicates that the argument can be expanded to other territories. Similarly, another objective, confirming the ethnographic implications of this process, was met, but the absence of documentation of the existence of similar mechanisms in other nations was not provided (Harrison 2.12). Therefore, one can come to the conclusion that further analysis of these two aspects is required for precision.
Evidence and Its Suitability
In order to prove the stance chosen by the author, comprehensive evidence is used. Even though it is limited to the Greek world, which means that there is a risk that the findings might be applicable solely to this region, the publication effectively incorporates the selected literary sources. For example, when Harrison (21.3-7) provides examples of foreign customs, he refers to the works of Polyaenus and Herodotus on “the representation of the Thracians.” In turn, when speaking about stereotypes about slaves, he mentions Aristotle’s “Politics” and “the Hippocratic “Airs, Waters, Places” (Harrison 8.3-4). In this way, every part of the claim incorporating the two goals specified at the beginning of the article is supported by evidence. This fact increases the credibility of this piece and allows us to avoid ambiguity in discussing the topic, which can be examined only when relying on ancient Greek writings.
Thoroughness and Clarity
In terms of thoroughness and clarity, the analyzed article does not have any issues since the progression of thought is well-organized by the author. Moreover, the presentation of cited materials and their order corresponds to the intention to meet the goals discussed in the previous sections. Thus, in the beginning, Harrison (2.3-4) draws readers’ attention to the subject by explicitly stating the relation of his ideas regarding national stereotypes to the institution of slavery. By doing so, he creates the basis for further narrative, including analogies between the scholar’s suggestions and their documented proof taken from Greek literature (Harrison 2.1). In the continuation of this piece, a sufficient amount of critical details is presented to support the claims stated in the introductions effectively. The organization of ideas is also appropriate with respect to the set objectives since the examination of the characteristics of slaves is followed by their ethnographic importance, justifications, and cultural significance (Harrison 19.2-5). This logical flow of thought improves the perception of the article by the readers, and a smooth transition between the sections allows easily grasping of the correlation between the presented points.
Course Materials
The article written by Harrison is essential for understanding the course material since it is intertwined with some of the critical pieces of evidence about people’s lives of the time. For instance, this source narrating about stereotypes explains why Hesiod (11.469) writes that “good management is the best for mortal men” when talking about slaves. This line means that this category of citizens is believed to be incapable of performing this task without assistance. Similarly, in “Iliad” and “Odyssey,” female servants are depicted as individuals valued for their skills in the first place, meaning that gender distinctions were applicable (Homer “Iliad” 7.103-107, Homer “Odyssey” 570.3-4). From these literary works, it is clear that the division of labor, whether it is grinding grain at the mill or performing household duties, was made accordingly (Homer “Iliad” 7.103-107). These stories confirm that Harrison’s conclusions are suitable for describing the institution of slavery and its impact on people’s views regarding foreigners in ancient times.
The main lessons from this article are the attempts of Greek citizens to distinguish themselves from other nations to prove their superiority and define a place for others in a strict hierarchy guided by this consideration. From this point of view, it is no wonder that philosophers used to reflect on the fact that “man was born from creatures of different kind” (Anaximander 134.1-2). This claim supports the idea of the dependency of skills and abilities on one’s geographical origin expressed by thinkers and discussed by Harrison (5.7). In addition, the tendency to attribute the phenomena one could not understand to divine powers can also be used to justify the formation of these beliefs in the absence of any attempts to avoid errors (Hippocrates 1.10). In this way, the previously discussed topics contribute to the increased awareness of a uniform approach to cognition regardless of the subject demonstrated by ancient Greeks.
References
Anaximander. n.d. “Presocratic Fragments.” 1-4 [PDF Document].
Harrison, Thomas. 2019. “Classical Greek Ethnography and the Slave Trade.” Classical Antiquity 38 (1): 36-57.
Hippocrates. n.d. “The Sacred Disease” [PDF Document].
Homer. n.d.a “Iliad.” Johnstoniatexts. Web.
Homer. n.d.b “Odyssey.” Johnstoniatexts. Web.
Hesiod. n.d. ” Works And Days.” Sacred Texts. Web.