Manumission, quasi de manumissio , is the act by which a master enfranchises his slave or serf, and places him, so to speak, out of his hands. This term is taken from Roman law, where enfranchisement is called manumissio . We usually say enfranchisement .

There were among the Romans three different forms of manumission .

The first, which was the most formal, was that known as per vindictam , also known as vindicare in libertatem . Some derive the word vindicta from Vindicius, who, having discovered the plot of the sons of Brutus to restore the Tarquins, was enfranchised as a reward. Others argue that vindicare came from vindicta, a rod with which a praetor tapped a slave whose master wished to free him. In presenting his slave to the magistrate, the master held him by the hand and then let him go, at the same time giving him a small slap on the cheek, which was the signal of freedom; then the consul, or the praetor lightly tapped the slave with the rod, saying to him: aio te esse liberum more quiritum . This done, the slave was inscribed in the rolls of the enfranchised, then had himself shaved, and covered his head with a pileus cap, which was the symbol of freedom: he would bring this cap into the temple of Feronia, goddess of the enfranchised.

Under the Christian emperors this first form of manumission underwent several changes; it was no longer done in the temples of the false Gods, or with the same ceremonies; the master led the slave to a Christian church, where the act of enfranchisement was read; a cleric signed the act, and the slave was free: this was called manumissio in sacro-sanctis ecclesiis , which came increasingly into use.

The second form of manumission was per epistolam and inter amicos ; the master would invite his friends for a meal, and have the slave sit down in his presence, by which means he was considered free. Justinian ordered that there be at least five friends as witnesses to this manumission .

The third was done per testamentum , as when a testator would order his heirs to enfranchise a certain slave that he designated to them in these terms, N ... servus meus liber esto : these sorts of freedmen were called orcini , or charonitoe , because they only enjoyed freedom when their masters had passed on Charon’s ferry, and were in the next world, in orco . If the testator simply asked his heir to free a slave, the heir would reserve for himself the right of patronage; and when the testator stipulated that at a certain time the heir would enfranchise the slave, this was called statu liber ; he was therefore only free when this time arrived; the heir could even sell him before then; and in this case, the slave, to obtain his freedom, was obliged to return to the buyer what he had paid the heir.

The enfranchised were initially called liberti , and their children libertini ; however, both terms were later used interchangeably to designate the enfranchised.

When enfranchisement was done to defraud creditors, they would have it declared null, in order to be able to seize the slaves.

The same applied when a freedman, having no children, freed his slaves; his patron could declare this null.  [1]

Those who remained under paternal authority, could not enfranchise their slaves either.

The law fusia canina regulated the number of slaves it was permitted to enfranchise; that is, someone who had not only two slaves could enfranchise both of them; someone who had three, only two of them; from three up to ten, half of them; from ten to thirty, a third of them; from thirty to 100, a quarter; from 100 to 500, a fifth; and it was forbidden to enfranchise more than this no matter how many there were; but this law was abolished by Justinian, as contrary to liberty, which he favored.

In France, at the beginning of the monarchy, almost all the people were serfs. The enfranchisement of cities and of the inhabitants of entire communities began under Louis the Fat, [2] and continued under Louis VII, by returning to them the right of arbitrary seigniorial taxation, [3] and the right of main-mort, by means of which children could succeed their fathers. Also returned to them was the right of mobility, [4] which gave them the freedom to live elsewhere. St. Louis [5] managed to abolish personal servitudes almost entirely.

There were also several particular types of manumission , whose terms can be found in the Marculf Formulary. [6]

There remain nevertheless a few vestiges of servitude in certain provinces, in which there are serfs or people in main-mort, as in Burgundy, Nivernais, Bourbonnais. In these provinces, enfranchisement is done by convention or by disavowal. It is also done by the issuing of titles of nobility, or by the purchase of a state office conferring nobility, with, however, compensation paid to the lord.

In the French colonies, where there are blacks who are enslaved, they may be freed, following the rules prescribed by the edict of March 1685, commonly called the code noir .

Masters who are [at least] twenty years old can, without their parents’ consent, enfranchise their slaves by all acts inter vivos , or upon their death, without being required to provide any reason.

Slaves who are named sole heirs by their masters, or named executors of their wills, or tutors of their children, are held to be enfranchised.

Enfranchisements thus carried out in the islands, operate there effectively as letters of naturalization, and throughout the kingdom.

The enfranchised are expected to give particular respect to their old masters, their wives and their children, such that any harm they would do to them would be more gravely punished than if it had been done to any other person. Former masters nevertheless have no right, in their capacity as patrons, over the persons of the enfranchised, or over their property or estates.

The enfranchised enjoy, according to these laws, the same rights as those who are born free.

It is an ancient legal maxim, that the womb enfranchises, that is to say, that children take on the condition of the mother with regard to liberty: the children of an enslaved woman are slaves.

In France all people are free; and as soon as a slave arrives there, he becomes free in being baptized.

It is nevertheless permitted to those who bring slaves to France, when their intention is to return to the islands, to declare this to the admiralty, by which means they retain their slaves.  [7] See the edict of 1716. [8]

On manumissions and enfranchisements, see book XXXX of the Digest , and book VII of the Code , from chapter one through twenty-five; [9] the entry “manumissio” in Ducange’s Glossarium ; the entry “affranchis” in Brillon’s Dictionnaire , and the entry in M. Terrasson’s Jurisprudence romaine . [10]

1. Under Roman law, an enfranchised person’s former master would become their ‘patron’, and would retain certain rights over them in this capacity, until the patron’s death.

2. Louis VI of France.

3. Translated from the French taille à volonté , an arbitrary manorial tax, levied by a lord upon his peasants; not to be confused with the taille royal , first permanently levied beginning in the 100 Years War, and applicable to all except the clergy and the nobility, which was not to be abolished until the French Revolution.

4. Translated from the French droit de suite , a French feudal right, reserved by a lord, to determine where his serf lived.

5. Louis IX of France.

6. The Marculf Formulary was a collection of legal acts compiled in the 7th or 8th centuries by an unknown Merovingian monk. It was intended as a guidance for officials in the drafting of acts, charters, and other public documents.

7. The admiralty was an appeals court dealing with maritime issues.

8. The Edict of 1716 stipulated the conditions under which a slave could be brought to France and remain enslaved. See Sue Peabody, “There are No Slaves in France”: The Political Culture of Race and Slavery in the Ancien Régime (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

9. The references are to the Digest and Code of Justinian. See Justinian, Digest , Book XL; and “Enactments of Justinian: The Code: Book VII,” in S.P. Scott, The Civil Law, bk. XIV, Cincinnati, 1932.

10. The references are to Charles Du Fresne, Sieur Du Cange (1610-1688), Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis (Lyon, 1688) ; Pierre-Jacques Brillon (1671-1736), Dictionnaire des arrests, ou jurisprudence universelle des parlemens de France et autres tribunaux (Paris   1711); and Antoine Terrasson (1705-1782), Histoire de la jurisprudence romaine (Paris, 1750).