yes
In ancient Mesopotamia, the most common classification of slaves was typically those who were debt slaves. These individuals were often forced into slavery as a result of being unable to repay debts, and they worked to pay off what they owed. Slaves could also be war captives or born into slavery, but debt slavery was prevalent due to the economic structure of the time. Unlike in some later societies, Mesopotamian slaves could sometimes earn their freedom and were often integrated into households as laborers or servants.
Slaves where set free for good service or if their master gave them permission. Slaves could also buy their freedom but this was a virtually impossible task, as they did not earn money.
They have to pay a jamillion gold peices to get free from their torture
butt
Peasants during the Middle Ages could only earn freedom by saving money to buy land.
Slaves could earn their freedom through various means such as purchasing it with savings, being granted manumission by their owner, performing exceptional service, or being part of a legal agreement or contract for their freedom. Some slaves were able to gain freedom through escape and seeking refuge in free territories or by fighting for their freedom in rebellions or wars.
With the exception of working in mineral extraction Roman slaves probably had it better. A Roman slave could earn his freedom or advance himself which was not the case with plantation slaves in the deep south.
Yes, slaves could be granted freedom through various means such as being emancipated by their owners, being freed after completing a term of service, or through laws or treaties abolishing slavery. In some societies, slaves could also earn or buy their freedom.
Slaves where set free for good service or if their master gave them permission. Slaves could also buy their freedom but this was a virtually impossible task, as they did not earn money.
They have to pay a jamillion gold peices to get free from their torture
A slave could buy their freedom by saving money or receiving funds from others, negotiating with their owner for a price, or using their skills or talents to earn income to purchase their freedom. In some cases, slaves could also seek help from abolitionist organizations or legal avenues to secure their freedom.
The War Between the states was not fought over slavery but instead state rights. This does not mean the South did not use slaves in the war, but the south offered slaves a chance to earn freedom if they served in the war, even though only ten percent of southerners were slaves at the time. So to answer this question more directly, yes slaves were not needed in the war but the use of slavery helped the south fight for what they believed in. Which might not have been right to today's society but back then it was a fair trade for slaves to fight and earn freedom.
butt
Slaves are not paid. They are people who are bought by other people, so they don't have to pay someone to do the work. They are owned property and have no freedom or earn wages for their labor.
so we could earn our freedom from the brits.
A Roman slave could be freed through a process called "manumission," which could occur in several ways. A slave owner might grant freedom voluntarily, often as a reward for loyalty or service. Slaves could also earn their freedom by saving enough money to purchase it, or through legal proceedings whereby they could prove they had been wrongfully enslaved. Additionally, some slaves were freed upon the death of their owner, as stipulated in the owner's will.
A slave could be freed through different means, such as being granted manumission by their owner, purchasing their freedom, or being granted freedom by the government. In some cases, slaves could earn their freedom through exceptional service or through self-purchase agreements.