It has been observed that, from the most grievous insults and contumely, slaves were protected by the laws; but if, in spite of legal protection, their masters found means to render their lives a burden, the state provided them with an asylum in the temples of Theseus and the Eumenides.[88] Having there taken sanctuary, their oppressors could not force them thence without incurring the guilt of sacrilege.[89] Thus, in a fragment of Aristophanes’ Seasons we find a slave deliberating whether he should not take refuge in the Theseion, and there remain till he could procure his transfer to a new master;[90] for any one who conducted himself too harshly towards his slaves was by law compelled to sell them.[91] Nay and not only so, but the slave could institute an action against his lord called αἰκιάς δίκη, or against any other citizen who had behaved unjustly or injuriously towards him. But the right of sanctuary was no doubt limited, and only extended from the time of the slave’s flight to the next New Moon, when a periodical slave-auction appears to have been held.[92] ----- Footnote 88: Sch. Aristoph. Eq. 1309. Footnote 89: Plut. Thes. § 36. With the commentators on Pollux. t. v. p. 232, seq. Cf. Phil. Jud. Lib. quisq. virt. Stud. t. ii. p. 467. ed. Mangey. Grot. Le Droit de la Guerre et de la Paix, l. iii. ch. 7. § 8, with the notes of Barbeyrac. Footnote 90: Pollux. vii. 13. Such as took refuge at the Altar of Hestia or the domestic hearth were denominated ἑδρῖται. Etymol. Mag. 316, 52. Footnote 91: In modern times the Turks claim the credit of superior humanity towards their slaves who, through marriage with their masters’ sons or daughters, often rise to the highest degree of opulence and distinction. Most of the Pashas and great officers of state have sprung from a servile origin. The same thing may be said of the Sultanas and principal ladies of the empire; for which reason the Circassian princes and nobles have always been ambitious to have one at least of their daughters established in a Turkish harem. Habesci, State of the Ottoman Empire, chap. 31. p. 396, sqq. A correspondent of the Malta Times, writing from Turkey, observes: “Should the slave object to remain with his master, he himself has the power to go to the market and declare he wishes to be sold. The master never opposes this, and it proves such a check upon him that he seldom dares even to scold his slave.” Times, February 28, 1842. All this must be understood, however, with considerable reserve, since no traveller can pass through the Ottoman Empire without discovering numerous examples of the cruelty of masters towards their domestics. Footnote 92: