Spartacus: The Very First Communist?

[Nimrod33]

This is something I was wondering from a long time: was Spartacus a prototype for the actual Communists? I've read more than a time that he was praised by Adam Weishaupt, another figure that is heavily associated with Communism. Not only that, but many Commies seems to also identify with him, to the point that even Hollywood seems to love him.

I would like to know some opinions about him. Thanks!

 

[Valkyrie]

From what I can gather, he and the other slaves were just fighting for their freedom. Romans were pretty relaxed with their slaves. In Roman society the wife of the house ran the household and the slaves and everything else came under her authority. The husband didn't interfere, he pursued more "manly" things like political/military service or commercial interests.
The slaves, more or less, were treated like extended family, and sexual pleasures were common place between family members and slaves. In the wealthy patrician class, slaves were given some authority to carry out necessary duties for the family business.
In the link below these things are mentioned, as well as Spartacus and the slave rebellions:

Social Classes in Rome -A Detailed Overview and Significance

Discover the impact of the Romans with Social Classes in Ancient Rome: A Detailed Overview. From maps to language and entertainment, explore how their legacy

roman-empire.net

 

[Helleniser]

I think they see him more as a symbol; just like Prometheus. They love to corrupt Ancient concepts and claim them as their own.

 

[Anemos Aiteros]

Probably the very first communist was also the first monotheist: akhenaton.

That is why, probably, lenin was mummified.

 

[GoldenRatio]

In the abstract sense of the oppressed fighting the oppressors, then sure. However, there have been many cases of that in history and in no other way was Spartacus a communist. His alliance with the other slaves was practical necessity, not some idealistic class struggle. I'd argue that communists love him so much because he led the most successful slave revolt in Rome, the spiritual ancestor of the West. He is a symbol of resistance to western oppression, even though his ilk would be considered western.

 

[Seeker in the Dark]

Going back in time and calling someone “communist” isn’t strictly accurate. Ideas can share similarities here and there but that doesn’t equate them being the same.

You can oppose aristocracy and slavery without being a communist. The British empire abolished slavery without being communist. The French rebelled and executed their aristocracy without becoming communists.

Communism isn’t just about opposing the rich and powerful. You can do that without being a communist. Communism also emphasises communal(usually in the form of an all-powerful state) after the aristocracy is overthrown. It’s a totalitarian economic system selling itself as democratic. I’m not aware what kind of government Spartacus and his fellow slave rebels would have established had they won, but unless it was a government where they ran every aspect of the economy, I wouldn’t call them communists.

It’s also odd to classify someone as belonging to an ideology before the ideology itself was formulated. Similarities here and there doesn’t equal sameness.

You have to be fair for the historical movements of their time and call them by labels they would have gone by and believed themselves rather than modern labels for ideologies not yet invented.