A Comparative Study of Medieval European Slavery and the Korean Nobi System: Legal Status, Human Dignity, and the Limits of Master’s Power
I. Introduction
Throughout human history, systems of dependent labor have existed in various forms. Among them, slavery in medieval Europe and the nobi system in Goryeo and Joseon Korea stand out as institutionalized mechanisms of social and economic subordination.
While both systems served to sustain ruling-class control and ensure economic productivity, they differed fundamentally in their legal structure, concept of personhood, and the extent of the master’s authority over the life of the subjugated.
This paper argues that the Korean nobi, despite being socially subordinate, occupied a legally and morally superior position to the European slave — recognized not merely as property but as a human being within a codified social order.
II. Concept and Legal Status
1. The Slave in Medieval Europe
Under the legacy of Roman law and the feudal order of Christian Europe, the slave was legally regarded as chattel, a movable property entirely owned by the master.
According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, “a master who killed or severely mistreated a slave faced little or no legal penalty,” demonstrating that slaves were dehumanized and objectified within the legal system.
Slavery was perpetuated through war captivity, debt bondage, piracy, and hereditary birth. Liberation could occur through manumission or rare royal and ecclesiastical decrees, but such cases were exceptional.
2. The Nobi in Goryeo and Joseon Korea
In contrast, Korea’s nobi were classified as a social status group (sinbun jipdan), not mere private property. Though bound to their masters and subject to servile obligations, they retained limited legal rights — including the right to marry, own minor property, and petition in court.
The Gyeongguk Daejeon (National Code) of Joseon defined the nobi’s civil and penal status, specifying procedures for litigation, marriage, and inheritance. This legal codification reflects the state’s recognition of the nobi as human subjects within a moral and legal framework, rather than commodities.
III. Economic Roles and Labor Structures
European slaves labored across various sectors — agriculture, domestic service, craftsmanship, and trade — yet they received only subsistence-level maintenance. Urban slave markets facilitated active international trade.
Korean nobi, however, were divided into domestic nobi (naenobi) and field nobi (oegunobi). The latter cultivated land and paid a portion of produce as rent or tribute, often managing partial economic autonomy. Some even accumulated small property or engaged in market transactions.
Hence, the Korean nobi system incorporated elements of restricted autonomy and reciprocal obligation, unlike the absolute dependency typical of European slavery.
IV. State Regulation and Ideological Foundations
In Europe, slavery persisted under the feudal order where Christian theology justified hierarchy as divinely ordained. The Church emphasized obedience and order, interpreting social stratification as part of God’s will.
In Joseon, Neo-Confucianism underpinned the social order, integrating the nobi system into a moral framework emphasizing hierarchy (ye) and benevolence (in). Although subordination was institutionalized, excessive cruelty or killing of nobi was morally condemned and legally punishable — a notable divergence from European practices.
V. The Right to Life: A Decisive Legal Divide
The starkest difference between the two systems lies in the master’s control over the life and death of the subjugated.
- In Medieval Europe:
Slaves were legally regarded as the property of their masters. Under Roman and canon law traditions, a master could kill or abuse a slave with minimal or no legal repercussions. As the Britannica and Medieval European Slavery Studies (IPF, 2022) note, the slave’s life was effectively outside the protection of the law. - In Joseon Korea:
The Gyeongguk Daejeon and the Daemyeong Yullye Jikhae (Korean Commentary on the Ming Penal Code) explicitly state that “a master who kills his nobi shall be punished by flogging or exile.”
Judicial records such as the Seungjeongwon Ilgi (Diary of the Royal Secretariat, entry of May 14, 1683) document cases where a master was sentenced to death for fatally beating a nobi.
The prevailing legal principle — “Only the sovereign holds authority over life and death” — indicates that the nobi’s life was under state protection, not the master’s discretionary power.
Thus, the Korean nobi was not a mere object of ownership but a legally recognized human being within the Confucian moral universe. This legal constraint on the master’s power represents a profound ethical distinction: the nobi possessed a measure of human dignity under law, which the European slave categorically lacked.
VI. Transformation and Decline
In Europe, slavery gradually transformed into serfdom after the 12th century, with legal recognition of personal freedom slowly expanding.
In Joseon, the nobi population declined from the 17th century onward through manumission, redemption payments (sokryang), and state emancipation policies.
Finally, the 1894 Gabo Reform legally abolished the nobi system, marking a transition toward modern citizenship and equality before the law.
VII. Comparative Summary Table
| Category | Medieval European Slavery | Goryeo–Joseon Nobi System |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Status | Property (chattel); no legal personhood | Subordinate status group; limited rights recognized |
| Right to Life | Master immune from punishment for killing | Killing punished by law; state holds authority over life |
| Labor Form | Agricultural, domestic, maritime, trade labor | Household (naenobi) and field (oegunobi) labor; partial autonomy |
| Means of Freedom | Manumission or payment | Redemption, royal pardon, state emancipation |
| Ideological Basis | Christian order and obedience theology | Neo-Confucian hierarchy with moral restraint |
| Decline | Transition to serfdom | Gradual emancipation; abolition in 1894 |
VIII. Conclusion
In essence, both systems institutionalized dependent labor, yet the legal and moral conceptions of humanity diverged sharply.
European slavery was founded on absolute property rights over human life, rendering slaves dehumanized commodities.
Korean nobi, though bound and subordinate, were subject to state law, moral accountability, and partial legal protection, which acknowledged their human dignity.
The Gyeongguk Daejeon and historical verdicts such as the Seungjeongwon Ilgi reveal that a master’s arbitrary killing of a nobi constituted a criminal act, not a private prerogative.
Therefore, the nobi system — though oppressive — must be understood as a legally regulated status of servitude, distinct from the absolute dehumanization of slavery in medieval Europe.
This comparison highlights how differing religious and philosophical frameworks — Christian theology versus Neo-Confucian ethics — produced fundamentally different understandings of human value and justice within hierarchical societies.
References
- Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Master–Slave Legal Relationships” (2023).
- IPF Research Institute, Serfdom, Bonded Labour and Slavery in Medieval Europe (2022).
- Gyeongguk Daejeon (National Code of Joseon), Criminal Law Section.
- Seungjeongwon Ilgi (Diary of the Royal Secretariat), Entry of May 14, 1683.
- Academy of Korean Studies, The Nobi of Joseon: Slaves or Serfs? (Digital Humanities Project).
- Korean Nobi and American Black Slavery: Comparative Study, Scribd (2020).
✳️ Scholarly Note
This comparative framework underscores that legal personhood, rather than mere economic dependence, is the critical factor distinguishing the nobi from the European slave.
Whereas Christian Europe compromised its own humanistic ideals for feudal and economic order, Neo-Confucian Korea constrained social hierarchy within a moral-legal framework that still recognized the essential humanity of the subordinate.
Explore related writings
About the Author
