Agreed. jc --- Douglas Deal <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Re "servants": > > There is no way to determine what baggage was > attached to the term > "servant" except via close examination of the > context and all relevant > particulars. In early America, the slave was often > called a "servant," > while his master--if devout--was a "servant of > Christ." Large numbers of > immigrants to America were "servants," some with > indentures, some > without. If "servant" still had some negative > connotations by the 19th > century, so did "employee"... or for that matter any > term for wage > labor, which was no one's goal in life (perpetual > dependency). For some > interesting discussions of "servants" and their > status in colonial > times, see Richard Morris, Government and Labor in > Early America; C. B. > Macpherson, Democratic Theory; and Christopher L. > Tomlins, Law, Labor, > and Ideology in the Early American Republic. > > Doug Deal > History/SUNY Oswego > > > > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please > see the instructions > at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html