Indentured Servants Dbq Essay

1436 Words3 Pages

The idea that the category of one’s property extends to and includes indentured servants and/or slaves was a popular, widespread belief in colonial times. Personal identity and most, if not all, human rights were stripped at the hands of one’s “owner,” as they were no longer a person of their own free will but an object belonging to someone of a perceived “higher standing.” However, while conditions for indentured servants and slaves hold many similarities, there were also distinct differences pertaining to skin color. In Michael P. Johnson’s Reading the American Past, documents 1-4: “Aristotle on Masters and Slaves,” 5-1: “Elizabeth Ashbridge Becomes an Indentured Servant in New York,” and 5-4: “Advertisements for Runaway Slaves,” all highlight …show more content…

One part of this section in particular, Aristotle explains the concept that someone is naturally a slave if they are capable of becoming property of somebody else. Throughout history, women have always been as “less of a person” than a man; therefore, making them easily capable of being considered as property. Going on, Aristotle then states his understanding of the differences between women and “barbarians,” saying that “[among barbarians] the female and the slave occupy the same position—the reason being that no naturally ruling element exists among them, and conjugal union thus comes to be a union of a female who is a slave with a male who is also a slave.” CITE These common ideas support the fact that for a large portion of history, women were thought to be property of man. When comparing these statements with Elizabeth Ashbridge’s indentured servant experiences in document 5-1, the act of which women are naturally considered to be property is not surprising. Her time spent working in the colonies was no different, if not worse, than any other indentured servant due to the fact that she was both a woman and a servant—both seen and treated as property instead of an actual person. “In two weeks time I was Sold,” Ashbridge states, “& Were it …show more content…

While the treatments of indentured servants, like Elizabeth Ashbridge, were degrading, the treatments of African-American slaves were dehumanizing. They were not just treated like objects, they were seen as such. In Aristotle’s The Politics, he states that “the slave is an animate article of property, and subordinates…in general may be described as instruments.” CITE This concept is widely supported by document 5-4, Advertisements for Runaway Slaves. Throughout the different ads for runaways, slave after slave is described with terms relating to objects, not actual people. For example, phrases like “a lusty strong Angola Negro,” and “they are all new Negro’s,” provide an implication that “Negro” is referred to like a brand and “they are all new” being said in likings of a new shipment of stock. Additionally, concluding statements like “whoever will apprehend the said Slave, so that I may have him again,” all suggest that those slave owners saw their slaves as objects that belong to them and nothing more. CITE They were being described as instruments used for another’s personal gain, saying “I may have hum again” further dehumanizing them as people and instead reducing them to basically nothingness owned by a

Open Document