[Ads-l] Fw: [ADS-L] Enslavement of Native Americans [was: wench]

[Z Rice]

"The Blacks" and Amerindians were enslaved in the United States. Our
ancestors were not simply "servants". They were enslaved. Using the term
'servant' smacks of the revisionist use of "workers" and "immigrants" to
refer to the same African population. Call it what it was.

You also wrote: "It was generally agreed that Native Americans did not make
good servants (a term which included what today we would call slaves) ...
they didn't like service, resisted doing it, and would go missing."

This comment that you made implies that Amerindians supposedly "did not
make good 'servants' " (servants ??), and others did. Hopefully, I am
mistaken and this is not what you meant. Regardless, you should also know
that the rate of death for enslaved Amerindians was much higher than that
of Africans enslaved in the US.

Still, no one makes a "good" so-called "slave" (the usage of this term here
is very telling). No one wants to be held captive, tortured, raped,
molested, disfigured, and worked to death. No one wants their children
snatched from them, raped, whipped, enslaved, and/or tortured to death. No
one wants their family ripped apart. No one wants to be forced to do some
other population's work (and for no pay no less). No one wants to suffer a
starvation diet. A human being is prone to resist such barbaric policies
and practices, as the history of those enslaved African ancestors has
already demonstrated.



On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Joel Berson <berson at att.net> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Joel Berson <berson at ATT.NET>
> Subject:      Fw: [ADS-L] Enslavement of Native Americans [was: wench]
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Re-sent under a better Subject heading.
>
> Which gives me the opportunity to add ... It was generally agreed that
> Nati=
> ve Americans did not make good servants (a term which included what today
> w=
> e would call slaves) ... they didn't like service, resisted doing it, and
> w=
> ould go missing.
>
> Joel
>
>     =20
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
>  From: Joel Berson <berson at ATT.NET>
>  To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU=20
>  Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 3:25 PM
>  Subject: Re: [ADS-L] wench
>   =20
> This is a partial answer, for New England.=C2=A0 After various of the wars
> =
> between the English settlers of New England and the Native Americans,
> captu=
> red Native Americans were sold for transportation to the Southern colonies
> =
> or to the West Indies, where they surely would become slaves.=C2=A0 Others
> =
> were kept as slaves in New England.=C2=A0 This was permitted by one of the
> =
> two exceptions in the 1641 Massachusetts "Body of Liberties" to the
> prohibi=
> tion of slavery ("bond slaves"), which allowed enslavement of persons
> "take=
> n in just wars".
> (The other exception in Liberty 91 essentially undid the prohibition --
> whi=
> le Massachusettsians could not enslave others, they could buy slaves sold
> t=
> o them.=C2=A0 And there were New England shippers in the slave trade --
> but=
>  they would fit under the exemption if they had not actually enslaved
> their=
>  cargoes but rather had bought them in Africa and sold them in the New
> Worl=
> d.)
>
>
> Liberty 91 is silent about "race", so it would seem to allow the presence
> o=
> f Native American slaves to the same extent as African slaves.
>
> For Joanne Pope Melish's evaluation of enslavement of Native Americans
> (and=
>  others), see her _Disowning Slavery: Gradual Emancipation and "Race" in
> Ne=
> w England, 1780=E2=80=931860_, Google Books (preview), search for "Indian"
> =
> (sort by Pages and look at the first 3 or 4 hits) and for "Body of
> Libertie=
> s".=C2=A0=20
>
> I do not have definite knowledge for the Middle Atlantic and Southern
> colon=
> ies, but I would bet there were Native American slaves there.=C2=A0 George
> =
> cites an example from New York, and there probably were similar in the
> Virg=
> inia (Williamsburg) and South Carolina (Charleston) newspapers.
>
>
> Joel
>
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 From: James A. Landau <JJJRLandau at NETSCAPE.COM>
>  To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU=20
>  Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 2:09 PM
>  Subject: Re: [ADS-L] wench
> =C2=A0=20
> Something that appears to have overlooked in this thread:=C2=A0 in the
> 17th=
>  century both Africans and Native Americans were used as household
> servants=
> .=C2=A0 The blacks were usually slaves (slavery was practiced in all 13
> Col=
> onies until circa 1780).=C2=A0 I do not know if Native Americans could
> also=
>  be slaves (can anyone enlighten me?)=C2=A0=20
>
> If in the 17th and 18th centuries in the Colonies the term "wench"
> generall=
> y meant "slave woman", it would still frequently be necessary to specify
> if=
>  a particular wench were African, Native American, or mixed-race.=C2=A0=20
>
> Off-topic: "wench", long archaic, is enjoying a micro-revival in George R.
> =
> R. Martin's A Song Of Ice And Fire series, set in a universe quite similar
> =
> to our Middle Ages, in which "Wench" is Jaime Lannister's disparaging term
> =
> of address to Brienne of Tarth.
>
> - Jim Landau
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Netscape.=C2=A0 Just the Net You Need.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org