yeah i also saw the snopes article "setting the record straight" article. I am very skeptical I understand this is debatable but honestly the fact that you are here debating semantics when i wasnt even aware of this "indentured servitude" just makes me rethink a lot of things they didn't consider "good enough" to teach
The only reason that I know about indentured servitude is because I am a Christian and the Bible has a whole series of rules and laws about the treatment of indentured servants. Including exactly when they must be freed. The term in the Bible is Bond Servant, and in searching that term you will likely find primarily theological discussion.
Very few people are aware of indentured servitude as it existed, and many who are think it's just a fancy term for the same thing. It's understandable because in many of the worst points in history the lines were blurred between the two. So from a critical eye looking back they were both the same thing.
The Romans for example didn't have a word necessarily, but there were slaves who were Roman Citizens, and slaves who were not. There were two sets of laws on how those slaves were to be treated. Non Romans were treated like slaves, Romans were treated like indentured servants.
The key difference is that a slave had no rights, while an indentured servant kept most of their normal rights. In many cases at the most civilized periods of history, it was an employment contract you could not back out of.
My original point was less about being semantic, and more that Snopes was trying to bury the lead about Irish slavery by covering it up with even more widely misunderstood facts about slavery.
yeah i also saw the snopes article "setting the record straight" article. I am very skeptical I understand this is debatable but honestly the fact that you are here debating semantics when i wasnt even aware of this "indentured servitude" just makes me rethink a lot of things they didn't consider "good enough" to teach
The only reason that I know about indentured servitude is because I am a Christian and the Bible has a whole series of rules and laws about the treatment of indentured servants. Including exactly when they must be freed. The term in the Bible is Bond Servant, and in searching that term you will likely find primarily theological discussion.
Very few people are aware of indentured servitude as it existed, and many who are think it's just a fancy term for the same thing. It's understandable because in many of the worst points in history the lines were blurred between the two. So from a critical eye looking back they were both the same thing.
The Romans for example didn't have a word necessarily, but there were slaves who were Roman Citizens, and slaves who were not. There were two sets of laws on how those slaves were to be treated. Non Romans were treated like slaves, Romans were treated like indentured servants.
The key difference is that a slave had no rights, while an indentured servant kept most of their normal rights. In many cases at the most civilized periods of history, it was an employment contract you could not back out of.
My original point was less about being semantic, and more that Snopes was trying to bury the lead about Irish slavery by covering it up with even more widely misunderstood facts about slavery.
We all come from indentured servants, if you can;t trace your genealogy to a king that's where you are.