I think this is a very tough question given the modern morals we have, but I have often pondered it. I am an avid student of history and particularly like the Roman era. There was a picture from a book I read that showed a noble woman having her hair styled by a female maid servant, while another hand maid put on her sandals.
If I had grown up in an era where such was the norm, I am pretty sure I would have a slave. To be served to such a degree is tempting even now. I would love to have a maid wait on my every need. I know this seems outrageous, but I am sure many of us would have given into such temptation in the past.
2007-07-01 10:20:13 · 21 answers · asked by Jessica J 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
I hope not. Neither would I want to take advantage of someone's free labor even if it were not called slavery.
2007-07-01 10:27:03 · answer #1 · answered by Pascha 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The term "slave" is were people freak out I think. I don't know if I would have had a slave, my family was never that well off. I think I come from Ireland, then spent some time around St. Louis as hill billies. Anyway, I'm pretty sure we weren't the family that had slaves.
On the other note of having a maid to wait on you hand and foot, that's a different way of looking at it. I would like to get to a point were I could have a personal assistant. I think that would be cool, it'd be nice to have someone to help me with phone calls and handle a lot of the busy work that takes up my day. I'd like to be able to focus my time toward more profitable type stuff. I wouldn't go so far as to call them a slave, office b***h maybe.
2007-07-01 17:33:36 · answer #2 · answered by double_o_shelbo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would probably have been working class (based on the fact that I'm middle class now, and a lot of my "wealth" is based on credit rather than actual cash-on-hand), so wouldn't have been able to afford slaves.
However, the difference between platation-type slavery and Roman slavery was a huge one. The slaves of ancient Roman royalty were better off than most working-class people, and had more social status. And even the difference between the treatment of slaves on a large plantation and the couple in a small household could be miles apart.
I don't think that I would have thought "Oh, this is WRONG" anymore than, say, the average fundamentalist Christian woman would think "I should be a minister" or the average straight man in the 1950's would think "There's nothing wrong with being a homosexual." We are made up of our influences, and people who owned (and own) slaves aren't generally exposed to the sort of thinking that would lead to setting them free or not buying them in the first place.
Much is made of the fact that Thomas Jefferson owned and possibly had children by slaves (some sources say that Sally Hemmings' red-haired children were by his brother), but the fact that he willed their freedom after his death made him a huge radical at the time. No-one could be elected president NOW if it were found that he had slaves, but up until after the Civil War, it was not something that most people thought was truly wrong.
2007-07-04 02:23:27 · answer #3 · answered by Beth 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that if you lived in a time and place that allowed slavery, that you would if you were of the social status that allowed it. Everyone here who says "No it's wrong" has to understand that you cannot apply your modern cultural values on a time that allowed such a practice.
Poor people in every slave owning civilization would not own slaves, simply too expensive. You are correct that this is a tough question, and your answer would depend heavily whether you were poor or rich.
Even scarier is that slavery still exists in this world.
2007-07-02 00:29:03 · answer #4 · answered by Redbird 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry to have an opposing point of view, but I don't think my moral compass would have allowed me to have a slave no matter what era I came from. Wrong has always been wrong and will always be wrong. A maid is different from a slave at any rate. A maid can expect fair treatment and compensation for her labor, and is free to come and go. Personally, I would much rather serve others than have them serve me. (I don't even usually like having someone open the door for me!)
2007-07-01 17:37:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting question. The answer, depending on the "where" and "when" would most likely be YES....unless of course, you were born in such wise as to BE a slave. It really was considered a normal part of life in many societies through history and while the very idea of slavery offends our modern sensibilities, that's a fact. I would like to think that I would be kind to my slaves, that I would treat them with dignity and respect (although we all would be aware, necessarily, of our respective positions). I'd like to think that my slaves would be as content as their status allowed and that my name would be spoken with affection in their quarters.
2007-07-04 02:16:53 · answer #6 · answered by madeleine_ursule 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Never forget that you can't really judge people in the past based on the morals and values of today. Only a small minority of people were rich and powerful enough to own slaves in anytime in history,so it is more logical to presume that even though we would toy with the thought of owning a slave, we would probably be the one who was owned in one way or the other.
2007-07-03 21:50:38 · answer #7 · answered by TOMMIE W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The majority of people with a great deal of wealth would have owned slaves. When I consider that I
am an African American, and not from a wealthy situation, the chances are more likely that I would be someone's slave. If I was very fortunate I might be a free (wo)man.
2007-07-01 17:29:45 · answer #8 · answered by Joy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it's doubtful that I would--I don't believe I could ever in any lifetime have been able to afford one. Apart from that, my ancestors all lived in the north, particularly Pennsylvania, which outlawed slavery in the 1790's, so it's likely that I'd have held the prevailing public opinion against holding human beings as property.
2007-07-01 17:50:39 · answer #9 · answered by Chrispy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Umm it is defenitaly a tough question if you put your self there and in that situation. I would have people helping out, but i would only have like a family where i would let them stay in the house with us, eat, go to school and pray, id see them as a modern day live in nanny.
2007-07-01 18:48:42 · answer #10 · answered by home town hero 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think yes. not cuz i want it now. but becuz there was a lot of work and ppl would rather buy slaves than hire workers.aside from the fact that there was a big influence at the time. and back then we didnt have ppl to say "be above the influence". back then it was ok for kids to smoke and drink. So i think that i would own slaves
2007-07-01 17:32:28 · answer #11 · answered by munchkin_princess 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋