Searching for the term “serf”, I wasn’t able to find anything to answer this question in Economic Thought Before Adam Smith. Anybody know?
Discredited as serving what purpose?
Everybody’s purposes. Harmony of interests, and all that.
bump (in case anyone who could answer has just woken up in the past few hours)
I don’t know, but I can help to establish a time frame. Adam Smith says the following (searching for the term “slave” in the index). All pages reference Adam Smith (2009 [1776]), The Wealth of Nations (Petersfield, Hampshire: Harriman House Ltd.). Chapter VIII, p. 53,
The wear and tear of a slave, it has been said, is at the expense of his master; b ut that of a free servant is at his own expense. The wear and tear of the latter, however, is in reality, as much at the expense of his master as that of the former… [b]ut though the wear and tear of a free servant be equally at the expense of his master, it generally costs him much less than that of a slave.
That’s all that I could really find that was explicit (he talks about slavery in the Roman Empire). It seems that it only became obvious that slavery, at some point, would be less profitable than paid labor once the industrial revolution had begun. Prior to that, it seems as if general productivity was low enough to justify the use of slaves.
The only economist I know that has been credited for debunking the concept of slavery is, indeed, Adam Smith.
But do take this with a grain of salt: I’m quoting from memory and I’m far from certain.
I would advise other historians of economic thought. Or the Mises Schol