Some historians believe that there were great benefits for enslaved people becoming a part of Mesopotamian households. How does this theory compare with other historians’ thoughts?(1 point)

The theory that some historians believe in, which suggests there were great benefits for enslaved people becoming part of Mesopotamian households, contrasts with the view of other historians who emphasize that the benefits experienced by enslaved individuals were not comparable to those enjoyed by free members of the household. Many historians argue that despite potential advantages, the fundamental inequalities and lack of freedom remained significant.

Additionally, some historians focus on the idea that owning businesses or selling their own goods could offer similar and perhaps more substantial benefits than those associated with being part of a household. Lastly, there are perspectives that consider how being accepted into poorer households could provide foreign captives an opportunity to improve their social standing, although this would still hinge on the overall context of their enslavement.

In summary, while there is acknowledgment of potential benefits for enslaved individuals in Mesopotamian households, other historians highlight the limitations of these benefits and explore alternative forms of social mobility outside of household integrations.