Early modern political persons were heads of households, not individuals.

Evidence

A source of difficulty here, in the world of early modern Europeans, is the immense weight of the household-family, and the notion that wives, children, servants, and, in some places, slaves were ‘included in their masters’. Locke’s society was a federation of heads of households, and, for all that he critiques patriarchalism, he concedes much to the household-family. — , Second Treatise of Government and A…, 54

Categorization

• DEFINE: ‘Included in their masters’ means wives, children, servants and slaves had no separate legal personality — they were absorbed into the household head.
• SHARE: For a reader who works on household/family structure: the polity as a federation of household heads is a specific and counterintuitive unit of political membership.
• XREF: connects to: The people is constituted politically, not given sociologically. — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 443; The early modern “nation” meant a status-group sharing custom, not a territorial state. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 150; Family leadership was effectively decided by a few members, not elections (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• The people is constituted politically, not given sociologically. #expands (0.95) — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 443
• Family leadership was effectively decided by a few members, not elections #corroborates (0.90)
• The early modern “nation” meant a status-group sharing custom, not a territorial state. #expands (0.85) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 150
• Political power differs in kind from paternal, marital, and slaveholding power #expands (0.85) — , Second Treatise of Government, 11
• Political leadership can be exercised by a replaceable inner group, not one person #corroborates (0.80)