Isn't a "Colonist" an evil entity that destroyed paradise to the detriment of earlier "Immigrants"? Murray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Gillard" <xk6050@xtra.co.nz> To: <new-zealand@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 4:50 PM Subject: [nz] 'Colonist' or 'Settler' or 'Immigrant' >I would be interested in hearing the spread of opinions relating to the > differences in understandings between these three words. > > > > For example, was a 'colonist' an immigrant who arrived early on, say > before > 1860? Or did 'he' have to have had means to buy land, for example? And > could > a woman be classed as a 'colonist' if she sought to operate on her own > account? > > > > Was a 'settler' simply an immigrant who would not have owned land, but > maybe > have been an artisan, for example? And again, to what point in time? 1860, > for example? > > > > So, were 'immigrants' those of all classes/occupations who arrived later, > say after 1860, or was that not the case until the great rush in the Vogel > era, for example? > > > > Was there an established social hierarchy in the use of these words? I > suspect from reading Papers Past, there was, with 'colonist' at the top of > the tree. > > > > Thanks > > Joseph > > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://new-zealand-l.blogspot.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > NEW-ZEALAND-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

No Murray that would be the governments job ;-) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04/06/2014 18:39, mhhr wrote: > Isn't a "Colonist" an evil entity that destroyed paradise to the detriment > of earlier "Immigrants"? > > Murray