House-Elves yet again

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 181332

Carol earlier:
> > 
> > What if the enchantment can't be made illegal because it's part of
the nature of Elves?
> 
a_svirn responded:
> Enchantments cannot be a part of anyone's nature. Enchantment is an
action of employing certain magic. And in order to enact a bonding 
enchantment two sides are needed, are they not? In this case wizards 
and elves. Wizards would have to want elves to be bound to them.
Unless you think that elves tricked wizards into being their owners? 

Carol responds:
Of course, I don't think that House-Elves tricked Wizards into being
their owners. What I think is that, in offering Wizards their
services, the first House Elves bound themselves in a kind of binding
magical contract (cf. the Goblet of Fire) which could only be broken
by giving an individual Elf clothes. And since the Elves didn't *want*
clothes, they became bound, over time, to particular families. I'm
oversimplifying, but I do think that the enchantment (which term, BTW,
seems to be used on this list without being part of canon) is part and
parcel of their magical nature.

Alternatively, clothes as a means of ending the bond to a particular
family could have been part of the original magical contract, perhaps
even a reward for faithful service, which over time took on the
coloring of a punishment in the eyes of House-Elves. But that, to me,
seems less likely than a natural, inborn enchantment (for lack of a
better word) since it's unlikely that every House-Elf who presented
himself to a Wizard when House-Elves first appeared would have signed
or agreed to an identical contract.

All I'm saying is that the magic that "frees" a House-Elf when he or
she is given clothes seems to be part of the House-Elf's nature, just
like the desire to serve. Whether it's inborn or the result of a
binding magical contract that somehow involves all House-Elves (I
don't think it's a spell that some Wizard put on the whole House-Elf
population or that they put on themselves), it can't be undone through
legislation. That's just like declaring Muggle-borns to be "thieves"
of magic. Regardless of whether the Muggle-borns own their wands
legally or illegally (or have their wands taken away), they're still
magical, still Witches and Wizards. You can't legislate them into
becoming Muggles. Nor can you legislate away whatever magic binds
House-Elves to their human masters. The only way to break the bond *in
canon* is to give them clothes.

Carol, wondering when and why we first started to use the term
"enchantment" for this magical bond and whether it's distorted our
thinking on the topic