The Forgotten European Slaves of Islamic Barbary North Africa and Islamic Ottoman Turkey

submitted by H3v8 from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It is unfortunate that slavery has such cultural significance in the Middle East. Certainly, Middle Eastern slavery was never abolished and remains intact today under the khafala system. However, I think to add some context to this, it is important to note that Europeans have always represented a very tiny fraction of the people who were victimized by "Muslim" slavery. In fact, throughout history and even now under the khafala system, it is often South Asian Muslims or Africans who are targeted by Arab slavery, Europeans were never the primary target. In fact, today, any European or North American wanting to work in the Middle East gets treated pretty well but many of the poor Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani Muslims get held as slaves. With an issue like this, I think it is important to carefully parse out the role of religion. How are random pirates representative of "Islamic principles" to begin with? How could an "Islamic" policy lead to such a wide population of Muslim slaves? Certainly there is a problem with slavery in the Middle East and even Africa but how appropriate is it to label it "Islamic slavery" when the role of religion is completely unclear and a vast majority of the victims at least in the Middle East are Muslim themselves?

[–]H3v8[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

In the Balkans and Asia Minor, the Christians were treated as slaves and there were many who changed their religion so that they could join the Ottomans in ruling over the Christian population. This is how the Bosnians or the Albanians were born, as they were not known as a distinct people before they turned into Muslims. Christians had to pay heavy taxes and were subjected to the cruelty of the Muslims, who would grab their children and women for their army and their harems. So, at least in parts of the Ottoman state, the distinction between slaves and non-slaves was based on religion, and the Christians were mostly white Europeans.

The video refers mostly to other areas of Europe, which suffered less, but it's a reality that Ottomans viewed Christians as inferior who were only meant to be slaves to the Muslims. Whenever Christians tried to revolt, Jews accompanied the Ottoman army to sell as slaves those who could fetch a good price and torture and massacre the rest (Naousa, Chios and so on).

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In the Balkans and Asia Minor, the Christians were treated as slaves and there were many who changed their religion so that they could join the Ottomans in ruling over the Christian population.

I'm not sure about this particular conflict or the role religion played in it but if religion played as significant of a role as you say it did, it would be an isolated incidence.

So, at least in parts of the Ottoman state, the distinction between slaves and non-slaves was based on religion, and the Christians were mostly white Europeans.

I don't think this video makes the case for this at all. I am not convinced this religious angle played as much of a role as you say it did. Look, I've seen so called "Muslim slavery" in the Arab world as it stands today and it is a simple truth that the targets of that so called "Muslim slavery" under the Khafala system are often poor brown Muslims at the hands of Arabs. There is more of an agenda to enslave poor Muslims from Africa and South Asia in the Middle East right now then there ever was to enslave white Europeans. Right now, any white European or American that goes to the Middle east gets paid lavishly and treated like royalty (as long as they abide by rules and customs) while the poor laborers from Africa and South Asia get held as slaves. I just don't see the desire to enslave any white people in the Middle East when the concept of white privilege is more applicable there than it has been in America in the past century. Either way, I say all this just to acknowledge that yes, the so called "Muslim slavery" you talk about is very real but to look at this through this lens of "Muslims want to enslave whitey" is just plain inaccurate and a reductive conception of what is actually going on here.

[–]H3v8[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure about this particular conflict or the role religion played in it but if religion played as significant of a role as you say it did, it would be an isolated incidence.

Concerning the Balkans and Asia Minor, it wasn't an isolated incidence but widespread practice. It took place in Greece, Albania, Yugoslavia (then Serbia), Bulgaria and so on. There was even an army (Janissaries) made of children taken by force from Christian families, while those who changed their religion by their own will usually remained in their native land as part of the occupation forces.

I don't think this video makes the case for this at all. I am not convinced this religious angle played as much of a role as you say it did.

The video talks about a certain category of (European) slaves, who were captured mostly by pirate raids. That is different than the slaves captured by the regular army as in Chios massacre.

So in the context of certain areas, yes, it was a matter of Muslims treating Christians as slaves, and perhaps someone can tell us if the situation was similar in Spain (before the Ottoman era).

Concerning the way poor workers are treated in rich Arabian countries, many people wonder why "immigrants" demand to become a Muslim minority (or rather a majority) in European countries instead of preferring countries of the same faith. And countries like Qatar fund camps and mosques for those "immigrants" instead of accepting them in their land.