Islamic Slavery, Part 6: Enslavement by Muslims Around the World

This is Part 6 of the chapter "Islamic Slavery" from M. A. Khan's book, "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery". To uphold the Quran's command and Muhammad's tradition, wherever Jihadi Muslim invaders have gone -- Asia, Africa or Europe -- they have engaged in extensive slavery, Africa being the worst affected. (Part 1, Part 5, Part 7)

ENSLAVEMENT BY MUSLIMS ELSEWHERE

Muslim invaders and rulers engaged in enslaving the vanquished infidels in large numbers in their raids and wars everywhere. Prophet Muhammad’s inauguration of wholesale enslavement of non-Muslims for selling them or engaging in household work and concubinage was progressively expanded after his death as the Muslim power progressively increased through the reigns of the Rightly Guided Caliphs (632–60), the Umayyads (661–750) and the Abbasids (751–1250).

When Muslim General Amr, directed by Caliph Omar, conquered Tripoli in 643, he took away the women and children from both the Jews and Christians. Caliph Othman, records ninth-century historian Abu Khalif al-Bhuturi, imposed a treaty on the Nubia (Sudan) in 652, requiring its rulers to send an annual tribute of slaves—360 for the caliph and forty for the Egyptian governor,[1] which continued until 1276. Similar treaties were concluded during the Umayyad and Abbasid rules with the towns of Transoxiana, Sijistan, Armenia and Fezzan (modern Northwest Africa), who had to send a stipulated annual tribute of slaves of both sexes.[2] During the Umayyad rule, Musa bin Nusair, an illustrious Yemeni General, was made governor of North Africa (Ifrikiya, 698–712) to put down a renewed Berber rebellion and to spread the domain of Islam. Musa put down the revolts and enslaved 300,000 infidels. The Caliph’s one-fifth share, numbering 60,000, was sold into slavery and the proceeds were deposited into the caliphal treasury. Musa engaged 30,000 of the captives into military service.[3]

In his four-year campaign in Spain (711–15), Musa had captured 30,000 virgins from the families of Gothic nobility alone.[4] This excludes the enslaved women from other backgrounds, and of course, the children. In the sack of Ephesus in 781, 7,000 Greeks were driven away as slaves. In the capture of Amorium in 838, slaves were so numerous that Caliph al-Mutasim ordered them to be auctioned in batches of five and ten. In the assault of Thessalonia in 903, 22,000 Christians were divided among the Arab chieftains or sold into slavery. In Sultan Alp Arsalan’s devastation of Georgia and Armenia in 1064, there was immense slaughter and all the survivors were enslaved. Almohad Caliph Yaqub al-Mansur of Spain raided Lisbon in 1189, enslaving some 3,000 women and children. His governor of Cordoba attacked Silves in 1191, making 3,000 Christians captive.[5]

Having captured Jerusalem from the Crusaders in 1187, Sultan Saladin enslaved the Christian population and sold them. In the capture of Antioch in 1268, Mamluk Sultan al-Zahir Baybars (r. 1260–77) enslaved 100,000 people after putting 16,000 defenders of the garrison to the sword. ‘The salve market became so gutted that a boy would fetch only twelve dirhams and a girl five,’ notes Hitti.[6]

It is already noted that, after Muslims assumed power in Southeast Asia, they had promoted slavery to such an extent that the Portuguese—arriving after a century—found that almost all the people belonged to slave-masters and the Arabs were prominent among the masters. It is also noted that Muslim rulers in Southeast Asia often enslaved the entire population after capturing a territory and carry them away. In Java, Muslim rulers reduced the entire hill people, a substantial part of the population, to slavery through raids and purchase. Sultan Iskandar Muda (r. 1607–36) of Aceh brought thousands of slaves to his capital as a result of the conquests in Malaya. Java was the largest exporter of slaves in around 1500; these slaves were captured in ‘decisive wars of Islamization’.[7] The Sulu Sultanate, despite being under constant threat of being overtaken by the Spanish, brought as many as 2.3 million Filipinos as slaves from the Spanish-controlled Philippines through Moro Jihad raids between 1665 and 1870. Late in the 1860s to 1880s, slaves constituted 6 percent to two-thirds of the population in the Muslim-ruled regions of the Malay Peninsula and Indonesian Archipelago.

Late in the eighteenth century, Moroccan Sultan Moulay Ismail (r. 1672–1727) ‘had an army of black slaves, said to number 250,000.’[8] In 1721, Moulay Ismail ordered an expedition against a rebel territory in the Atlas Mountains, where the rebels had resolved against sending tributes to the sultan. Upon defeating the rebels, ‘All the men were put to the sword, while the women and children… were carried back’ to the capital. Soon afterwards, he ordered another expedition of 40,000-strong force under the command of his son Moulay as-Sharif against the rebel town of Guzlan that had withdrawn tribute. Upon seeing no hope of winning the battle, the rebels surrendered and sued for mercy. But Moulay as-Sharif ‘ordered every man to be killed and decapitated.’[9] Their women and children were obviously carried away as slaves.

Guinea (Africa, currently 85 percept Muslim) came under the Muslim rule in the eighteenth century. During the latter part of this century, the ‘Upper Guinea Coast had “slave town” with as many as 1,000 inhabitants’ under a chief. Traveling in Islamic Sierra Leone in 1823, Major Laing witnessed “slave town” in Falaba, the capital of Salima Susu.[10] These slaves worked in agricultural projects of the chief. The East African Empire of famed Sultan Sayyid Sa’id with its capital in Zanzibar (1806–56) ‘was founded upon slavery… Slaves were shipped to the markets of Southern Arabia and Persia as domestic retainers and concubines.’[11]

Ronald Segal, who is sympathetic to Islam,[12] informs that African children of the age-group of ten to eleven years were captured in large numbers for military training to serve in the Muslim army. From Persia to Egypt to Morocco, slave armies consisting of 50,000 to 250,000 soldiers became commonplace.[13] Similar to the rearing of the Ottoman Janissary soldiers (discussed below), Sultan Moulay Ismail used to pick up ten-year-olds from the black slave-breeding farms and nurseries, castrate them and train them into loyal and fierce fighters, called bukhari, because, they pledged allegiance to the sultan swearing by Sahih Bukhari. The best of these bukharis served as the sultan’s personal and palace guards; the rest served in maintaining orders in the provinces. He had 25,000 bukharis guarding his capital at Meknes, while 75,000 were stationed in the garrison town of Mahalla.[14]

According to estimates of Paul Lovejoy (Transformations in Slavery, 1983), about two million slaves were transported from Africa and the Red Sea coast to the Islamic world in the nineteenth century alone, with at least eight million (estimated mortality rate 80–90 percent) likely perished in process. In the eighteenth century, estimated 1,300,000 black Africans were enslaved. Lovejoy estimates that a total of some 11,512,000 slaves were dispatched from Africa to the Islamic world by the nineteenth century, while the estimate of Raymond Mauvy (cited in The African Slave Trade from the Fifteenth to the Nineteenth Century, UNESCO, 1979) puts the total number at fourteen million, which also include some 300,000 enslaved in the first half of twentieth century.[15] Murray Gordon’s Slavery in the Arab World put the total number of black slaves harvested by Muslim slave-raiders at eleven million—roughly equal to the number taken by European traders to their colonies of the New World. At the end of the eighteenth century, caravans from Darfur used to transport 18,000–20,000 slaves in a single trip to Cairo. Even after Europe banned slavery in 1815 and pressured Muslim governments to stop the practice, ‘In 1830, the Sultan of Zanzibar claimed dues on 37,000 slaves a year; in 1872, 10,000 to 20,000 slaves a year left Suakin (Africa) for Arabia.’[16]

---

[1]. Vantini G (1981) Christianity in the Sudan, EMI, Bologna, p. 65–67

[2]. Ibn Warraq (1995) Why I am not a Muslim, Prometheus Books, New York, p. 231

[3]. Umayyad Conquest of North Africa, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_conquest_of_North_Africa

[4]. Lal KS (1999) Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi, p 103; Hitti PK (1961) The Near East in History, D. Van Nostrand Company Inc., New York, p. 229-30

[5]. Brodman JW (1986) Ransoming Captives in Crusader Spain: The Order of Merced on the Christian-Islamic Frontier, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, p. 2-3

[6]. Hitti (1961), p. 316

[7]. Reid A (1988) Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce 1450–1680, Yale University Press, New Haven, p. 133

[8]. Lewis B (1994) Race and Slavery in the Middle East, Oxford University Press, Chapter 8, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/lewis1.html

[9]. Milton G (2004) White Gold, Hodder & Stoughton, London, p. 143, 167-71

[10]. Rodney W (1972) In MA Klein & GW Johnson eds., Perspectives on the African Past, Little Brown Company, Boston, p. 158

[11]. Gann L (1972) In Ibid, p. 182

[12]. Segal emphasizes that anti-Semitism is in complete conflict with the amicable relationship Prophet Muhammad had established with Judaism and Christianity. He asserts that there is no historical conflict between Jews and Muslims, although some conflict arose only after the crusades. Such assertionsl go directly against Prophet’s exterminating or exiling the Jews of Medina and Khaybar and his final instruction, while in death-bed, to cleanse Arabia of the Jews and Christians. He also urged his followers to kill the Jews to the last one [Sahih Muslim, 41:6985]

[13]. Segal R (2002) Islam’s Black Slaves, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, p. 55

[14]. Milton, p. 147–150

[15]. Segal, p. 56–57

[16]. Braudel F (1995) A History of Civilizations, Translated by Mayne R, Penguin Books, New York, p. 131

Islamic Slavery, Part 5: Enslavement by Muslims in India During the Mughal Period

This is Part 5 of the chapter "Islamic Slavery" from M. A. Khan's book, "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery". Upholding the Quran's command and Muhammad's tradition, all Muslim invaders and rulers of India -- from first successful invader Muhammad bin Kasim to last Muslim ruler Tipu Sultan -- engaged in enslavement of Indians. So, the much raved about Mughal period was no different in terms of enslavement (Part 1, Part 4, Part 6).

During Mughal rule (1526…): By defeating Ibrahim Lodi in 1526, Jahiruddin Shah Babur, proud descendent of Amir Timur, established the Mughal rule in India. In his autobiographical memoir Babur Nama, he describes his campaigns against the Hindus as Jihad, punctuated with verse and references from the Quran. The records of capturing slaves during Babur’s reign are not documented systematically. However, in his attack of the small Hindu principality of Bajaur in present-day Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, records Babur: ‘they were put to general massacre and their wives and children made captives. At a guess, more than 3,000 men went to their death… [I] ordered that a tower of heads should be set up on the rising ground.’[1] Similarly, he made pillars with the heads of slain Hindus at Agra. In 1528, he attacked and defeated the enemy in Kanauj and ‘their families and followers were made prisoners.’[2] These examples suggest that the enslavement of women and children was a general policy in Babur’s Jihad campaigns. Babur Nama also mentions that there were two major trade-marts between Hindustan and Khurasan, namely at Kabul and Qandahar, where caravans came from India carrying slaves (barda) and other commodities to sell at great profits.

Following Babur’s death (1530), a period of turmoil followed over the rivalry between his son Humayun and Sher Shah Suri, an Afghan. In 1562, Emperor Akbar the Great, Babur’s grandson and an apostate of Islam, prohibited wholesale enslavement of women and children in wars.[3] In Akbar’s reign notes Moreland, ‘it became a fashion to raid a village or a group of villages without any obvious justification, and carry off the inhabitants as slaves’; this prompted Akbar to enact a ban on enslavement.[4] However, the deeply engrained tradition hardly stopped. Despite the ban, Akbar’s generals and provincial rulers went on their own to plunder and enslave non-Muslims. As noted already, Akbar’s small-time general Abdulla Khan Uzbeg boasted of enslaving and selling 500,000 men and women. Even Akbar, disregarding his earlier decree, ordered to enslave the women of the slain Rajputs in Chittor (1568), who committed jauhar. Enslavement had continued across the provinces despite the ban. In ordinary time in Akbar’s reign, notes Moreland, children were stolen or kidnapped as well as purchased; Bengal was notorious for this practice in the most repulsive form (i.e., slaves were castrated).[5] This forced Akbar to reissue the ban on enslavement in 1576. In his reign, witnessed della Valle, ‘servant and slaves were so numerous and cheap that ‘everybody, even of mean fortune, keeps a great family, and is splendidly attended.’’[6] These examples give a clear idea about the scale at which enslavement was taking place even in enlightened Akbar’s reign.

Enslavement undoubtedly worsened during Akbar’s successors Jahangir (1605–27) and Shah Jahan (1628–58), under whose reigns, orthodoxy and Islamization was gradually revived. Emperor Jahangir in his memoir testifies of children in Bengal being castrated by helpless parents for giving ‘them to the governors as slaves in place of revenue.’ ‘This practice has become common,’ he adds. Said Khan Chaghtai, a noble of Jahangir, had ‘possessed 1,200 eunuch slaves alone,’ according to multiple testimonies.[7] Jahangir had sent some 200,000 Indian captives to Iran for sale in 1619–20 alone.[8]

Under next Emperor Shah Jahan, the condition of the Hindu peasants had become unbearable. European traveler Manrique witnessed in Mughal India that the tax-collectors were carrying away destitute peasants along with their children and wives ‘to various markets and fairs’ for selling them to realize the tax. French physician and traveler Francois Bernier, who spend twelve years in India and was Emperor Aurangzeb’s personal doctor, affirms the same. He wrote of unfortunate peasants, who were incapable of paying taxes, that their children ‘were carried away as slave.’[9] During Aurangzeb’s reign (1658–1707), considered devastating to the Hindus, some 22,000 young boys were emasculated in 1659 alone in the city of Golkunda (Hyderabad).[10] They were to be given to Muslim rulers and governors, or sold in slave-markets.

Nadir Shah of Iran invaded India in 1738–39. After committing great massacre and devastation, he captured a large number of slaves and drove them away along with a huge plunder. Ahmad Shah Abdali from Afghanistan invaded India thrice in the mid-eighteenth century. In his victory in the Third Battle of Panipat (1761), some 22,000 women and children of the slain Maratha soldiers were driven away as slaves.[11] As already cited, the last independent Muslim ruler, Tipu Sultan, had enslaved some 7,000 people in Travancore. They were driven away and forcibly converted to Islam.[12] Enslavement of the infidels in India went on as long as Muslims were ruling with authority. The consolidation of power by the British mercenaries in the nineteenth century eventually ended enslavement in India. Even during the Partition (1947), Muslims kidnapped tens of thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and married them to Muslims: a form of age-old enslavement (discussed already). In November 1947, as already noted, Muslim Pathan raiders carried away Hindu and Sikh girls from Kashmir and sold in the markets of Jhelum (in Pakistan).[13]

These are accounts of enslavement by Muslim invaders and rulers mainly in Northern India. Enslavement was going on in earnest in far-off provinces across India, including Gujarat, Malwa, Jaunpur, Khandesh, Bengal and the Deccan, which were either under the control of Delhi or were independent Muslim sultanates. The records of enslavement in those regions were not always recorded systematically.

---

[1]. Babur JS (1975) Baburnama, trs. AS Beveridge, Sange-Meel Publications, Lahore, p. 370–71

[2]. Ferishtah, Vol. II, p. 38–39

[3]. Nizami KA (1989) Akbar and Religion, Idarah-i-Adabiyat-i-Delhi, New Delhi,, p. 106

[4]. Moreland WH (1995) India at the Death of Akbar, Low Price Publications, New Delhi, p. 92

[5]. Ibid, p. 92–93

[6]. Ibid, p. 88–89

[7]. Lal (1994), p. 116–117

[8]. Levi SC (2002) Hindus Beyond the Hindu Kush: Indian in the Central Asian Slave Trades, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 12(3), p. 283–84

[9]. Lal (1994), p. 58-59

[10]. Lal (1994), p. 117

[11]. Ibid, p. 155

[12]. Hasan M (1971) The History of Tipu Sultan, Aakar Books, Delhi, p. 362–63

[13]. Talib, SGS (1991), Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947, Voice of India, New Delhi, p. 201

Islamic Slavery, Part 4: Enslavement by Muslims in India During the Sultanate Period

This is Part 4 of the chapter "Islamic Slavery" from M. A. Khan's book, "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery". This part discusses the horror saga of little-known Islamic enslavement in India during the Sultanate period -- from Sultan Iltutmish to Lodi Dynasty (Part 1, Part 3, Part 5).

After Muhammad Ghauri was killed by Hindu Khokar's in his war-camp in 1206, Kutbuddin Aibak settled in Delhi to inaugurate the Sultanate of Delhi. Enslavement under the joint Jihad enterprise of Ghauri-Aibak has been discussed already. Next comes the rule of Sultan Iltutmish.

During Sultan Iltutmish to Balban (1210–1285): Next, Sultan Iltutmish (r. 1210–36) spent his early years in suppressing the Turkish opponents. He was also in fear of invasion by Genghis Khan. In 1226, he attacked Ranthambhor. Minhaj Siraj records that ‘much plunder fell into the hands of his followers;’[1] the plunder obviously included slaves. In the 1234–35 attack of Ujjain, he made captives of the ‘women and children of the recalcitrant,’ according to Shiraj and Ferishtah.[2]

After the death of Iltutmish, there was a brief lull in enslavement because of the weakened power of the sultans. In 1244, Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud, commanded by Ulugh Khan Balban, attacked the Gukkar rebels of the Jud Mountain in Multan and carried away ‘several thousand Gukkars of all ages and of each sex,’ records Ferishtah.[3] Ulugh Khan Balban attacked Karra in 1248; there, records Siraj, his ‘taking of captives and his capture of the dependents of the great Ranas (Hindu princes) cannot be counted.’ In attacking the Rana Dalaki wa Malaki, ‘He took prisoners the wives, sons, and dependents of that accursed one, and secured great booty.’[4] In 1252, Balban attacked and defeated the great Rana, Jahir Deo, of Malwa; ‘many captives fell into the hands of the victors,’ records Siraj.[5]

In the attack of Ranthambhor in 1253, Balban captured many slaves, while in the attack of Haryana in 1259, many women and children were enslaved. Balban led expeditions twice against Kampil, Patiali and Bhojpur enslaving large numbers of women and children each time. In Katehar, he captured the women and children after a general massacre of the men above eight years in age, notes Ferishtah. In 1260, Balban attacked Ranthambhor, Mewat and Siwalik—proclaiming that those who brought a live captive would receive two silver tankahs and one tankah for the head of a slain infidel. Soon three to four hundred living persons and heads of the slain were brought to his presence, records Ferishtah. While serving under Sultan Nasiruddin (d. 1266), Balban made many attacks against the infidels, but the number of the captives taken by him are not mentioned. However, a guess can be made from the fact that, slaves were so abundant that Sultan Nasiruddin had presented author Minhaj Siraj with forty of them for sending to his sister in Khurasan.[6]

Balban became the sultan in 1265 assuming the title of Ghiyasuddin Balban. As the commander of the previous sultan, Balban showed great military prowess, leading numerous expeditions against the infidels. After assuming power, his first job was, as noted already, to exterminate hundreds of thousands of recalcitrant Hindu rebels, the Muwattis etc. He ordered to ‘destroy the villages of the marauders, to slay the men, to make prisoners of the women and children.’[7]

During Khilji dynasty: Under the Khilji (1290–1320) and Tughlaq (1320–1413) dynasties, the hold of the Muslim rule in India had been firmly established with the expanded army and territory. The sultan’s power was so overwhelming that ‘no one dared to make an outcry,’ noted Afif. Apart from campaigns to suppress many Hindu rebellions, many expeditions against infidel-held territories were undertaken with an ever-increasing zeal to bring them under the Muslim control. Rich booty was plundered, which obviously contained slaves, but their recording is sketchy, probably because, it had become too common. However, a few available testimonies left by contemporary chroniclers give a general idea of the extent of enslavement. Jalaluddin Khilji (r. 1290–96), the founder of Khilji dynasty, undertook ruthless campaigns to suppress Hindu revolts and to extend the boundary of the sultanate. He led expeditions to Katehar, Ranthambhor, Jhain, Malwa, and Gwalior. In the campaigns to Ranthambhor and Jhain, he sacked temples, plundered, and took captives making "a hell of paradise", writes Amir Khasrau. From the Malwa campaign, large quantities of booty (which always included slaves) was brought to Delhi, adds Khasrau.[8]

Next, Sultan Alauddin Khilji (r. 1296–1316) beat all earlier sultans in the capture of slaves. He sent a large expedition to Gujarat in 1299 sacking all major cities and towns: Naharwala, Asaval, Vanmanthali, Surat, Cambay and Somnath. According to the records of Muslim chroniclers Isami and Barani, he acquired great plunders and a large number of captives of both sexes. In the sack and plunder of Somnath alone, testifies Wassaf, the Muslim army ‘took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000’, as well as ‘the children of both sexes.’ Ranthambhor was attacked in 1301 and Chittor in 1303. In the Chittor invasion, 30,000 people were massacred; and as a standard practice, their women and children were enslaved although some of the Rajput women had committed Jauhar. Large numbers of slaves were captured in the expeditions to Malwa, Sevana and Jalor between 1305 and 1311. Sultan Alauddin also captured slaves in his expedition to Rajasthan. During his reign, capturing slaves became like a child’s play as Amir Khasrau puts it, ‘the Turks whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu.’ So stupendous was his slave-taking that he had ‘50,000 slave boys in his personal service’ and ‘70,000 slaves worked on his buildings,’ record Afif and Barani, respectively. Barani testifies that ‘fresh batches of captives were constantly arriving’ in the slave-markets of Delhi during Alauddin’s reign.’[9]

During Tughlaq dynasty: In 1320, the Tughlaqs captured power. Muhammad Shah Tughlaq (r. 1325–51), the most learned amongst Muslim rulers of India, was the most powerful rulers of the Sultanate period (1206–1526). His notorious zeal for capturing slaves had even outstripped the feats of Alauddin Khilji. Shihabuddin Ahmad Abbas wrote of his capture of slaves that ‘The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making war upon the infidels… Everyday thousand of slaves are sold at a very low price, so great is the number of prisoners.’ During his notorious reign, he undertook numerous expeditions to put down revolts and to bring far-off regions of India under his sway, reaching deep into South India and Bengal. He also brutally put down sixteen major rebellions. Many of these expeditions brought great booty, which invariably included slaves in large numbers. Slaves were so abundant that the sultan had sent ten female slaves to traveler Ibn Battutah on his arrival in Delhi.[10] The sultan sent a diplomatic mission to the Chinese emperor, led by Battutah, with a caravan of gifts, which included ‘a hundred white slaves, a hundred Hindu dancing- and singing-girls…’[11] Sending slaves as gifts to the caliphs and rulers overseas was also a common practice during Sultan Iltutmish and Feroz Tughlaq (d. 1388). Ibn Battutah testifies that the sultan used to accumulate slaves round the year and marry them off during the celebration of two major Islamic festivals, the Eid.[12] This was obviously aimed at swelling the Muslim population in India.

Next, Sultan Firoz Shah Tughlaq (r. 1351–88) was a kind-hearted toward the infidels, for he first allowed drafting some non-Muslims into his army, defying Muslim opposition. Even under his rule, enslaving the infidels went on with great vigor. He had acquired a mind-blowing 180,000 young slave boys in his court, testifies Afif.[13] He, like his predecessor, used to capture thousands of male and female slaves round the year and marry them off on the days of Eid celebration. According to Afif, ‘slaves became too numerous’ under Firoz Tughlaq and ‘the institution (of slavery) took root in every centre of the land.’ Soon afterwards, the sultanate broke into several independent kingdoms, but the enslavement of the infidels continued as usual in every "centre of the land", writes Afif.[14]

In Amir Timur’s invasion: Amir Timur from Central Asia, waged Jihad against India (1398–99) to become a ghazi or a martyr, had accumulated over 100,000 captives when he reached Delhi. On the eve of his attack on Delhi, he killed them all. From his assault on Delhi onward to his return to his capital, he has left a tragic trail of barbaric slaughter, destruction, pillage and enslavement, which he recorded in his memoir, Malfuzat-I-Timuri.[15]

Of his assault on Delhi on 16 December 1398, records Timur, ‘15,000 Turks were engaged in slaying, plundering and destroying… The spoil was so great that each man secured fifty to a hundred prisoners—men, women and children. There was no man who took less than twenty.’ If each soldier, on an average, had taken 60 captives, the total yield of slaves was about 1000,000 (1.0 million)[16].

On the way back to his capital in Central Asia, narrates Timur, he instructed his commanders ‘to take every fort and town and village’ they came across, and ‘to put all the infidels of the country to the sword… My brave fellows pursued and killed many of them, made their wives and children prisoners.’ After reaching Kutila, he attacked the infidels; ‘After a slight resistance, the enemy took flight, but many of them fell under the swords of my soldiers. All the wives and children of the infidels were made prisoners.’

Moving forward, upon arriving at the bank of the Ganges during the bathing festival, his soldiers ‘slaughtered many of the infidels and pursued those who fled to the mountains.’ The spoil, adds Timur, ‘which exceeds all computations… fell into the hands of my victorious soldiers.’ Spoils of course included slaves.

When he reached Siwalik, notes Timur, ‘the infidel gabrs were dismayed at the slight and took flight. The Holy warriors pursued them, and made heaps of slain… Immense spoil beyond all compute’ was obtained; ‘All the Hindu women and children in the valley were made prisoners.’

On the other side of the river, Raja Ratan Sen, hearing of Timur’s approach, had drawn his force at the fortress of Trisarta (Kangra). When attacked the fortress, records Timur, ‘the Hindus broke and fled, and my victorious soldiers pursued’ them with only a few escaping; ‘...they secured great plunders,’ exceeding all calculations and each with ‘ten to twenty slaves.’ This means that the assault yielded 200,000 to 300,000 slaves.

On the other side of the Siwalik Valley was the large and important town of Hindustan, called Nagarkot. In the attack, ‘The Holy warriors… made heaps of corpses,’ and ‘a vast booty,’ including ‘prisoners… fell into the hands of the victors, who returned triumphant and loaded with spoil,’ concluded Timur.

On his way back from Delhi, Timur had made five major assaults on the Hindu fortresses, towns and villages, besides other smaller incursions and captured slaves in each. The rough number of captives—some 200,000 to 300,000—is available only for the assault in Kangra. If similar number of slaves were captured in the other assaults, he must have acquired 1.0 to 1.5 million slaves in the course of his return. Combined with the captives taken at Delhi, he had driven away some 2.0 to 2.5 milion slaves from India. At Delhi, he also had selected thousands of artisans and craftsmen, whom he brought to his capital.[17]

During the Sayyid and Lodi dynasties (1400–1525): In the period, subsequent to Timur’s invasion, the numbers of slaves taken in wars are not properly recorded; only abstract references are found in various documents.[18] Following Timur’s departure after devastating the power in Delhi, the Tughlaqs, followed by the Sayyids, while consolidating their authority, made many expeditions. Many of these campaign yielded slaves in large numbers. As recorded by Ferishtah, in the reign of Sultan Sayyid Mubarak (r. 1431–35), the Muslim army plundered Katehar and enslaved many of the Rahtore Rajputs (1422), enslaved many in Malwa in 1423, carried away the surrendered Muwatti rebels in Alwar in 1425 and the subjects of Raja of Hulkant (in Gwalior, in 1430) were carried away as prisoners and slaves.[19]

In 1430, Amir Shaikh Ali from Kabul attacked Sirhind and Lahore in Punjab. In Lahore, records Ferishtah, ‘40,000 Hindus were computed to have been massacred, besides a great number carried away prisoners’; in Toolumba (Multan), his army ‘plundered the place, and put to death all the men able to bear arms… and carried the wives and children of the inhabitants into captivity.’[20]

Following the Sayyids, the Lodi dynasty (1451–1526) re-established the authority of the sultanate and continued the practice of enslavement as usual. Sultan Bahlul, founder of the dynasty, ‘turned a free-booter and with his gains from plunder built up a strong force.’ In his assault against Nimsar (in Hardoi district), he ‘depopulated it by killing and enslaving its people.’ His successor Sikandar Lodi produced the same spectacle in Rewa and Gwalior regions.[21]

---

[1]. Ibid, p. 325

[2]. Lal (1994), p. 44–45

[3]. Ferishtah, Vol. I, p. 130

[4]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 348; also Ferishtah, Vol. I, p. 131

[5]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 351

[6]. Lal (1994), p. 46–48

[7]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. III, p. 105

[8]. Lal (1994), p. 48

[9]. Ibid, p. 49–51

[10]. Ibid, p. 51

[11]. Gibb HAR (2004) Ibn Battutah: Travels in Asia and Africa, D K Publishers, New Delhi, p. 214

[12]. Lal (1994), p. 51–52

[13]. Elliot & Dawson, III, p. 297

[14]. Ibid, p. 53

[15]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. III, p. 436–71; Bostom AG (2005) The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books, New York, p. 648-50

[16]. By mistake, the number of prisoners captured by Timur was cited to be 10 times less in previous editions.

[17]. Lal (1994), p. 86

[18]. Ibid, p. 70–71

[19]. Freishtah, Vol. I, p. 299–303

[20]. Ibid, p. 303,306

[21]. Lal (1994), p. 86

Islamic Slavery (Part 3): Enslavement by Muslims in India During Pre-Sultanate Period

This is Part 3 of the chapter "Islamic Slavery" from M. A. Khan's book, "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery". This part discusses the horror saga of little-known Islamic enslavement in India during the pre-Sultanate period, 715-1206 (Part 1, Part 2, part 4).

---

ENSLAVEMENT BY MUSLIMS IN INDIA

Muslim invaders and rulers engaged in large-scale enslavement of the infidels wherever they went: Europe, Africa and Asia. In this discussion, slavery by Muslims in medieval India as recorded by contemporaneous Muslim historians will be presented in some detail. Brief accounts of Islamic slavery in Africa, Europe and elsewhere in Asia will also be presented.

By Muhammad bin Qasim: Islam’s assault on Indian frontiers started during Caliph Omar with the attack and pillage of Thana in 636, just four years after Prophet Muhammad’s death. Eight more such plundering expeditions followed under succeeding caliphs: Othman, Ali and Mu'awiyah. These early assaults by Muslim invaders sometimes yielded booty and slaves besides slaughter and pillage, but failed to gain a foothold for Islam in India. With Caliph al-Walid’s blessings, Hajjaj bin Yusuf sent two expeditions to Sindh, led by Ubaidullah and Budail. Both campaigns failed suffering heavy casualties; both commanders were slain. Sorely wounded at heart, Hajjaj next sent his nephew and son-in-law Qasim at the head of 6,000 soldiers. He overran Debal in Sindh in 712, digging a firm and lasting foothold of Islam in Hindustan. Debal, records famous Muslim historian al-Biladuri, ‘was taken by assault, and the carnage endured for three days… the priests of the temple were massacred.’[1] He put the males above seventeen years of age to the sword and enslaved the women and children. The total number of captives taken in Debal is not recorded; but among them were 700 beautiful women, who had taken refuge in temples, records Chachnama. Caliph’s one-fifth share of the booty and slaves, which included seventy-five damsels, was sent to Hajjaj. The rest were distributed amongst his soldiers.[2]

In the attack of Rawar, records Chachnama, ‘When the number of prisoners was calculated, it was found to amount to thirty thousand persons, amongst whom were the daughters of the chiefs, and one of them was Rai Dahir’s sister’s daughter.’ One-fifth of the prisoners and the spoils were sent to Hajjaj.[3] As records Chachnama, when Brahmanabad fell to Muslims, in which 8,000 to 26,000 men were slain, ‘One-fifth of all the prisoners were chosen and set aside; they were counted as amounting to twenty thousand in number, and the rest were given to the soldiers.’[4] This means, about 100,000 women and children were enslaved in this assault.

One consignment of caliph’s share of the booty included 30,000 women and children and slain Dahir’s head. Among the captives were a few girls of Sindh nobility. Hajjaj forwarded the caravan of booty and slaves to Caliph al-Walid in Damascus. ‘When the Khalifa of the time read the letter,’ records Chachnama, ‘he praised Almighty Allah. He sold some of those daughters of the chiefs, and some he granted as rewards. When he saw the daughters of Rai Dahir’s sister, he was so much stuck with her beauty and charms, and began to bite his fingers with astonishment.’[5]

In the attack of Multan, records al-Biladuri, there were, among the captives, ‘ministers of the temple, to the number of six thousand.’[6] This figure should give us an idea of total number of women and children enslaved in Multan. Qasim undertook similar expeditions in Sehwan and Dhalila among others. His rather small feat in Sindh over a short period of three years (712–15) might have yielded to the tune of three hundred thousand slaves in all.

During 715 to 1000 CE: After Qasim’s recall in 715, Muslim campaigns of slaughter and enslavement became somewhat subdued, but low-intensity campaigns continued nonetheless. During the reign of the only orthodox Umayyad Caliph Omar (717–20), his lieutenant Amru bin Muslim made several Jihad expeditions against Hindu territories and subdued them; these undoubtedly had yielded slaves. During Caliph Hasham bin Abdul Malik (r. 724–43), Sindh military chief Junaid bin Abdur Rahman engaged in a number of victorious campaigns. In his attack of Kiraj, he ‘stormed the place, slaying, plundering, and making captives.’ In his incursions against Ujjain and Baharimad, he burnt down the suburbs and plunder great booty.[7] Booty invariably included captives.

After the orthodox Abbasid dynasty was founded in 750, Caliph al-Mansur (r. 755–74) sent Hasham bin Amru for waging holy war against Hindu territories. He ‘subdued Kashmir and took many prisoners and slaves…’[8] He attacked many places between Kandahar and Kashmir, and every victory must have yielded captives, which are not recorded.

Great Muslim historian Ibn Asir (Athir) records in Kamil-ut Tawarikh that during Caliph Al-Mahdi’s reign, Abdul Malik led a large naval Jihad expedition against India in 775. They disembarked at Barada and in the sustained battle with the people of the neighborhood, the Muslim army prevailed. ‘Some of the people were burned, the rest were slain and twenty Musalmans perished in testimony of their faith,’ records Asir.[9] The number of captives is not recorded.

During Caliph al-Mamun’s reign (r. 813–33), Commander Afif bin Isa led an expedition against the revolting Hindus. After defeating and slaughtering them, the surviving 27,000 men, women and children were enslaved.[10] The next Caliph al-Mutasim’s governor of Sindh, Amran bin Musa, attacked and defeated Multan and Kandabil, and ‘carried away its inhabitants’ as captives.[11] In about 870, Yakub Lais attacked Ar-Rukhaj (Aracosia) and the enslaved inhabitants were forced to embrace Islam.[12]

By Ghaznivid invaders: Nearly three centuries after Qasim’s exploits, Sultan Mahmud launched seventeen devastating incursions into Northern India (1000–27), involving mass slaughter, plunder, destruction of temples and enslavement in large numbers. In his attack of King Jaipal in 1001–02, records al-Utbi: ‘God bestowed upon his friends such amount of booty as was beyond all bounds and all calculation, including five hundred thousand slaves, men and women.’ Among the captives were King Jaipal and his children and grandchildren, and nephews, the chief men of his tribe and his relatives.[13] He drove them away to Ghazni for selling.

In the attack of Ninduna (Punjab) in 1014, writes al-Utbi, ‘slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap; men of respectability in their native land were degraded by becoming slaves of common shop-keepers (in Ghazni).’ From the next year’s assault in Thanesar (Haryana), the Muslim army ‘brought 200,000 captives so that the capital appeared like an Indian city; every soldier of the army had several slaves and slave girls,’ testifies Ferishtah. From his expedition to India in 1019, he brought 53,000 captives. Of his seventeen expeditions to India, the campaign to Kashmir was the only failure. In each victorious campaign, he plundered booty, which normally included slaves, but their records have not been recorded systematically. Caliph’s one-fifth share of the booty was kept aside, which, records Tarikh-i-Alfi, included 150,000 slaves.[14] This means that a minimum of 750,000 slaves were captured by Sultan Mahmud.

Mahmud (d. 1030) did the spade-work for founding an Islamic Sultanate in Punjab, where the Ghaznivid dynasty ruled until 1186. In 1033, his not-so-illustrious son, Sultan Masud I, launched ‘an attack on the fort of Sursuti in Kashmir. The entire garrison was put to the sword, except the women and children, who were carried away as slaves.’[15] In 1037, Sultan Masud, having fallen ill, made a vow ‘to prosecute holy war against Hansi,’ if he recovered. Having recovered, he attacked and captured Hansi. According to Abul Fazl Baihaki, ‘The Brahmans and other higher men were slain, and their women and children were carried away captives.’[16]

The rather weak Ghaznivid Sultan Ibrahim attacked the districts of Punjab in 1079. Fierce battle lasted for weeks and both sides suffered great slaughter. At length, his army gained victory and captured much wealth and 100,000 slaves, whom he drove away to Ghazni, record Tarikh-i-Alfi and Tabakat-I Akbari.[17]

By Ghaurivid invaders: Sultan Muhammad Ghauri, an Afghan, launched the third wave of Islamic invasion of India in the late twelfth century establishing Muslim rule in Delhi (1206). In the attack of Benaras in 1194, ‘The slaughter of the Hindus was immense; none were spared except women and children and the carnage of the men went on until the earth was weary,’ records Ibn Asir.[18] The "women and children" were normally spared for enslaving. His illustrious general Qutbuddin Aibak attacked Raja Bhim of Gujarat in 1195 capturing 20,000 slaves;[19] in his attack of Kalinjar in 1202, records Hasan Nizami, ‘Fifty thousand men came under the collar of slavery, and the plain became black as pitch with Hindus.’[20] In 1206, Muhammad Ghauri marched to exterminate the recalcitrant Khokhar rebels who had established their sway in regions of Multan. The slaughter of the rebels was so thorough that none survived to light a fire. ‘Much spoils in slaves and weapons, beyond all enumerations, fell into the possession of the victors,’ adds Nizami.[21] In summarizing the feat of slave-taking of Sultan Ghauri and Aibak, says Fakhr-i-Mudabbir, ‘even poor (Muslim) householders became owner of numerous slaves.’[22] According to Ferishtah, ‘three to four hundred thousand Khokhars were converted to Islam’ by Muhammad Ghauri.[23] These conversions came mostly through enslavement.

Having become the first sultan of India in 1206, Aibak conquered Hansi, Meerut, Delhi, Ranthambor and Kol. During his reign (1206–10), Aibak undertook many expeditions capturing much of the areas from Delhi to Gujarat, from Lakhnauti to Lahore. Every victory yielded slaves, but their number is not recorded. The fact that Aibak generally captured slaves in his wars can be gauged from Ibn Asir’s assertion that he made ‘war against the provinces of Hind… He killed many, and returned with prisoners and booty.’[24]

Simultaneously, Bakhtiyar Khilji unleashed extensive conquest, involving massacre and enslavement, in Bengal and Bihar in Eastern India. The number of slaves captured by Bakhtiyar is not recorded either. About Bakhtiyar, Ibn Asir said, bold and enterprising, he made incursions into Munghir and Bihar, brought away much plunder and obtained plenty of horses, arms and men (i.e., slaves).[25] In Bakhtiyar’s attack of Lakhmansena of Bengal in 1205, records Ibn Asir, ‘his whole treasure, and all his wives, maid servants, attendants, and women fell into the hands of the invader.’[26]

After Aibak settled in Delhi, slaves were not transported overseas anymore like in earlier raids of Sultan Mahmud and Muhammad Ghauri, who used to come from Ghazni. Captives were, thereafter, engaged in various activities of royal courts, and by the generals, nobles and soldiers. The excess of slaves were sold in the markets of India for the first time in her history.

---

[1]. Eliot HM & Dawson J, The History of India As Told By Its Own Historians, Low Price Publications, New Delhi Vol. I, p. 119-20; Sharma SS (2004) Caliphs and Sultans: Religious Ideology and Political Praxis, Rupa & Co, New Delhi, p. 95

[2]. Lal (1994), p. 17

[3]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. I, p. 173

[4]. Ibid, p. 181

[5]. Sharma, p. 95–96

[6]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. I, p. 122–23,203

[7]. Ibid, p. 125–26

[8]. Ibid, p. 127

[9]. Ibid, Vol. II, p. 246

[10]. Ibid, p. 247–48

[11]. Ibid, Vol. I, p. 128

[12]. Ibid, Vol. II, p. 419

[13]. Ibid, p. 25–26

[14]. Lal (1994), p. 19–20

[15]. History of Punjab: Ghanznivide Dynasty, http://www.punjabonline.com/servlet/library.history?Action=Page&Param=13

[16]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 135,139–40

[17]. Ibid, Vol. V, p. 559–60; Lal (1994), p. 23

[18]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 251

[19]. Ferishtah MK (1997 print) History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India, translated by John Briggs, Low Price Publication, New Delhi , Vol. I, p. 111

[20]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 232; also Lal (1994), p. 42

[21] Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 234–35

[22]. Lal (1994), p. 44

[23]. Ibid, p. 43

[24]. Elliot & Dawson, Vol. II, p. 251

[25]. Ibid, p. 306

[26]. Ibid, p. 308–09

Islamic Slavery, Part 2

Islamic slavery has been the most horrible yet the little known slavery in history. So, author M. A. Khan decided to publish the chapter "Islamic Slavery" from his book, "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery". This part discusses Slavery in the Ancient World. While the Christian Europe and now Islamic civilizations are being condemned for slavery, the practice was common in all ancient civilizations, which warrants a brief discussion here. (Part 1; Part 3)

---

SLAVERY IN THE ANCIENT WORLD

Slavery was not an Islamic invention, nor did Islam have a monopoly in it. Likely originated in the age of savagery, slavery had been a prominent feature of all major civilizations throughout recorded history. Slavery existed in Babylonia and Mesopotamia, and was prevalent in ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome before the advent of Christianity. Slavery is approved in Christian scriptures and was practiced in the medieval Christendom.

Ancient Egypt. In ancient Egypt, slaves provided the labor-force in the construction of Pyramids. According to famous Greek traveler Herodotus (484–425 BCE), some 100,000 slaves worked for twenty years in the construction of the Great Pyramid at Giza, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, built by Cheops, a Pharaoh of Egypt’s Old Kingdom (r. 2589–2566 BCE).[1] Recorded from legendary accounts, this figure was obviously an exaggeration. It, nonetheless, informs us that slaves were used in large numbers in such ventures in those times. Pharaohs in Egypt used to capture slaves in wars or purchase them from foreign lands. They were the property of the state, not of private citizens, but were often presented as gifts to generals and priests.

Ancient Greece. In the ancient city states of Greece, namely Athens and Sparta, slavery was integrated into the socio-economic and political system. Alongside the free citizens and foreigners, there were the helots: the slave class, working as serfs in agricultural and other menial activities. This, assume many scholars, allowed the elites and free citizens to engage themselves in intellectual pursuits among other activities, likely contributing to the stunning intellectual, political, scientific and literary achievements of classical Greece. The bulk of the Greek peasants did not own lands and had to give away a large proportion of their crop to landlords. As a result, they fell into debt and ultimately offered themselves as slaves, forming the helot class. At one point, Athens is said to have had a staggering 460,000 slaves against only 2,100 free citizens. Slaves were treated mildly in Athens compared to those in Sparta. Later, the constitution of Draco (621 BCE) and the laws of Solon (638–558 BCE) made them property of the state, which improved their condition. The decree of Solon also banned enslavement because of debts. The slaves now possessed some basic rights and could not be put to death except by the state.

Roman Empire. In the ancient Roman Republic and early Roman Empire, about 15–20 percent of the population were slaves.[2] During Emperor Augustus Caesar (r. 63 BCE–14 CE), one master, it is said, left behind 4,000 slaves.[3] Until the second century BCE, masters could legally kill a slave although occurred rarely. The Cornelian Law (82 BCE) forbade masters from killing a slave. The Petronian Law (32 BCE) forbade masters from forcing slaves into warfare. Under Emperor Claudius (r. 41–54 CE), if a master neglected the health of his slaves resulting in death, he was guilty of murder. Dio Chrysostom—a famous orator, writer, philosopher, and historian—had devoted two Discourses (14 and 15) delivered at the Forum condemning slavery during Emperor Trajan (r. 98–117 CE). De Clementia (1:18), authored by Seneca the Elder (c. 54 BCE–39 CE), records that masters—cruel to slaves—were publicly insulted. Later on, Emperor Hadrian (r. 117–138 CE) renewed the Cornelian and Petronian laws. Ulpian, a Stoic lawyer under Emperor Caracalla (r. 211–217 CE), made it illegal for parents to sell their children into slavery. Diocletian (r. 284–305 CE), the last notable Pagan Emperor of Rome, made it illegal for a creditor to enslave a debtor and for a man to sell himself into slavery for paying up a debt. Constantine the Great (r. 306–337 CE) prohibited the separation of family members during the distribution of slaves. Evidently, the condition of slaves was slowly improving in the pre-Christian Roman Empire.

Ancient China. In ancient China, rich families owned slaves for doing menial works in the fields and at home. The Emperor usually owned slaves in hundreds and even in thousands. Most of the slaves were born to slave-mothers. Some became slaves for failing to pay up debts; others were captured in raids and wars.

Ancient India. There are few mentions of slavery in ancient India, another great civilization since early antiquity. Megasthenes (c. 350–290 BCE), the famous Greek traveler, who was familiar with slavery in Greece and other countries he had visited, failed to notice the existence of slavery in India. He wrote, ‘‘All Indians are free. None of them is a slave… They even do not reduce foreigners to slavery. There is thus no question of their reducing their own countrymen to slavery.’’[4] Similarly, Muslim chroniclers, who left abundant records of large-scale Islamic slavery in India, never mention any incidence of slavery in the pre-Islamic Hindu society. However, slavery did exist in ancient India, because references of slaves are found in Rigveda (ancient Hindu scripture) and other philosophical and religious literature, including in the teachings of Buddha.

Buddha (c. 563–483 BCE) enjoined his followers to assign only the amount of work to slaves that they could easily do. He also advised masters to attend to slaves when they fell ill. Kautaliya (aka Chanakya), a teacher of the Taxila University whose protégé Chandragupta Maurya founded the great Maurya dynasty (c. 320–100 BCE), had prohibited masters from punishing slaves without reasons; the defaulters were to be punished by the state. Emperor Ashoka (r. 273–232 BCE) of the Maurya dynasty, in his Rock Edict IX, advised masters to treat their slaves with sympathy and consideration. Ancient Hindu scripture Rigveda mentions of slaves being given as presents and rulers giving female slaves as gifts. Slaves in India served as domestic servants in the palaces of rulers and in the establishments of aristocrats and priests. It is likely that those, who failed to pay up debts, were reduced to slavery in India.[5]

It, however, appears that the practice of slavery in ancient India was much lower and that slaves received more humane treatment compared to those in contemporary Egypt, Greece, China and Rome. In India, slaves were never considered a commodity for trading; there was no slave-market. Slave-trade was never a feature of India’s economic system until Muslims brought the practice to India.

Slavery in Christianity. It is clear from the discussion above that the Christian world was not a stranger to the practice of slavery. Instead, slavery in the Christian world, particularly by European Christians, has been most thoroughly studied and condemned. However, unlike the Quran, the New Testament does not call for enslavement of innocent people through aggressive war; it does not condemn slavery either. Instead, Jesus [Mat 18:25, Mark 14:66, Mat 18:25] and Saint Paul [Eph 6:5–9, Cor 12:13, Gal 3:28 and Col 3:11 etc.] talk acceptingly of slavery as it existed in those days.

In line with the scriptural acceptance as it existed as social practice, slavery was practised, it even flourished at different points in time, in the Christian world. We have noted above that slavery was gradually declining in the pre-Christian Roman Empire; their conditions were improving. When Christians rose to imperial power in Rome after Emperor Constantine’s conversion in the fourth century, the trend reversed somewhat. For example, pro-Christian Emperor Flavius Gratianus (r. 375–383) enacted an edict that a slave, who would accuse his master of a crime, should be burned alive. In 694, the Spanish monarchy, in collaboration with the church, ordered the Jews to choose baptism or slavery. The church Fathers and Popes justified slavery in the medieval Christendom on religious grounds. They continued supporting the slave-trade even in the face of rising opposition against the institution in Europe. ‘The Churches, as everyone knows, opposed the abolition of slavery as long as they dared,’ writes Bertrand Russell.[6]

Discussed in next part: Extensive Enslavement by Muslims

---

[1]. Ibid, p. 2

[2]. Slavery, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery

[3]. Lal (1994), p. 3

[4]. Ibid, p. 5

[5]. Ibid, p. 4

[6]. Russell B (1957) Why I Am Not a Christian, Simon & Schuster, New York, p. 26