THE SLAVE TRADE AND SLAVE LIFE IN CENTRAL ASIA.
The last cannon-shot fired by the victorious champions of the Union
against their seceding brethren, although it has not entirely put an
end to the slave trade in the Western hemisphere, has nevertheless
dealt it a very severe blow. The flag of Great Britain in the waters
of Eastern Africa and the recent conquest of the whole Caucasus by
the Russians have, to a great extent, crippled the same abominable
traffic among the Mohammedans of Western Asia. The indolent,
enervated Orientals may still regard with bitter resentment and
rancour the efforts of Europe in the cause of humanity; but the sale
and purchase of human beings is everywhere practised with a certain
reserve arising from a sense of shame, or, to speak more correctly,
of fear of European eyes. This trade is now to be found unfettered
and unembarrassed only in Central Asia. Here, in the ancient seat of
Asiatic barbarism and ferocity, thousands every year fall victims
to this inhuman trade. These victims are not negroes, occupying the
lowest place in the human race, but belong to a nation celebrated
now, as of old, for its culture and civilisation. These not only
exchange freedom for slavery, but at the same time the comforts
of comparative civilisation for the miseries of semi-savage life,
and are torn from their smiling homes to pine away in the desert.
The lot of such captives is even harder than that of the negro.
Inasmuch as to this day Europeans have had very little information
with respect to the miserable state of things which prevails in the
distant regions of Central Asia, it may not be out of place if I
here recount my own experiences of them somewhat in detail.
What the Portuguese slave traders and the Arabian ivory merchants
are in Central Africa, that are the Turkomans in the north-eastern
and north-western portions of Iran, indeed we may say in all Persia.
Wherever nomad tribes live in the immediate neighbourhood of a
civilised country, there will robbery and slavery unavoidably exist
to a greater or less extent. The poverty-stricken children of the
desert are endowed by nature with an insatiable lust for adventure,
and frames capable of supporting the most terrible privations and
fatigues. What the scanty soil of their native wilderness denies
them, they seek in the lands of their more favoured neighbours.
The intercourse between them, however, is seldom of a friendly
character. As the plundered and hardly used agriculturist cannot,
and dare not, pursue the well-mounted nomad across the pathless
deserts of sand, the latter, protected by the nature of the
country, can carry on his career of plunder and rapine without fear
of chastisement. In former times the cities on the borders of the
Great Sahara and of the Arabian desert were in the same plight. Even
at the present day the caravans in the latter country are exposed
to the greatest dangers. But Persia has to suffer from these evils
to a still greater extent, as the deserts which form her northern
boundary are the most extensive and the most savage in the world,
while their inhabitants are the most cruel and least civilised of
nomads.
The wars of hoary antiquity between the Iranians and Turanians, sung
by the master singer of the Shah Nameh, "the Book of the Kings,"
seem to have had their origin in acts of violence perpetrated by
the latter. It is true that the combatants of that period are
represented in the poem as belonging to one and the same race,
but we find that at the period of the expedition of Alexander the
people of northern Iran called on the great Macedonian to afford
them protection against their northern neighbours, whom they
described as terrible beings of inhuman aspect--probably they were
of the true Mongolian type, which differs widely from that of the
Iranians. Alexander built a great wall from the Caspian Sea to the
Kurdistan mountains. This immense work, however, did not come up
to the expectations of its founder. Like the Great wall of China,
built for a similar purpose, it could not permanently keep out
the barbarians. Their impetuous fury burst through such feeble
obstacles, and nothing could check their devastating, incursions
except the energetic rule of some exceptionally vigorous sovereign,
who instead of protecting his subjects by a stone wall, did so
with a well-disciplined army. This is the case at the present
day. The Turkomans and Œzbegs direct their forays according
to the peaceful or disturbed state of the adjacent provinces, or
the energy or indolence of their respective governors. During
the disorders which attended the establishment of the Kadjarish
dynasty, individual bands of Yomut Turkomans pushed their predatory
incursions as far as the neighbourhood of Ispahan, although the
greater number of them were serving under the banner of Aga
Mohammed Khan. At the same period the Tekkes pressed forward on
the north-east as far as Seistan. At the present day it is the
two provinces of Khorassan and Mazenderan which suffer most. The
Turkomans first of all inquire into the character and administration
of a newly appointed governor, and if they find in him signs of
cowardice or neglect of duty (which is often the case), they make
repeated incursions with terrible speed on the defenceless province
committed to his care. On the other hand, they hardly dare to show
themselves in those places where a vigorous and active officer is at
the head of affairs. At the time of my journey through Khorassan the
roads were so safe that travellers could go alone through districts
which were formerly so fraught with danger, that the largest and
best appointed caravans could pass there only when accompanied by a
body of troops and a battery of cannon. At that time the governor,
Sultan Murad Mirza, kept the nomads in check. Every movement of
theirs was reported to him by his spies, and, as soon as they showed
themselves, they were attacked in their own haunts, and received
severe punishment. In Astrabad, on the contrary, where a fool was
entrusted with the administration, the neighbourhood was so unsafe
that the Yomuts carried off Persians captive from the very gates of
the town.
There are several tribes of Turkomans both on the edge and in the
interior of the desert, who consider the robbery of human beings
so indispensable a means of livelihood as to deem their existence
in the steppes impossible, if they were to be deprived of this
productive source of wealth. As other nations talk about "the
prospects of a good harvest," so they talk about "the prospects
of open roads to Iran." The time which elsewhere is employed in
ploughing, irrigating, and sowing the fields, is spent by them in
training their horses, burnishing their arms, and in mock combats.
Custom has raised their detestable occupation to the rank of a
recognised trade. It is looked upon as a Djihad, or religious war,
against the Shiite schismatics, who are declared to be no better
than infidels. As the heroes set out on their adventure they are
publicly dismissed with the blessings of the ministers of their
religion; and in case of any one of them paying with his life for
his enormities (which very seldom occurs), he is at home declared to
be a martyr, a mound of earth adorned with flags is heaped over his
remains, which are seldom left in the hands of the enemies, and the
devout make pilgrimages to the holy place, where they implore with
tears of contrition the intercession of the canonised robber.
The terrible extent to which the most exposed provinces suffer from
these excursions is explained by the courage and resolution of the
Turkomans. No war, no devastation caused by the elements, can be
compared to the misery which their depredations occasion. Not only
is all trade and commerce on the highways crippled, but even the
husbandman must provide himself with a tower in which he can take
refuge, when suddenly attacked by them during his labours in the
fields. The smallest village is surrounded by a wall. Even these
measures do not suffice, for the robbers often come in large bands
and lay siege to such fortified places, and not seldom carry the
whole population, men, women, and children, into captivity with all
their moveable property. I have seen in Eastern Khorassan villages
whose inhabitants, although in the immediate vicinity of large
forests, pass the winter without fires, because none dare venture
out to cut wood beyond the walls. Others suffer hunger, as their
water-mills are outside the village. Travelling is, of course,
regarded as a most desperate venture, which no one undertakes save
in cases of the most urgent necessity, or under the protection of an
armed force.
The readers of my book on Central Asia will have already formed
some idea how far this fear of captivity among the Turkomans is
well-founded. The lot of the negro, confined in the close hold of
a ship during his passage from Africa to America, is sufficiently
hard, yet it is not less hard to be bound behind the saddle of
a nomad with the feet tied under the belly of the horse, to be
insufficiently supplied with food and water, and to be thus
transported for days across the weary desert, far from one's dear
country and the bosom of one's family. These privations of savage
life in the tent of the rude nomad and under an inclement sky are
the harder for the Persian to bear, as at home he is accustomed to
cooked food and the comforts of civilised life. In addition to these
sufferings he is loaded with heavy chains, which are not removed
by night or by day. He is continually the object of the revilings,
curses, and blows of his tyrannical master. Indeed the first stage
of his slavery is the most grievous.
At the present day the occupation of stealing men is followed by the
Œzbegs and Turkomans alone. Of the first race the inhabitants
of Khiva are to be especially noticed, but they only follow it
when in the course of their hostilities with the Turkomans they
are driven towards the frontiers of Iran. The Bokhariots have not
approached those frontiers since the commencement of this century,
and the inhabitants of Khokand may be said to have never come in
contact with them. Of the Turkomans, the Tekkes and the Yomuts are
most addicted to this traffic; the first seeking their victims in
Khorassan, Herat, and Seistan, and even along the western frontier
of Afghanistan; the latter along the southern shores of the Caspian
Sea. After these the Salors and the Sariks are to be mentioned, who,
broken in power and diminished in numbers, seldom, but then with so
much the greater fury, make their incursions. The Alielis and Karas
can only now and then get hold of a caravan of Hindus, Tadjiks, or
even Afghans, and these only on the road to Bokhara. The Tchaudors,
who dwell between the lower part of the course of the Oxus and the
Caspian Sea, since the Russians are no more marketable, nor indeed
easy to catch, have scarcely any field left them for exercising
their man-stealing propensities.
The majority of the slaves in Central Asia are Shiite Persians, more
especially from the provinces mentioned above, though many from the
remaining provinces are also captured, either in war or during their
pilgrimage to Meshed. Besides them there are Sunnite Persians from
Khaf and Herat; the last are generally caught while cultivating
their fields, or while gathering the pistachio nuts. Djemshidis and
Hezares, who fall victims to their mutual feuds, are less often to
be met with, and still smaller is the number of Afghans and Hindus.
Nay, Osmanlis and Arabs, in spite of the high esteem in which they
are held, are sold as slaves, but, as far as I know, there are not
more than four or six of them. Jews alone, who have the reputation
of being sorcerers, are regarded with too much horror by the
inhabitants of Turkestan to be a marketable commodity.
It is difficult to estimate the number thus carried year by year
into captivity, because, as I have explained above, it varies
according to the state of things in Persia. Nor is it easier to
estimate the number of those at present living in slavery in
Turkestan. Not all persons who fall into the hands of the Turkomans
are sent to the Khanats for sale. Taking into consideration the
distribution of property in Iran, we may reckon that about one-third
of those captured in Mazenderan and along the shores of the Caspian
are ransomed. This is a clear gain to the nomad robber, as he, in
the first place, saves the expense of keeping his merchandise for
a long time on hand; in the second place, he is not exposed to
the risk of the market, for should his captive prove physically
deficient in some important respect, he will not be able to sell
him at all. Still, however, the proportion of those who are thus
ransomed is not everywhere the same. The greater part of those
who fall into the hands of the robbers are poor men, who are most
exposed to this danger during their work out in the fields. These,
of course, can rarely be ransomed. But if, in the case of those who
are captured in Mazenderan, we may estimate those who are ransomed
at a third, we cannot assume the same of those who are seized in
the much poorer provinces of Khorassan and Seistan. I have heard,
out of the mouth of a slave dealer who had grown grey in his trade,
that from these districts scarcely a tenth part are ransomed, the
remaining nine-tenths being forwarded for sale in the markets of the
Khanats. The Turkoman never retains a slave for his own use, except
(1) when his captive is old or crippled, and yet not so much so but
that he works enough to earn his meagre sustenance; if he cannot,
he is at once mercilessly cut down; (2) infants who are brought
up as Turkomans to become the wildest of robbers; (3) when Cupid
makes some pretty brunette of an Iranian so dear to him that he
cannot make up his mind to part with her. This last case, however,
happens but seldom, as the Turkomans are notoriously the greatest
misers in the world. As, besides, they are wanting in that feeling
of delicacy for which the Circassian Huri-dealers are so renowned,
the harems of Khiva and Bokhara receive many flowers which have lost
their freshness in Turkoman hands. The only Persians who are to be
found among the inhabitants of the steppes are such as in their own
country would not be much better off, or else escaped criminals who
have to continue their former courses of misdoing, of murder and
robbery, in conjunction with the nomads.
It is the ordinary practice of the men-stealers to keep their booty
by them not longer than two or three days. They are by that time
transferred to the slave broker, who by way of advance has already
furnished the robbers with money or provisions. These conscienceless
usurers derive the largest profit from the abominable traffic,
for the robbers are for the most part dissolute characters, who,
contrary to the usual practice of the nomads, gamble away, or
squander in vicious enjoyments, their money as soon as they get it.
Slave brokers are of two kinds. (1) Turkomans, who carry on the
commerce which exists between the inhabitants of the steppes and
the Khanats. They wait until they have got together thirty, forty,
or fifty slaves, and then travel in a caravan to Khiva or Bokhara.
In the meantime their human merchandise are let out for hire as day
labourers, in order to lighten the expense of their maintenance.
(2) Sunnite inhabitants of the Persian frontier. These men play a
very curious and ambiguous _rôle_, and are the most detestable of
all engaged in the whole business. On the one side they serve the
Persians as go-betweens, employed to find out such persons as are
kept in slavery in the steppes or in the Khanats; on the other they
are the most useful spies of the nomads, whom they furnish with the
best intelligence about a village or a caravan. Many, especially
such as live on the eastern frontier of Persia, have buildings for
the reception of slaves in Herat, Maymene, and Bokhara, and just
as once in the year they lead to the market a string of miserable
slaves of both sexes, so on their return they bring back with them a
number of captives redeemed through their mediation. From the family
of one of these unfortunate creatures, they take regularly three
times the ordinary amount of the ransom, and talk largely about the
difficulty of finding him, and of persuading his captor to accept
of the money, while all along they know the very place where he is,
and have probably already spoken about the price. It is amusing to
observe how these scamps change their sentiments, their religion,
and political opinions, according to circumstances. On their way
to Bokhara, while playing the part of slave holders, they act the
zealous Bokhariot, abuse the heretical Shiites, and exult in the
just measure dealt out to the Persian slaves. On their return to
Iran, when playing the part of slave ransomers, they are loud in
their abuse of the brutality and cruelty of the Bokhariots, shed
bitter tears over the misfortunes of the poor Persians, and are, in
one word, the softest-hearted creatures in the world.
In the caravan in which I myself travelled from Bokhara to Herat,
there were two such slave brokers, who came from Khaf and Kain. Both
of them bore the title of Khodja, or descendant of the prophet, of
which they were not a little proud. The tenderness and care with
which they treated the liberated slaves in their charge was almost
unexampled. Yet these very men, as the leader of the caravan assured
me, had only a few months before led a train of miserable captives
into slavery. In the Khanats of Khiva and Bokhara the slave dealers,
called there Dogmafurush, form a regularly organised guild. It is
remarkable that as regards their nationality they are for the most
part Sarts, Tadjiks, and emancipated Persians, and not so often
Œzbegs or of any other tribe belonging to the Turko-Tartaric
race. The sale takes place either in the dealers' magazines, or in
some market-place outside the town, to which place the goods are
removed some days previous. The most important depôts are to be
found in the Khanat of Khiva, first of all at the capital, then in
Hezaresp, in Gazavat, in Görlen, and in Kohne. Besides these, every
place of any pretensions has a retail dealer, who is in connection
with the large wholesale dealers, or sells goods on commission.
In Bokhara is to be mentioned first of all Karakul, and next the
capital; besides these, Karshi and Tchihardjuy. It is to be observed
that, eastward from Samarcand, this abominable traffic declines more
and more, so that in the Khanat of Khokand there are no large slave
dealers, and the majority of the slaves to be found there are bought
in the territory of Bokhara. In the steppes lying to the north of
the Khanats, thanks to the spread of Russian sway, slaves are only
found as articles of luxury in the houses of the rich begs.
The price of slaves in the markets of Central Asia, like that of
every commodity, varies according to the quantity at any one time on
sale, which in time of peace is less, in time of war greater. The
difference of price in male slaves of the same age depends for the
most part on their physical condition and their nationality. The
Turks of northern Persia are most preferred; first, because they
sooner learn to make themselves understood in the Turkish dialects
of Central Asia, which are akin to their own; secondly, because they
have robuster frames and are more accustomed to hard work than the
other inhabitants of Iran. The Afghans fetch the lowest price, not
only because they have the greatest dislike to hard work, but also
on account of their vindictive and revengeful character, which in
the case of a brutal master may lead to unpleasant consequences. As
for the female slaves, they do not by any means enjoy the position
which is occupied by the daughters of Circassia and Georgia in the
harems of Turkey and Persia. On the contrary, their position is
rather to be compared with that of the negresses in those countries.
It is very easy to explain why. In the first place, the daughters of
Turkestan correspond better to the ideas of beauty entertained by
Œzbegs and Tadjiks than the Iranian women, who with their olive
complexions and large noses, would never bear off the apple of Paris
from the fair, full-cheeked Œzbeg women. In the second place, in
consequence of their poverty the inhabitants of Central Asia do not
indulge in polygamy to such an extent as the Mohammedans of the
west. Besides this, the Œzbeg has generally too much aristocratic
pride to share his bed and board with a slave, whom he has bought
for money. In Bokhara it is true that we find instances to the
contrary, but that is only among the high functionaries of state,
and even they only take such women as have been brought as children
into the country. In the middle classes such _mésalliances_ are very
rare phenomena. Besides, marriage is much easier here than in other
Mohammedan countries. Hence female slaves are kept only as articles
of luxury in the harems of the great, or as domestic servants.
As regards male slaves the case is quite different. This yearly
contingent of human arms has become for centuries necessary to the
support of the Œzbegs, who have a horror of steady agricultural
labour. Indeed without their slaves they could hardly obtain from
the ground enough to support life. The truth of this assertion
is shown by the fact, that the price of cereals in the Central
Asiatic markets is determined not simply by the rise and fall of
the waters of the Oxus, but also by the greater or smaller number
of slaves sold during the year. The use to which slaves are applied
is principally agriculture, and in the next place care of cattle;
and the larger the estate of an Œzbeg landlord, the larger the
number of slaves which he requires. In a land like Turkestan, where
the military element preponderates, and every free man, either from
instinct or from political necessity, lays hold of the sword rather
than the plough-tail, it is necessary that the arms, thus subtracted
from profitable labour and employed in murder and devastation,
should be replaced by others accustomed to labour. That this is so,
is best shown by the fact, that in those districts in which the
population are most addicted to war and robbery, there the number of
slaves is greatest. In this respect Khiva stands first of the three
Khanats, Bokhara second, and Khokand third. In Khiva the greater
part of the population is Œzbeg, and, as they are surrounded on
all sides by nomad tribes, they are continually engaged in war,
and anarchy prevails among them more often than in the two other
Khanats. In Bokhara, where the population is strongly mixed with
peaceable Tadjiks, things have been rendered more stable by an older
established and better organised government. In Khokand, which also
contains many Tadjiks, wars are infrequent, owing to the notorious
cowardice of its inhabitants, and when they do occur they are by no
means so destructive in their character.
A small proportion of the slaves are employed as private servants
by the government officials (Sipahi) as also by the sovereigns
themselves. For such purposes, however, only such are used as were
brought in their earliest youth to Central Asia. These receive a
thoroughly Œzbeg education, and beyond the opprobrious title of
_kul_ (slave), bear few traces of the servile condition. Like the
Circassian slaves in Turkey, they often attain the highest posts
in the administration, as their innate Iranian quick-sightedness
enables them to supplant their Œzbeg competitors. Thus, many who
have now under their rule whole provinces, were brought into the
Khanat as slaves. In Bokhara, where the Œzbeg aristocratic is of
little moment by the side of the predominant Persian element, the
sovereigns often take slaves for their lawful wives. Such was the
mother of the present Emir, such is one of his wives, both of them
of Iranian origin.
In the purchase of a male slave the first point looked to is a
strong and robust physical frame, but his value is increased if it
be found out later that he has a good character. The seller must
engage himself to take him back during the first three days in case
any hidden physical defect be found out; for, although the buyer at
the time of sale examines him carefully all over like a beast of
burden, makes him show the strength of his arms, chest, back, and
voice, he is still obliged to be on his guard against the tricks
of the broker. For instance, it is very difficult to ascertain
the age of such a Persian slave. As is the custom in Iran, the
Turkomans also dye the beards of their captives if they have any
grey hairs. It is thus possible to make a mistake of twenty, nay,
even of thirty years, and it sometimes happens that a slave who,
when bought, had a fresh, youthful appearance, and a coal black
beard, a few days afterwards turns out to be a grey-haired old man.
It is easier to practice such tricks, as the slave, subdued by fear
and harsh treatment, does not dare to make the least objection
to any assertion of his Turkoman master. This is especially the
case with slaves who belong to the Sunnite sect. As they profess
the religion of the Central Asiatic, they are not allowed to be
made slaves of by the commandments of their religion; but in
consequence of the threats of the dealer they deny their own faith.
The Central Asiatic, when he sees an Afghan or a Herati for sale,
knows that he has been compelled to renounce his faith, yet with
disgraceful hypocrisy considers it no sin to buy him and keep him
as a slave. I have myself seen in Khiva and Bokhara, even in houses
of Mollahs of great renown for learning and piety, Sunnite slaves,
and when I called them to account for conduct so inconsistent
with their profession, they answered, "At the time I bought him
he was a Shiite; that he is now a Sunnite is to be attributed to
the influence of the sacred soil of Turkestan." Thus is religion
employed to cheat religion.
If we now pass on from the details of the slave trade to consider
the condition of the slave, we shall find that the hardest time
for him to bear is when he is first captured and trained by the
Turkoman or the broker; when the Iranian, justly proud of his
superior civilisation, is treated like one of the lower animals by
the coarse and brutal Turanian, whose very name is in Iran held in
derision. The Persian is from his childhood accustomed to the most
refined politeness, and to a flowery, elegant conversation; and must
of course suffer mentally a great deal when first introduced to
the savage manners and habits of Turkestan. His physical sufferings
are by no means so great. The majority of them, destined for
agricultural labour, generally gain the confidence and affection
of their master by their good behavior. If a slave has during a
year not incurred punishment, he is soon looked upon as a member of
the new family. Indeed, many receive, after a certain time, either
monthly wages, or else a share of the produce of the land or cattle
committed to their care. As the Iranian is in general more active
and frugal than his Turanian neighbour, the slaves in Turkestan,
in a remarkably short time, get together a little capital. This is
employed by most of them in ransoming themselves from slavery, which
they have the right to do after seven years' service. This term
is occasionally shortened as a reward for peculiar diligence, or
from great good nature on the part of the master; and the slave is
surprized by an azad (letter of freedom), in the same way that we
make a present to a faithful servant. Such a document is confirmed
by the kadi and the temporal magistrate, and he who is in possession
of it becomes at once master of his own actions. The act of
emancipation is everywhere accompanied by certain solemnities. Sheep
are slaughtered, guests invited; the freedman embraces one after
the other the male members of his master's family; and after he has
taken his place upon the same piece of felt carpet as his master,
his freedom is proclaimed. Among the Kirghiz it is the custom for
the master on such occasions to fasten a white bone to the girdle of
the freedman, which denotes that the latter is raised from the ranks
of the "black-boned" (subject people) to that of the "white-boned"
(nobility).
So much for good-tempered and obedient slaves. Where the contrary
qualities show themselves, Œzbeg barbarity and cruelty make
themselves felt in all their force. It is enough to make one's
hair stand on end to read the list of punishments used to compel a
refractory slave to obedience. The master has legal right of life
and death over his slave. It very seldom happens, however, that he
actually kills him, as he thereby loses the whole of his purchase
money; but the miseries which he inflicts on him are worse than
death itself. Many are kept for years together on mere bread and
water in the midst of the lonely deserts; others, a few days before
their seven years have expired, are sold again--not, however, in the
Khanats, where, their character being already known, they would be
unsaleable. In such cases of imposition the victim is generally a
Kirghiz, unversed in the tricks of the slave trade. Thus the Persian
passes from the city into the northern desert, whence, even if
emancipated, he seldom, if ever, returns home.
It is certainly striking that, out of the large number of slaves
of Persian origin who are continually brought into Central Asia,
only half of those who obtain their freedom go back to their
native country. Such as do return are induced to do so either by
the necessity of setting their family affairs in order, or by
extraordinary home-sickness. He who has lived eighteen years in
Turkestan will seldom change it for Iran. The slaves, as observed
before, are for the most part originally poor; and when they have
secured in Turkestan a certain means of gaining their livelihood,
or have got together some property, they in few cases think of
returning to their native land, where, on account of general habits
of industry and activity, existence is much harder to support;
where the necessaries of life are more expensive, and the luxury
and splendour of the wealthy excite many ungratified desires in
the breasts of the poor, which are not aroused in the midst of the
barbarous simplicity of the Khanats. Still, it is to be observed
that the emancipated slave can never get rid of the disgrace
implied in the word _kul_ (slave), however great may be the wealth
he may have accumulated, or however high the post to which he may
be promoted. Although he may be living in the utmost splendour and
magnificence, the kul can never hope to obtain the hand of a free
Œzbeg, the poorest of whom would reject his proposals with scorn.
I know an instance in which an Œzbeg refused his daughter to
a freedman, although the latter's suit was backed by the command
of the khan; he preferred rather to encounter the anger of his
sovereign than to call one who had once been a slave his son-in-law.
Even the khanezads[20] (children of slaves), who are not allowed
to be sold, are treated in the same manner, and can only marry the
daughters of other emancipated slaves, or sarts. Only in the fourth
generation is the disgrace attached to the word _kul_ somewhat
softened down, but by no means quite obliterated. In a country like
Central Asia, in which courage is looked upon as the highest virtue,
the slave is regarded as the _ne plus ultra_--a man who, for want of
a contempt of death, allows himself to be put in chains; and it is
this vice which is so difficult to be forgiven. This way of looking
at the subject is further strengthened by the boundless feeling of
aristocracy which distinguishes the Tartars, whether settled or
nomad, in which not even the wildest Tories or the proudest marquis
of the Faubourg St. Germain can surpass them--a feeling which is
entertained not only against the foreign Iranian, but even the
native Tadjiks, the eldest inhabitants of the land.
[20] The sale of a khanezad is regarded as a disgraceful action, and
one who commits such an act is branded as a thief and a robber.
It will be understood that it is only the moral stigma of slavery
which the freedman has to suffer from. In his civil rights he is as
well protected as any one else. Thus, as the Oriental is even more
a creature of habit than we are, I found it very easy to understand
how the Persian soon finds himself completely at home in Turkestan,
which country he once so despised and dreaded, and dwells
contentedly in a foreign land, only occasionally solacing himself
with a visit to his relations or to the shrine of some Shiite saint
in Iran.
Unfortunately, it is the material comfort and prosperity of the
slave which the Central Asiatic, like other Mohammedans, alleges
in his defence, when we express our abhorrence of the disgraceful
traffic in human beings. As in Turkestan, so in Turkey we may
often hear this argument:--"The sons and daughters of the wild
Circassians were in their native land poor people, who in their free
mountains could hardly get bread enough to eat; here with us they
become rich government officials, pashas, nay, even princesses,
whose powerful influence affects the policy of government." They
further point out how kindly the slaves are treated in the houses
of persons of distinction, where they are put on the same footing
as the members of the family. But they forget that these cases are
exceptional, and that such good fortune depends for the most part on
the personal beauty of the favoured few. What becomes of the greater
number, whose charms are not such as to gain the favour of their
master? What shall we say of this majority, exposed as they are to
the oppression and cruelty of a tyrannical master, and constantly
employed in the hardest labour?
Such things are of course not taken into account, any more than the
original cruelty of the slave merchant, who tears his victims from
their homes and their friends. On the banks of the Bosphorus, as on
those of the Oxus, few persons care to picture to their minds the
horrors of that first moment of separation. How many orphans, how
many widows, how many aged and helpless parents, are left behind to
wring their hands in sorrow for their bread-winner, who is carried
into captivity! It is impossible to count them, it is impossible to
describe the miserable condition of so many villages and districts
which are exposed to the terrible scourge of the slave trade. The
traveller in those regions stumbles at every step over the most
melancholy traces of the devastation which it causes. However
certain he may feel of the splendid destiny which awaits this or
that individual captive, he must still exclaim: "This is the most
execrable occupation that has ever defiled the hands of man, and
its suppression is the first and holiest duty which our western
civilisation has to perform for the cause of humanity!"
The suppression of the slave trade in Central Asia is, moreover,
much easier than many might at first sight suppose. The root of
the evil is to be sought, not so much in the Turkomans as in the
inhabitants of the cities. All nomad tribes were and are ready for
such a trade, if they only find settled tribes who will buy their
captives of them. The Bedouins of the Arabian desert could never
addict themselves much to the traffic, inasmuch as the markets of
the surrounding cities were closed by the religion of Islam against
the sale of their booty. In the same way the Turkomans would soon
abandon the practice, if the sale of Persians, Afghans, &c., in the
Khanats were declared illegal. The Djemshidis, the Firuzkuhis, and
Hezares, afford the strongest proof of this. As the transport of
their captives to Bokhara is rendered unsafe by the intermediate
Turkoman tribes, while at the same time their sale is forbidden
in the Afghan town of Herat, they have either to suppress their
slave-trading propensities altogether, or come to a compromise with
the Turkomans, much to the advantage of the latter.
Sultan Murad Mirza, an enlightened prince, and the governor of
Khorassan, once expressed to me his surprise that England, which
spends so many thousands in checking the slave trade in African
waters, can look on unconcernedly while the same trade in the middle
of Asia lays waste such a country, whose ancient civilisation was
of profit to Europe itself. In like manner I, too, cannot conceal
my astonishment at the apathy which Europe, and especially that
State whose flag is in the East ever the harbinger of the dawn of a
newer, a happier era, has displayed on this question. Sentimental
newspaper writers, in their political rhapsodies, may yet for a long
time take under their protection the feelings of independence of
many a savage Asiatic tribe, to whom freedom means nothing more than
anarchy, plunder, and murder. But the dreams of Rousseau have had
their day, and we can with the fullest confidence say, that whenever
Europe shows herself in the East, whether in the peaceful garb of
the missionary, or in the terrible panoply of her warlike power,
she brings only blessings in her train, and scatters the seeds of
a new order of things. The more light is poured from the West upon
the East, the sooner will the evil customs of the old world be
eradicated, and our brother men be made happier.