Talk:Slavery

Number of African slaves in Indian Ocean / Arab slave trade

Under "Modern History" > "Africa" the number of African slaves in the Arab slave trade is given on the basis of a single source - a short and unsourced summary from BBC. On such an important and potentially controversial issue I would think it would be important to have better and more specific and scholarly sources. Not knowing anything about the subject myself (that's why I looked up this Wikipedia article), I still made an excursion on the net to see if there was anything better out there. Here are a few potential sources that may contain the relevant facts:

1) A longer and more detailed article from BBC.

2) A popular book: The East African Slave Trade: The History and Legacy of the Arab Slave Trade and the Indian Ocean Slave Trade by Charles River Editors (who is not a person but a "boutique digital publisher"). A popular book, it seems, but it may contain an interesting bibliography.

3) Articles in a scholarly journal: Journal of African Development, Spring/Fall 2011.

4) A collection of scholarly articles published by UNESCO: The African Slave Trade from the 15th to the 19th century. Several of the articles collected in this volume deal with Arab / Indian Ocean slave trade.

5) Book (at least semi-scholarly): Islam's Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora by Ronald Segal (see Wikipedia article about the author for his credentials).

I hope some of this is helpful. Filursiax (talk) 13:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Identification, image

@Rjensen I moved the image to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-L%C3%A9on_G%C3%A9r%C3%B4me#Orientalism so that it is still available, but in a more appropriate context

Here is some literature on slavery and slave-trade in the Middle East, to prove that my comment on Gérôme's representation of the slave market is not just "politicized personal opinion": Toledano (1982, 48–54, 106–7) discusses 19th century descriptions of slave markets in Istanbul and other cities of the Ottoman Empire. Also see Toledano (1998, 4-16).

For the question of historic accuracy in Gérôme's paintings of the slave market (and other oriental scenes) see, e.g., Lees (2012).

To sum up what these (and other scholars) have found out: from the 1850s on, slaves were traded in the houses of slave traders, because the slave trade was forbidden in public. Even before the ban, enslaved women were not publicly exposed in the streets when shown to potential buyers, but sitting in chambers. There is no evidence whatsoever that they were naked. Gérôme's paintings can be considered to be accurate only when it comes to the architecture in the background, for which he used photographs and his own sketches. The scenes and interactions taking place in these settings were a product of his imagination. They were erotic fantasies. The Oriental background served to make depictions of nudity legitimate for European viewers and buyers. The "Others'" cruel treatment of women and slaves was used as a pretext to paint, and look at paintings of, naked women.

This is why Gérôme's painting is inappropriate here. I do not say it should be deleted from Wikipedea, but it needs to be contextualized. Pumslau (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Pumslau

In addition, not only slaves were barefoot in the Middle East in the 19th century. On historical photographs, e.g. from the collection of Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje, one can see many free men walking barefoot. The image is therefore not useful to illustrate "identification" of slaves in the Middle East, where wearing shoes or sandals marked the social status of a person, but did not necessarily serve to distinguish free from enslaved persons. Pumslau (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Pumslau

References

@Julian von Bredow: Please, be aware of edit warring policy. As you do not respond to my arguments in the talk page but continue reverting my edits, I might consider reporting on it. WP:3RR broken already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pumslau (talk • contribs) 13:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Rjensen and Julian von Bredow please participate in this discussion. Pumslau please stop reverting because you are the one who introduced the bold edit. I would advise you not to report anything and to seek consensus first per WP:BRD.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:48, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

About the Third Opinion Request: The Third Opinion request has been removed (i.e. declined) as premature. Like all other moderated content dispute resolution venues at Wikipedia, 3O requires thorough talk page discussion before seeking assistance and discussion through edit summaries will not suffice. If an editor will not discuss, consider the recommendations which are made here. — TransporterMan (TALK) 19:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC) This is an informational posting only and I am not watching this page; contact me on my user talk page if you wish to communicate with me about this.

There's no good reason to use the fanciful Gérôme image here; now replaced by the much more scrupulous reportage of David Roberts. Ewulp (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Extremely incorrect sentence needs changing

This sentence needs to change BADLY:

-The first country to abolish slavery was the United Kingdom, where slavery was non-existent by 1200 AD and was legally prohibited under the Slave Trade Act of 1807 (although slavery remained legal in some British colonies until 1843).

This is wrong on MANY counts:

1. The United Kingdom did not exist in 1200, so already wrongly stated. For this to make any sense we have to look at England, Welsh polities, Ulster and Scotland separately.

2. None of them explicitly banned slavery by 1200 - it died out de facto by around 1200, but this was not unique to Britain. England had a prohibition on the slave *trade*.

3. Several countries simply did not have slavery at the time either. If we are including former state entities (or those which banned it then later had it), we need to consider ancient nations that didn't have slavery per se, even possibly including the Achaemenids.

4. The abolition of the slave trade in 1807 post-dates the slave trade ban in France, though France brought it back. Denmark banned the slave trade in 1803. Other parts of the world weren't involved in a slave trade. Britain was earlier than other major slave trading powers, so if the editor is a patriotic Brit they can be proud of that if they wish, but as it stands it is far from correct.

5. Going the other way, the ban on the slave trade is *not* when slavery was banned in Britain. England annulled slavery retrospectively in the Somerset vs. Stewart case in 1772, and Scotland banned slavery in 1799. The status of slavery in Ireland is a more controversial one, though the "United Kingdom" only began by that name in 1800. Again, these were not the *first*.

6. More a technicality, but slavery was abolished throughout all British colonies in 1833 effective by 1838, not 1843. 1843 saw its abolition in India, but India was not a British colony at the time, but under the East India Company - precisely why the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act did not apply there and other areas of East India Company rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.18.244.117 (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

ADD LEGAL DEFINITION OF SLAVERY?

California Penal Code 181 and use of word CUSTODY by Sheriff Probation and Parole Officers who are paid money to hold in involuntary servitude (this could arguably be Forcing people to report for duty/work/appearance/jury duty? without just compensation) The Justice System also caps wages at around .10cents and hour and wage garnishes that amount and money sent from relatives. I think the minumum was if not abided by and the maximum wage is around .31cents. I seek to employ prisoners! link at tiny. cc/jointventureproject see Joint Venture Project of CA TITLE 9 CCR Ca Code Regulations

Pasted/cited from https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-181.html Every person who holds, or attempts to hold, any person in involuntary servitude, or assumes, or attempts to assume, rights of ownership over any person, or who sells, or attempts to sell, any person to another, or receives money or anything of value, in consideration of placing any person in the custody, or under the power or control of another, or who buys, or attempts to buy, any person, or pays money, or delivers anything of value, to another, in consideration of having any person placed in his or her custody, or under his or her power or control, or who knowingly aids or assists in any manner any one thus offending, is punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for two, three or four years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C51:7001:200:44EA:4BB0:2770:A417 (talk) 22:09, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Far-left propaganda

Please remove the far-left propaganda in the "Terminology" section of the article, specifically the entire second paragraph and its nonsense about the word "slave" being somehow offensive to leftists. Slate is not a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:FD0A:FB00:DC06:2FA8:A094:C00C (talk) 17:17, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

1794 abolition in France

Thers a single sentence about France abolishing slavery crammed in between stuff about abolition attempts iin various American colonies. I call that anglocentric. Heck it was surely one of the things tat inspired the French people to endure the French Terror and stand up to the English and Germans even before Napoleon came to power.Rich (talk) 09:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2020

I ask for removal of citation 155 titled:" Indentured Servitude in Colonial America. Deanna Barker, Frontier Resources." as it is just a personal blog with a vague bibliography. (in case, editors should cite references therein) 2001:B07:A12:B90D:5DDE:4A71:135D:F7F3 (talk) 21:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done: The information is useful, and it is used for a rather non-exceptional claim. It works well as a link of convenience and if somebody has access to those sources to check then that would great, but I wouldn't deprive them of the opportunity to check up on these, so I'd rather keep the link as, I said, a link of convenience. What I am going to do is copy the bibliography here for future reference.

Extended content

James Curtis Ballagh. White Servitude in the Colony of Virginia. Baltimore MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1895. Fredrick M. Binder & David M. Reimers. The way we lived: Essays and Documents in American Social History, Vol. 1; 1607-1877. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Co., 1992. Phyllis Cunnington; Costume of Household Servants from the Middle Ages to 1900. London, UK; Harper and Row Publishers, Inc., 1974. Joseph Doddridge; Notes on the Settlement and Indian Wars. Parsons, WV: McClain Printing Co., 1996. David W. Galson; White Servatude in Colonial America: An Economic Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1981. W. Preston Haynie (Ed.) Northumberland County Virginia Records of Indentured Servants 1650-1795. Heritage Books, Inc., 1996. Peter Kolchin. American Slavery 1619-1877. New York, NY: Hill and Wang, 1993. Abbot Emerson Smith; Colonists in Bondage: White Servitude and Convict Labor in America, 1607-1776. Chapel Hill, NC.: University of North Carolina, 1947. Warren B. Smith: White Servitude in Colonial South Carolina. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1961. Charles Woodmason; Journal of C.W. Clerk.

Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)