Talk:Slavery in Iran

Page Move

The current title of this page is misleading. To say "Slavery of Iran" suggest that Iran, or its people, were enslaved. But in fact the article is about historical periods where Iran enslaved others. Better titles would be something like "Slavery in Iran" or "History of Iranian Slavery". --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

It appears this was done while keeping a redirect from Slavery in Iran so that people looking for information related to this subject can still find it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite and addition of information from related articles

I rewrote this article as best I could and added citation needed tags. I also put in and edited down some information from related topics on Wikipedia that had references. Please have a look and fix anything that needs it. One question I had was about how to deal with Timur, who it seems brutalized many Persian subject, but also ruled using the Persian language and Persian officials? How should this be dealt with? Did the institution of slavery under his rule include Persians? I am not an expert on this subject matter. But I think it's worth an article.ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Timur lane is a Turkic invader. He massacred many Iranians. He captured many Iranian slaves and depopulated many cities in Iran. Not fair to say the institution of slavery includes Persians. In fact Iranians were victim of Timur's brutality more than Armenians and Georgians. --Larno (talk) 05:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Sexual Slavery

This article is about actual slavery which is banned in Iran I found that some irrelevant materials are added to this article such slavery in Syria and sexual slavery. Sexual slavery is out of the scope of this article and I should mention that sex slavery is banned in Iran too. Anyhow, I removed the following part from the article:

Iran is on the U.S. State Department's Trafficking of Persons list as a tier 3 source, transit point and destination for women and children trafficked for the purposes of involuntary servitude. Tier 3 includes "Governments that do not fully com ply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so." Other tier 3 countries include Algeria, Burma, Cuba, Fiji, Kuwait, Moldova, North Korea, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Syria. Many of the Iraqi women fleeing the Iraq War are turning to prostitution, others are trafficked abroad, to countries like Syria, Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, and Iran.

Thanks, --Larno (talk) 17:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Why is sexual slavery out of the scope of the article? And why have you removed other sections about slavery such as in the Ottaman Empire which included modern day Iran (and the Persian people)? You are of course welcome to add the fact that slavery is illegal in Iran, but removing sourced information as you've done seems grossly inappropriate. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Slavery in Ottoman has nothing to do with Iran.If you add these material based on its proximity to Iran why you don't add slavery in Ottoman to "Slavery in Austria" or "Slavery in Italy" or Russia. Regarding the sexual slaverysexual slavery" is a diffrent topic, and we are talking about real slavery. Moreover, if you want to these materials to an approriate article. You should provide independent sources. U.S. State is not an independent source because of the level of political tensions between two countries. You are welcome to add your materials to relevant articles but many of your edits are irrelevant to this article.--Larno (talk) 05:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I've asked Secthayrabe to offer an opinion. I believe you've worked with him before, and he has offered opinions on this article in the past. I would also like to get the opinions of others on this matter. Do you ahve a suggestion in this regard?

I don't have any problem with presenting the Ottoman information in the clear context that Iran/ Persia was part of this empire, as were other areas and other peoples. Were Iranians enslaved? I don't know. I think the article needs more details and more content from good sources.

I also have no objection to your addition noting that slavery is illegal in Iran. However, I think U.S. State Department listing of Iran is notable and should be included. I have no objection to offering context from reliable sources (Iranian or U.S.) noting the tensions between these countries. I am not aware of anyone suggesting the US has simply made up the sexual slavery issue in order to embarass Iran, but if there is an argument being made for that being the case I think that would be appropriate to accurately include as well. I don't think it's good to simply ignore the issue. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I have read a few books that said and I have the same opinion with Larno Man with the intention that their ought to be a dissimilar article about that matter.Also Slavery in Ottoman has nothing to do with Iran the as Larno said again Iran was never ruled completely by them only the north included the Capital Tabriz.Also it is notebale that everyone were force to speak Turkish if they refused then their tongues were cut off so yes they were a type of slave if I find more ifomation I will not it here,thankyou if you would like to dissuce this privately please do not hesitant to talk to me on my talkSecthayrabe (talk) 20:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Herodotus

I removed two quotes from Herodotus since it is up to historians to interpret it. Note quoting Herodotus is different than actually verifying his statement as fact, which Briant does not do. In other words according to ChrisO: Don't make the mistake of thinking that ancient historians wrote for the same reasons, or to the same standards, as modern historians.. And according to Briant: "It is hard to separate history from fairly tale in Herodotus". Dandamayev provides a good summary here: [1] which I have taken as a summary.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 08:31, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Please don't remove sourced information. Briant does not cast doubt on the slavery issue. Heja Helweda (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't misinterpret my words and what is the slavery issue. Slavery has existed since the beginning of time. I said specifically Herodotus and not Briant who mentions Herodotus but does not confirm or deny it. So adding statements of Herodotus as fact is not the way to write an article. You can't just use primary sources over secondary sources, as there are many sources which today show not everything in Herodotus is a fact. Discussion took place with another user and it was agreed to mention Herodotus but note that modern scholars disagree with many issues mentioned by Herodotus. They will still quote Herodotus but this does not mean they confirm all of his words. Also per WP:Weight, the words of scholars on the general situation should have more weight over tertiary and primary sources. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 01:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

My comments on Herodotus still stands. Also another user added prostitution and transit route from state department, none of these sources have anything to do with slavery. Also please use valid references and not websites. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

yet another article under the hands of "any editor with self opinions".

Even bringing the subject of slavery in persia, which has been proven to be non-existent whenever persians themselves rules the land shows what kind of garbage is editing these articles in this thing called Wikipedia, aka most unreliable source in the net. Only non-historical, political etc articles are reliable here, because they are not edited or started by simply said idiots. :) oh, and remove this post as fast as possible and call it uncivil please, lol pathetic losers. :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.209.159.184 (talk) 17:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

To ChildofMidnight 1st of all Iran was never part of the Ottoman empire, Persians and Ottomans fought many wars with both sides occupying the others territories from time to time. 2nd, i guess thats the only way people like you can say slavery existed in Persia, by the hands of other nations which you then try to pin on persians somehow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.209.159.184 (talk) 17:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Page move/Rename

If the article is going to be on wikipedia it should be changed to "Slavery in Ancient Persia" or "Slavery in Persia" as the name "Iran" would be anachronistic for the article. Thoughts? GoetheFromm (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Two books that might be helpful on issue of slavery in Achaemenid Persian Empire

While on the website "http://histclo.com/act/work/slave/sla-anc.html", I found the following segment about the issue of slavery within the Achaemenid Persian Empire:

The Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus the Great (576/590–529 BC). Slavery was an important institution in ancient Persia and there are substantial records which provide a better idea of the institution than in earlier states of the ancient Middle East. There are still, however, many questions. The famous Cyrus Cylinder speaks of abolishing slavery, yet we know that slavery was an important institution in ancient Persia. Persia as founded by Cyrus was an agressvely expansionary military empire. War thus was the primary source of slaves. [Falcelière et al, p. 433.] This provided many opportunities for war captives and to enslave conquered peoples. Historians note numerous instances in with large numbers of peoples were enslaved, such as Persian victories over the Greeks in the Aegean islands of Chios, Lesbos, and Tenedos. Slaves taken in military campaigns were known as "the booty of the bow". [Dandamaev and Lukonin, p. 156.] The Persians are also known to have breed slaves to supplement war booty. This perhaps reflects the peace that Persian victories brought, thus reducing the supply of war captives. Rebels and crinals were alsp sources of slavey even after the Empire had been well established. Slaves were distributed to both Persian nobels and military commanders. Persian law made slavery hereditary. The legal status of slaves in Persia was that of livestock and other moveable property. [Dandemaev and Lukonin, p. 153.] This varied somewhat because in some provinces added to the Empire, local law and custom was allowed to remain in force. Slaves were held by the Persin monarchy itself as state slaves. They were used in different ways. The Great King or monarchy maintained a very large retinue of mostly slaves to both serve him and work his estates. Most performed agricultural labor on the monarch's estates. Others perormed a wide range of other tasks (bakers, cooks, millers, personal servants, winemakers and beer brewers, wine waiters. Boys were made into eunuchs for a range of functions in the toyal households. [Dandamaev and Lukonin, pp. 158, 170.] State slaves were used to work mines as mineral resource were owned by the state. [Olmstead, pp. 74 ff] Working in mines was a virtual death sentence for Roman slaves. One source suggests that Persian slaves working in mines were well paid. [Dandemaev and Lukonin, pp. 161-62.] Children made up a substantial portion of Persian slaves. Te Fortification Tablets at Persepolis, the Persian capital, reveal that 13 percent of the slaves were boys and 10 percent girls. I'm unsure at to the reason for this statistical disparity. The domestic arrangements are not fully understood. One source suggests that at least some slaves lived together in family units and were moved as required for work assignments in thesze units. There are documented instances of slaves being moved in groups of 100-1,500 people. [Dandemaev and Lukonin, pp. 160–61.]

For its information, the website cites the following books: "The Culture and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran" by M.A. Dandemaev and V.G. Lukonin and "History of the Persian Empire" by A.T. Olmstead. These both seem to be scholarly, academic sources (I checked on Amazon).

Now, this seems to at least partially contradict what this article says about the presence of slavery in the ancient Persian Empire. The article seems to downplay the existence of slavery, but the website suggests that slavery was more prevalent (not as prevalent as in, say, Greece or Rome, but still more prevalent that the article suggests).

I am NOT an expert on either the history of slavery or the history of the Persian Empire, and I do NOT have access to the two books that the website cites as its resources. But, maybe someone else is an expert and/or has access to these two books. If so, then I think it would be very useful to compare our article with the website that I have mentioned, cross-reference and verify the information with the two books cited, and figure out which of the two views on slavery in the Persian Empire is more accurate. IonNerd (talk) 07:45, 15 March 2011 (UTC)