The Ottoman Legacy, Slavery, and Denial

Martin Bossenbroek

In the Western world, the colonial and slavery past has become a topic of fierce social debate in recent years. Under pressure from academic publications, court rulings and journalistic revelations, several European countries have now officially spoken out, even at the government level, about the dark sides of their centuries-long colonialism. Whatever else the discussion will produce, it demonstrates a willingness for moral reflection, both on the heroic acts and misdeeds of one’s own ancestors.

Fourteen years ago, that Western example seemed to be emulated in the Islamic world. At the Second Arab-African Summit, on 10 October 2010 in Sirte, Libya, its host, President Moammar al-Gaddafi, apologised for the “shameful way” in which “our African brothers” had been treated in the past by “rich Arabs”: they “captured them and kidnapped them to North Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and other Arab regions.” Their behaviour, he acknowledged, “was no different from that of the West – America and Europe. They hunted them like animals, treated them like slaves and behaved like colonialists.” [1]

The validity of Gaddafi’s claim has been confirmed by numerous scholars, including in the Islamic world. From the seventh to the 19th century, 14 million Africans were captured by Afro-Arab slave traders and carried off to North Africa, the Middle East and the west coast of India. It was a human tragedy in the same frightening order of magnitude as the transatlantic slave trade. [2]

However, outside academic circles, this historical truth is not recognised. Gaddafi was the first and the last statesman in the Islamic world to ever broach this painful subject. In all other respects, the governments of the countries that were active in the centuries-long Afro-Arab slave trade remained silent. No acknowledgement, no regret, let alone penance.

Nor in Ankara. This may be called remarkable, as in all other respects Recep Tayyip Erdogan, prime minister from 2003 to 2014 and president of Türkiye since then, proudly flaunts the national past. Under his reign, Turkish history has been rewritten into one grand triumph without a whimper. This is symbolised by the so-called ‘presidential seal’. On it, a golden sun – the eternal Turkish state – is surrounded by 16 golden stars – the 16 independent historical Turkish empires, from the Huns in 200 BC to the Ottomans. [3]

To illustrate how fanatically Erdogan believes in this symbolism, one photo, taken in January 2015 at the reception of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, suffices. For the usual photo opportunity, both leaders shook hands at the bottom of a monumental staircase. Behind them, sixteen actors in historical uniforms are lined up on that staircase, representing the empires referred to. It is a staging that was henceforth to become a regular part of official receptions, Turkish government spokesmen announce. [4]

However, as far as can be verified, it remained just that once. Most likely, in time, the realisation has dawned that such a historical costume party creates an overly martial impression. As if all those 16 empires were based purely on armed violence.

Which was, of course, indeed the case. The Ottoman Empire, the immediate predecessor of the present Turkish state, was created from the 14th century onwards by successive territorial conquests and sustained itself until the 20th century thanks to a wide variety of deprivations of freedom. It was, in other words, a colonial and a slave empire at the same time. [5]

The former is self-evident in multi-ethnic empires, the latter deserves further explanation.
To keep a grip on the expanding colonial empire, the Ottoman sultans developed a special form of slavery. The system was perfected by Mehmet ii. After his conquest of Constantinople in 1453, he needed a state apparatus loyal to him personally. To this end, he founded a palace school called Enderun, which came to function as the top of a veritable slave training pyramid.

This was based on a harsh form of taxation that was first applied exclusively in the Balkans, later also in the Caucasus, and became known as devşirme, literally ‘child levy’. This meant that the Christian population in the subjugated areas had to hand over underage boys to the sultan on a regular basis.

These boys were made into ghilman (slaves) and transferred to the capital, where they had to convert to Islam. After a selection of physical and intellectual abilities, most of them were placed with Turkish peasant families for several years to learn the language and customs and work hard. This was followed by military training and placement in one of the divisions of the so-called Janitsar Corps.

The chosen few who were admitted to the Enderun School itself, located in the Topkapı Palace, had to follow a complete follow-up process. They received thorough, all-round training to become, depending on their specific qualities, scholars and/or administrators. The very best could even make it to vizier (minister) or eventually grand vizier (prime minister). [6]

Besides this exceptional variant, the Ottoman Empire also featured just about every possible ‘regular’ form of slavery. The enslaved victims were brought in from all corners of the world. From Africa through the Sahara, across the Red Sea and across the Indian Ocean. From southern and western Europe on the ships of the Barbary pirates. From eastern and south-eastern Europe through the Balkans and the Caucasus, across the Black Sea and across the Caspian Sea. All in all, many millions, of every possible colour of skin and intended for all sections of society. [7]

In short, the Ottoman Empire harboured a richly diverse population of enslaved people. Only during the nineteenth century did this change. Western powers put increasing pressure on the Turkish sultans to end the slave trade within their spheres of influence. Out of self-preservation – the crumbling of the immense empire was continuing at the same time – they gave in step by step. [8]

In 1890, Turkish Sultan Abdülhamit ii was even among the signatories to the Brussels Convention, as were the Shah of Persia and the Sultan of Zanzibar. In it, they agreed with 14 Western countries on measures against the slave trade in and around Africa. [9]

At the time, Abdülhamit ii was unwilling to agree with the abolition of slavery as an institution, but that was only a matter of time. Apart from abolitionism and imperialism, his position was also undermined by a third phenomenon originating in Europe: nationalism.

This triple centrifugal force became fatal to ‘The Eternal Empire.’ With two coups (in 1908 and 1913), the fiercely nationalist Young Turks forced Abdülhamit ii to introduce political reforms as well as restrictions on slavery. A complete ban would have to wait until after the final abolition of the sultanate. In 1933, Türkiye ratified the Slavery Convention [10] drawn up by the League of Nations seven years earlier.

Türkiye’s curtailed national state did not have a peaceful start. It was born out of a continuous series of armed conflicts from 1912 to 1923: two Balkan wars, World War I and the Turkish War of Independence. Those ongoing hostilities also drove the internal tensions between the different ethnic and religious groups to a head.

This culminated in a bloodthirsty outburst that to this day is dismissed by the Turkish government as ‘the events of 1915’ but is now officially recognised by more than 30 countries as ‘the Armenian Genocide’. [11]

Authoritative scholars in this field, including Dutch historians Erik-Jan Zürcher and Uǧur Ümit Üngör, support that designation. They acknowledge that the term ‘genocide’ was coined only in 1944 by Polish-Jewish jurist Raphael Lemkin to capture the unprecedented horrors of the Holocaust in a single word. But in substance, they say, his definition does indeed apply. For it read as follows: ‘[…] a coordinated plan of various actions that seek to destroy the essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of destroying the groups themselves.’

And in their view, based on abundant evidence, this was most certainly involved in the eastern part of Türkiye from 1915 to 1923. [12]

The one-and-a-half million Christian Armenians in the area were subjected to mass deportations and massacres, forced assimilation, destruction of material culture and a deliberately induced famine. More than half of them did not survive the ordeal. According to Zürcher and Üngör, there is, therefore, every reason to refer to ‘a deliberate, centrally led, policy to end the Armenian presence in Anatolia.’ In other words: genocide. [13]

This observation can be met with protests and reprisals from Ankara with every new official recognition in a Western country. In Erdogan’s worldview, it is simply impossible that the Turkish people have been guilty of those kinds of outrages in the past.

This conviction is underscored by the solely admiring words he uses for his country’s glorious history, which by definition has no black pages. As in the celebration of the centenary of the Turkish Republic, on 29 October 2023. In his speech, he spoke highly of “our deep-rooted history and age-old values”. What exactly the latter consists of, he did not elaborate on. He did, however, point to “all the experience of our twenty-two hundred years of statesmanship” that entitles present-day Türkiye to set itself up as “the protector of the unprotected”. [14]

Rather galling, indeed.

About the writer

This is a pre-publication of Martin Bossenbroek’s book “Kolonialisme! De vloek van de geschiedenis” which translates as “Colonialism! The Curse of History”.

Martin Bossenbroek is a historian and writer. He has published several books and articles on the
(Dutch) colonial past. His best-known titles are De Boerenoorlog (The Boer War) (awarded the Libris History Prize in 2013 and nominated for the AKO Literature Prize) and De wraak van Diponegoro. Begin en einde van Nederlands-Indië (2020). In 2023, he published De Zanzibardriehoek. Een slavernijgeschiedenis 1860-1900, which was also awarded the Libris History Prize. This article is an adaptation of the chapter ‘Desert Sand’ from his latest book, to be published by Athenaeum Publishers in mid-October 2024, Kolonialisme! De vloek van de geschiedenis.

1. Courtesy of Arabist Ronald E. Kon, Deputy Editor-in-Chief Fanack. Chronicle of the Middle East and North Africa and owner/director of KONTEKST for the translation of the speech delivered in Arabic. The recording is from Al-Jazeera, the English subtitles from MEMRI TV; Libyan Leader Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi Apologizes to African States for the Trafficking in African Children Carried Out by Wealthy Arabs | MEMRI; Watch Gaddafi’s Apology on Behalf of All Arabs for their Role in the Slave Trade – YouTube; Watch Gaddafi apologize on behalf of Arabs for their cruel treatment of Africans during the Arab slave trade – Face2Face Africa; https://www.bbc.com/arabic/middleeast/2010/10/101010_qaddafi_apology_tc2; The Second Afro-Arab Summit (iri.edu.ar).
2. See Ralph A. Austen, ‘The Mediterranean Islamic Slave Trade Out Of Africa: A Tentative Census,’ in: Elizabeth Savage, ed., The Human Commodity: Perspectives on the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade (London 1992) 214-248; idem, ‘The 19th Century Islamic Slave Trade from East Africa (Swahili and Red Sea Coasts): A Tentative Census,’ in: W.G. Clarence-Smith, ed., The Economics of the Indian Ocean Slave Trade in the Nineteenth Century (London 1989) 21-44; idem, ‘The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade: A Tentative Census,’ in: Henry A. Gemery & Jan S. Hogendorn, ed., The Uncommon Market: Essays in the Economic History of the Atlantic Slave Trade (New York 1979) 23-76. Ralph A. Austen, Trans-Saharan Africa in World History, New York 2010; Jonathan A.C. Brown, Slavery & Islam, London 2019; Martin Bossenbroek, De Zanzibardriehoek. Een slavernijgeschiedenis (Amsterdam 2023) 23-24; William Gervase Clarence-Smith, Islam and the Abolition of Slavery, London 2006; Dick Harrison, Geschiedenis van de slavernij. Van Mesopotamië tot moderne mensenhandel, Utrecht 2023; Bernard Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East: A Historical Enquiry, New York 1990; Paul E. Lovejoy, Transformations in Slavery. A History of Slavery in Africa, Cambridge 2000; Suzanne Miers and Richard Roberts, ed., The End of Slavery in Africa, Madison 1988; Suzanne Miers and Martin A. Klein ed., Slavery and Colonial Rule in Africa, London 1999; Tidiane N’Diaye, Le génocide voilé. Enquête historique, Paris 2008; Ronald Segal, Islam’s Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora, New York 2001; eastern and western african slave trade : r/MapPorn (reddit.com).
3. Presidential Seal of Turkey – Wikipedia.
4. Ivo van de Wijdeven, De macht van het verleden. Geschiedenis als politiek wapen (Amsterdam 2023) 153-204; Chainmailed Turkic warriors to welcome more foreign leaders to Turkey | Reuters. Warrior’s welcome for Abbas at Erdogan’s palace (alarabiya.net.
5. Ottoman Empire – Wikipedia; The Islamic slave trade began in the 7th century… – Maps on the Web (zoom-maps.com).
6. Enderun School – Wikipedia. The summary of the discussion on the system in: Harrison, Geschiedenis, 127-155 and Devshirme – Wikipedia.
7. Stephan Conermann and Gül Şen, ed., Slaves and Slave Agency in the Ottoman Empire, Bonn 2020; George Junne, The Black Eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire. Networks of Power in the Court of the Sultan, London 2016; Terence Walz and Kenneth M. Cuno ed., Race and Slavery in the Middle East. Histories of Trans-Saharan Africans in Nineteenth-Century Egypt, Sudan, and the Ottoman Mediterranean, Cairo 2010; Madeline C. Zilfi, Women and Slavery in the Late Ottoman Empire, Cambridge 2010.
8. Austen, Trans-Saharan Africa; Brown, Slavery & Islam; Clarence-Smith, Islam; Harrison, History of Slavery; Lewis, Race and Slavery; Lovejoy, Transformations in Slavery; Miers and Roberts, The End of Slavery in Africa; Miers and Klein, Slavery and Colonial Rule in Africa; N’Diaye, Le génocide voilé; Segal, Islam’s Black Slaves; Ehud R. Toledano, The Ottoman Slave Trade and Its Suppression 1840-1890, Princeton 1982; Idem, As If Silent and Absent: Bonds of Enslavement in the Islamic Middle East, New Haven 2007.
9. Bossenbroek, Zanzibardriehoek, 308-319.
10. Clarence-Smith, Islam and the Abolition of Slavery, 104-110.
11. The Armenian genocide | Formal recognition; Countries that Recognise the Armenian Genocide (armenian-genocide.org); Armenian genocide – Wikipedia
12. Dutch parliament recognises 1915 Armenian ‘genocide’ – DW – 02/22/2018.
13. Vahakn N. Dadrian, ed., The Ottoman Empire. A Troubled Legacy, Yerevan 2010; Uǧur Ümit Üngör, The Making of Modern Turkey: Nation and State in Eastern Anatolia, 1913-1950 (Oxford 2011) passim; Erik-Jan Zürcher, Turkey, a modern history (Amsterdam 2015) 134-139; Armenian genocide – Wikipedia; Uğur Ümit üngör ‘Was it genocide or not?’ On the interweaving of dimensions in the genocide debate, De Gids. Volume 169 – DBNL
14. Presidency Of The Republic Of Turkey : President Erdoğan’s Message on 29 October Republic Day.