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.
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.