Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry

by Bernard Lewis

  Another type of information on racial attitudes may be found in religious literature, specifically that which by apt quotation seeks to condemn racial prejudice and discrimination. During the centuries which followed the death of the Prophet, pious Muslims collected vast numbers of what are known as hadiths, that is to say, traditions concerning Muhammad's actions and utterances. A very large proportion of these arc certainly spurious-but this, while it may nullify their value as evidence of the Prophet's own views, still leaves them as important evidence on the development of attitudes during the period in which they were manufactured. A number of these traditions deal with questions of race and color. There are some which specifically condemn one or another race. Thus the Prophet is quoted as saying of the Ethiopian: "When he is hungry he steals, when he is sated he fornicates. "'h This is undoubtedly spurious, but is also well known in early and modern times as an Arabic proverb about the Zanj.-" Similar traditions, equally spurious, are cited disparaging the Persians, the Turks, and other parties to the struggles of early Islamic history. Sometimes these traditions have an eschatological content, as for example when the Prophet predicts that the Ka'ba, the sanctuary in Mecca, will be destroyed by "black-skinned, short-shanked men," who will tear it apart and thus begin the destruction of the world.''

  Such traditions are few, and most of them are not regarded as authentic. A larger body of accepted traditions survives, the general purport of which is to deplore racial prejudice and to insist on the primacy of piety. One of the commonest is the phrase ascribed to the Prophet, "I was sent to the red and the black"-an expression taken to embrace the whole of mankind.' With the passage in the Qur'an already quoted as point of departure, the manufacturers of tradition-for these too are almost certainly spurious-have as their purpose to insist that true merit is to be found in piety and good deeds and that these take precedence over gentle, noble, or even purely Arab birth.

  These traditions, and those opposed to them, clearly reflect the great struggles in the early Islamic Empire between the pure Arab conquistador aristocracy, claiming both ethnic and social superiority, and the converts among the conquered, who could claim neither ethnic nor family advantage and perhaps for that reason insisted on the primacy of religious merit.

  Here I may draw attention to a rhetorical device very common in classical Arabic usage-an argument by the absurd. It is, however, very different from that device which we call the reductio ad absurdum. The purpose of the reductio ad absurdum is to demonstrate the falsity of an argument by stating it in its most extreme and therefore absurd form. The Arabic rhetorical device to which I refer has the opposite purpose-not to disprove but to emphasize and reaffirm; it is thus not a reductio ad absurdum, but rather a trajectio ad absurdum (if I may coin a rhetorical term). A principle is asserted and an extreme, even an absurd, example is given-but the purpose is to show that the principle still applies even in this extreme and absurd formulation.

  One cannot but be struck by the number of times the black-as also the Jew and the woman-is used to point this type of argument in both classical and modern times. Thus, in asserting the duty of obedience, of submission to legitimate authority, however unlikely the form in which it appears, Muslim jurists cite a dictum attributed to the Prophet: "Obey whoever is put in authority over you, even if he be a crop-nosed Ethiopian slave."30 This combination of qualities is clearly intended to indicate the ultimate improbability at once in physical, social, and racial terms.

  A different point is made in the same way in a late anecdote, the purpose of which is to emphasize the importance of humane treatment for slaves. An Arab had a black slave woman, who tended his sheep. Angered when she allowed a wolf to take one of them, he slapped her face. She complained; and the Prophet, hearing of the matter, ruled that the compensation due for the slap was her freedom. The owner objected that she was "black and barbarous" and understood nothing of the faith. "The Prophet asked her: `Where is God?' She replied: 'In heaven.' The Prophet said: 'She is a believer; free her.' X31

  Some traditions use the same rhetorical device in relation to the choice of a wife:

  Do not marry women for their beauty, which may destroy them, or for their money, which may corrupt them, but for religion. A slit-nosed black slavewoman, if pious, is preferable. 32

  Piety must overcome inclination, though it cannot redirect it.

  This theme also occurs in stories about Abu Dharr, an early Muslim hero who is often cited as a model of piety and humility. As examples of his humility it is mentioned that he married a black woman, "for he wanted a wife who would lower him and not exalt him," and that he was willing to pray behind an Ethiopian.33 The point is most forcibly made by the famous Ibn Hazm (994-1064), who observes that

  God has decreed that the most devout is the noblest 34 even if he be a Negress's bastard, and that the sinner and unbeliever is at the lowest level even if he be the son of prophets.35

  The sentiment is impeccably pious and egalitarian-yet somehow the formulation does not entirely carry conviction. Significantly, Ibn Hazm makes this remark in the introduction to a treatise on Arab genealogy, in which he tries to demonstrate the importance and dignity of this science. In another somewhat equivocal tradition, an Ethiopian says to the Prophet, "You Arabs excel us in all, in build, color, and in the possession of the Prophet. If I believe, will I be with you in Paradise?" The Prophet answers, "Yes, and in Paradise the whiteness of the Ethiopian will be seen over a stretch of a thousand years. ,31

  The moral of this and of countless other anecdotes and sayings of the same kind is that piety outweighs blackness and impiety outweighs whiteness. This is not the same as saying that whiteness and blackness do not matter. Indeed, the contrary is implied in such tales as that of the pious black who turns white, and the parallel stories of white evildoers who turn black." A vivid example occurs in the Risalat al-Ghufran, a vision of heaven and hell by the Syrian poet Abu'l-`Ala' al-Ma'arri (973-1057). In paradise the narrator meets an exceedingly beautiful houri, who tells him that in life she was Tawfiq the Negress, who used to fetch books for copyists in the Academy of Baghdad.

  "But you were black," he exclaims, "and now you have become whiter than camphor!"-to which she replies by quoting a verse: "If there were a mustard-seed of God's light among all.the blacks, the blacks would become white .,,3" The same association of light with good is shown in the Muslim hagiographic literature, which depicts the Prophet himself as of white or ruddy color. Similar descriptions are given of his wife `A'isha, his son-in-law `Ali and his descendants, and even his predecessors, the prophets Abraham, Moses, and Jesus.39

  From both the expressions and the denunciations of racial prejudice, in both general and religious literature, it is clear that a major transformation had taken place. In ancient Arabia, as elsewhere in antiquity, racism-in the modern sense of that word-was unknown. The Islamic dispensation, far from encouraging it, condemns even the universal tendency to ethnic and social arrogance and proclaims the equality of all Muslims before God. Yet, from the literature, it is clear that a new and sometimes vicious pattern of racial hostility and discrimination had emerged within the Islamic world.

  This great change of attitude, within a few generations, can be attributed in the main to three major developments.

  The first of these is the fact of conquest-the creation by the advancing Arabs of a vast empire in which the normal distinctions inevitably appeared between the conquerors and the conquered. At first, Arab and Muslim were virtually the same thing and the distinction could be perceived as religious. But as conversions to Islam proceeded very rapidly among the different conquered peoples, a new class came into existence-the non-Arab converts to Islam, whose position in some ways resembled that of the native Christians in the latter-day European empires. According to the doctrines of Islam-repeatedly reaffirmed by the pious exponents of the Faith-the non-Arab converts were the equals of the Arabs and could even outrank them by superior piety. But the Arabs, like all other conquerors before and s
ince, were reluctant to concede equality to the conquered; and for as long as they could, they maintained their privileged position. Non-Arab Muslims were regarded as inferior and subjected to a whole series of fiscal, social, political, military, and other disabilities. They were known collectively as the mawali (sing. mawla), a term the primary meaning of which was "freedman." Many indeed were brought to Islam by way of capture, enslavement, and manumission-a process reflected in a famous if spurious hadith, according to which the Prophet said:

  Will you not ask me why I laugh? I have seen people of my community who are dragged to Paradise against their will. They asked, "0 Prophet of God, who are they?" He said, "They are non-Arab people whom the warriors in the Holy War have captured and made to enter Islam."'

  Already in antiquity, some Greek philosophers had argued that slavery was beneficial to the barbarian slave, in that it initiated him to a better and more civilized way of life. The religious version of this- of slavery as a road to the blessings of Islam-later became a commonplace.` But the earliest converts who came by this road encountered difficulties.

  A Spanish-Arab author, Ibn 'Abd Rabbihi (860-940), describes the attitude of the early Arabs to the non-Arab mawalf:

  N5fi' ibn Jubayr ibn Mut'im gave precedence to a maw/a to lead him in prayer. People spoke to him about this, and he said: "I wished to be humble before God in praying behind him."

  The same Nafi' ibn Jubayr, when a funeral passed by, used to ask who it was. If they said: "A Qurashi," he would say: "Alas for his kinsfolk!" If they said: "A mawla," he would say: "He is the property of God, Who takes what He pleases and leaves what He pleases."

  They used to say that only three things interrupt prayer-a donkey, a dog, and a maw/a. The mawla did not use the kunya [part of an Arab name, consisting of Abu-father of-followed by another personal noun, usually but not always that of his son] but was addressed only by his personal name and byname. People did not walk side by side with them, nor allow them precedence in processions. If they were present at a meal, they stood while the others sat, and if a mawla, because of his age, his merit or his learning, was given food, he was seated at the end of the table, lest anyone should fail to see that he was not an Arab. They did not allow a maw/a to pray at funerals if an Arab was present, even if the only Arab present was an inexperienced youth. The suitor for a maw/a woman did not address himself to her father or brother, but to her patron, who gave her in marriage or refused, as he pleased. If her father or brother gave her in marriage without the patron's approval, the marriage was invalid, and if consummated was fornication not wedlock.

  It is related that 'Amir ibn 'Abd al-Qays, known for his piety, asceticism, austerity and humility, was addressed in the presence of 'Abdallah ihn 'Amir, the governor of Iraq, by Humran, the mawld of the Caliph 'Uthman ibn 'Affan. Humran accused 'Amir of reviling and abusing the Caliph. 'Amir denied this, and Humran said to him: "May God not multiply your kind among us!" To this 'Amir replied: "But may God multiply your kind among us!" 'Amir was asked: "Does he curse you and do you bless him'?" "Yes," he replied, "for they sweep our roads, sew our boots, and weave our clothes!"

  'Abdallah ibn 'Amir, who was leaning, sat bolt upright, and said: "I didn't think that you, with your virtue and your asceticism, knew about these things." To which 'Amir replied: "I know more than you think I know!"3

  The struggle for equal rights of the non-Arab converts was one of the main themes of the first two centuries of Islam. Another theme of comparable importance was the struggle of the half-breeds for equality with the fullbreeds. The Arab conquerors, despite the teachings of Islam and against the protests of the pious, had, perhaps inevitably, ruled as a sort of conquistador tribal aristocracy. Only true Arabs could belong, meaning those who were of free Arab ancestry on both their father's and mother's side. Exercising the immemorial rights of the conqueror, the Arabs took concubines among the daughters of the conquered; but their offspring by these slave women were not considered full Arabs, and were not admitted to the highest positions of power. Almost until the end of the Umayyad Caliphate, all the caliphs were the sons of free Arab mothers; and it is clear that Umayyad princes who were the sons of non-Arab slave women were not for one moment considered as possible candidates for the succession. Even a gifted leader and commander like Maslama' neither saw himself nor was seen by others as a possible claimant to the caliphate.

  This kind of discrimination is well attested in Arabic literature: so too is the resentment of its victims. As this class of victims-the sons of Arab fathers and non-Arab mothers-became more numerous and more important, their resentments became more dangerous. At one time it was argued-principally by nineteenth-century European scholars reflecting the preoccupation of their time and place with struggles for national freedom-that the great upheavals of the mid-eighth century were due to a rising tide of Persian revolt against Arab domination and that the Abbasid revolution marked their victory. This theory, and the accompanying idea of a new Persian ascendancy, is not supported by the evidence. On the contrary, all the indications are that the Arab ascendancy continued for some time after the advent of the Abbasid caliphs. The caliphs themselves and all their senior officials and commanders were still Arabs, Arabic was the sole language of government, and Arabs still continued to enjoy important social and economic privileges in the empire.'

  Nevertheless, major changes had been taking place. According to a saying attributed to the Prophet, "the ruin of the Arabs will come when the sons of the daughters of Persia grow to manhood." The tradition is certainly spurious, but like many such spurious traditions it reflects, very accurately, the issues and concerns of the time. Those who challenged and in time unseated the Arab conquistador aristocracy were not the subject peoples, still traumatized by conquest and politically inert. The challengers were their own sons, half-Arab and therefore only half-privileged, increasing in numbers and in power, and ever less willing to accept the disabilities and humiliations imposed upon them by their full-blooded half-brothers. As with most major revolutionary changes, the equalization of the half-Arabs began before the revolution and was not accomplished until some time after its political completion. The last two Umayyad caliphs were the sons of slave mothers; the first Abbasid, the son of a free Arab woman.' But the second Abbasid caliph, and those who came after him, were the sons of foreign concubines. The army of Khorasan. to which the Abbasids owed their victory and for a while their survival, was an Arab, not a Persian, army-but an Arab army half-Persianized by generations of residence and intermarriage.'

  The term commonly used by the ancient Arabs for the offspring of mixed unions was hajin, a word which, like the English "mongrel" and "half-breed," was used both of animals and of human beings. For example, hajin would indicate a horse whose sire was a purebred Arab and whose dam was not. It had much the same meaning when applied to human beings, denoting a person whose father was Arab and free and whose mother was a foreign slave. The term hajin in itself is social rather than racial in content, expressing the contempt of the highborn for the baseborn, without attributing any specific racial identity to the latter. Non-Arabs, of whatever racial origin, were of course baseborn but so too were many Arabs who, for one reason or another, were not full and free members of a tribe. Full Arabs-those born of two free Arab parents-ranked above half-Arabs, the children of Arab fathers and non-Arab mothers (the opposite case was inadmissible). Half-Arabs, in turn, ranked above non-Arabs, who were, so to speak, outside the system.

  Among the ancient Arabs there was an elaborate system of social gradations. A man's status was determined by his parentage, family, clan, sept, and tribe and the rank assigned to them in the Arab social order. All this is richly documented in poetry, tradition, and a vast genealogical literature. A more difficult question is how far the ancient Arabs recognized and observed social distinctions among the various non-Arab peoples and races who supplied much, though not all, of the slave population of Arabia. According to `Abduh Badawi, "there was a consensus that the most
unfortunate of the hajins and the lowest in social status were those to whom blackness had passed from their mothers."'

  At his discretion, the free father of a slave child could recognize and liberate him and thus confer membership in the tribe. Under the Islamic dispensation such recognition became mandatory. In pre-Islamic custom, however, the father retained the option; according to Badawi and the sources cited by him, Arab fathers at that time were reluctant to recognize the sons of black mothers.

  This is probably an accurate description of the social attitudes of the Bedouin aristocracy of conquest that emerged after the great expansion of the Arabs in the seventh century and for a while dominated the new Islamic Empire, which they created in the lands of the Middle East and North Africa.

  Among these two groups, the non-Arab converts and the half-breed Arabs, color as such does not seem to have been a significant issue. The literature preserves the memory of a bitter struggle in which the three parties are Arabs, half-Arabs, and non-Arabs. The identity of the non-Arab component seems to have been of secondary importance, at least to the Arabs, though it may have meant more among the non-Arabs themselves. The significance of an African origin as distinct from other possible non-Arab origins lay in its visibility. The son of an Arab father and a Persian or Syrian mother would not look very different from the son of two Arab parents. The difference was in effect social and depended on social knowledge. The son of an African mother, however, was usually recognizable at sight and therefore more exposed to abuse and discrimination. "Son of a black woman" was a not infrequent insult addressed to such persons, and "son of a white woman" was accordingly used in praise or boasting.10