This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Algeria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Algeria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AlgeriaWikipedia:WikiProject AlgeriaTemplate:WikiProject AlgeriaAlgeria
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade
Arab as arabic peninsula, and arab as basically the (sometimes disputed) use of arab over basically all arabic speaking muslim countries. --Joujyuze (talk) 07:50, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first source used (Selected Topics in Migration Studies, p27) does not claim that the Trans Saharan slave trade is also known as the "Arab slave trade" it clearly states that the Trans Saharan trade is referred to as the Arab trade:
@Wiki Sidahmed I didn't check the source but I believe both are wrong terms. The Saharan slave trade wasn't exclusive to the Arabs; Berber states in North Africa, such as the Almoravids and the Almohads in Morocco, were also involved. TybenFree (talk) 15:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As an African American, I am well aware, as you should be and probably are, that this slave trade is still going on. In 2021, CNN spoke about it while interviewing a little bit. Stop being so political. Report the facts. You are the slave masters in today’s modern time. 174.196.130.117 (talk) 20:18, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How in the heck is this related? This is about when this slave trade was legal. Illegal slavery (human trafficking) takes place in all places and to all kinds of people, including Africans trafficking other Africans. Please direct your complaints to the page on human trafficking. 2605:A601:A900:A701:C4E8:6FFF:FE90:74EC (talk) 17:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What the hell are talking about? There is no evidence that trans-Saharan slave trade exists today. Probably you're referring to Mauritania? Maybe you can provide a link to CNN for reference TybenFree (talk) 11:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trans-Saharan slave trade declined a long time ago, and there is no evidence whatsoever that it exists today even in Libya. Probably slavery still exists in modern-day Mauritania, but it cannot be part of this subject. TybenWelcome20:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article isn't neutral. The Trans-Saharan slave trade involved not only Arabs but also Berber states like the Almoravids and Almohads, moreover, Arabs themselves were victims of this slavery. TybenFree (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that "Arab slave trade" isn't a suitable term. Let's look at the sources:
The source Selected Topics in Migration Studies primarily uses the term "Trans-Saharan slave trade" throughout the entire referenced chapter and it doesn't explicitly use the term "Arab slave trade", it just mentions that the trade is otherwise referred to as the "Arab trade". But it doesn't directly and authoritatively state for a fact that the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade is part of a trade known as "the Arab slave trade".
The source "A Study in Evil: The Slave Trade in Africa" is published by MDPI, which is a highly questionable scholarly journal known for its predatory practices.
The source The Arab-Muslim Slave Trade is published by Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, which is a partisan think tank and not a publisher of academic history.
Now look at this passage from the more reliable source The Red Sea Slave Trade published by the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History:
"Together with the Trans-Saharan and Indian Ocean slaves trades, the Red Sea slave trade is one
of the arenas that constitute what is still inadequately referred to as the “Islamic,” “Oriental” or
“Arab” slave trades that involved the transfer of enslaved people from sub-Saharan Africa to
areas in the Muslim world"
That's not quite right. The term is sourced to Selected Topics in Migration Studies published by Springer. It's a reliable academic source. There are also two journal articles. I'm reverting this change as it removed sources but we can certainly mention that trans-Saharan trade is also what it's called. Andre🚐07:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the additional cites. I've left the Jewish Political Studies Review and the journal Religions. I do not think either is unreliable, they are academic journals. However since we have a lot of other cites here, I suppose we could remove them if they are really that bothersome, but it should be a moot point since the term is so well-attested.
I was slightly overeager because at least 1 or 2 of those was about the Zanzibar slave trade or the Indian ocean slave trade, but we still have 8 for "Arab" including the Springer one, and 3 for "Islamic." I'm pretty sure the Sudan one belongs here even though it doesn't use the word "trans-Saharan." I expect it'll take you some time to peruse through all of those. I haven't read them all in depth but enough to see it'll substantiate the name, but particularly "Bondage across the Ocean: Indentured Labor in the Indian Ocean" even though Indian Ocean is in the title, it does mention the Saharan route in the context of the slave trade. It states that between 1400 and 1900, approximately 9 million slaves were transported via the trans-Saharan route, with 3.6 million being exported. It discusses the role of Muslim merchants in conveying slaves across the Sahara Desert, and it notes that traditional imports of domestic slaves to Arabia contributed to the increasing slave trade between inland Africa and the Omani plantations along the east coast. Additionally, it highlights the immigration of Swahili and Hadrami Arabs to the region, linking them to the expanding slave trade. Please let me know if you have any questions Andre🚐08:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am absolutely not engaged in any OR or SYNTH, how do you figure that? All of the sources indeed do describe the Trans-Saharan slave trade as part of the Arab slave trade, in extensive depth. I'm not disputing that other groups other than Arabs and Muslim merchants were involved, but it's still called the Arab slave trade.
As eminent Sudanese historian Yusuf Fadl Hasan notes, in "SOME ASPECTS OF THE ARAB SLAVE TRADE FROM THE SUDAN," Arabs were primarily traders rather than conquerors in sub-Saharan Africa. The African slave trade was largely managed by Arabs or individuals of mixed Arab and African descent. The term "Arab" is used broadly to include Arabic-speaking individuals of various origins, including non-Arab Muslims and dhimmis (Christians or Jews). Slaves were often sourced from pagan regions near Dar Fur, Bornu, and Dar Silla, with significant numbers being transported to markets in Egypt and Arabia. The Jallaba, a group of Arabized traders, played a prominent role in this trade, particularly in the regions of Kordufan and Dar Fur. The Arab slave trade was significant in meeting the demand for slaves in the Islamic world. The trade routes were already established by Africans, and the Arabs faced little organized opposition in their operations. The slave trade in the Sudan was ultimately curtailed by the Anglo-Egyptian slave trade convention in 1877, which aimed to eliminate the trade by 1889. Although the trade persisted for some time, the sealing off of roads used for slave transport contributed to its decline.
Chapter 5 "Arabian Agricultural Slavery in the Longue Durée," in Slavery, Agriculture, and Malaria in the Arabian Peninsula, Benjamin Reilly, Ohio University Press, discusses the Arab slave trade primarily in the context of agricultural slavery in the Arabian Peninsula. It highlights that a system of African servile agriculture persisted from at least 1800. The document also notes that the slave trade into Arabia was significant in the first half of the nineteenth century, with British archival records indicating that Muscat received a substantial number of slaves annually. For instance, Major Wilson reported that Muscat alone received between 1,400 to 1,700 slaves each year during that period. It mentions the Saharan region in the context of the trans-Saharan slave trade, noting that an average of 5,000 Sudan Africans entered the MeNA region via this trade from 650–1600 CE, with a peak of 8,700 per year during the period from 900–1100 CE.
"Islamization in Sudan: A Critical Assessment," Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban, Middle East Journal, discusses the Arab slave trade in the context of the Turco-Egyptian involvement in Sudan during the nineteenth century. It notes that despite the British outlawing the Atlantic slave trade in 1833, the Turco-Egyptian troops continued to extract approximately 20,000 slaves annually from Sudan. This practice was often associated with the ivory trade and was referred to as "ghazwa," which was framed as military campaigns against non-Muslim groups. It also notes that the demand for domestic slaves in Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, and Arabia was continuous, and slavery was practiced in various regions, including the Muslim north and the "pagan" south of Sudan. Andre🚐09:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources also discuss the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade as part of the slave trades of Mali Empire, Kanem-Bornu Empire, Songhai Empire, and Ghana Empire in extensive depth. You are trying to phrase the article as if the trade was not a multi-ethnic enterprise. Alfedda (talk) 10:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, that's not what I'm implying at all. The article clearly states in its current text, "The Arabs managed and operated the trans-Saharan slave trade, although Berbers were also actively involved." If you want to add the other sources to explain how other peoples were actively involved, go right ahead. Just don't remove the discussion of the Arabs. Andre🚐10:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, your edits got reverted, not by me, because you added them to the lead section. Lead summarizes body so you should add them to the body first. Andre🚐20:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm puzzled that the first paragraph of the article says "The trans-Saharan slave trade was... also known as the Islamic slave trade." As pointed out above "Islamic slave trade" is an obsolete term used to describe various phenomena, which includes, but is not limited to Trans-Saharan slave trade. Further, as the article itself attests, Trans-Saharan slave trade was practiced by many groups, of which Muslims were one. This statement in the lead is misleading.VR(Please ping on reply)09:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the first source[6] and it mentions "Islamic slave trade" only once, and in the following sentence: "Islamic slave trade to Asia and of the Dar el Islam in North and East Africa". Asia is nowhere near the Sahara, and the East African slave trade was also a distinct concept.
The second source[7] also only mentions it only once and this is the sentence: "The historic evidence indicates that in the areas of Africa that were part of the older Islamic slave trades there was domestic slavery, but it is unclear whether domestic slavery was a cause or a consequence of the external slave trades." I don't see this sentence equating Trans-Saharan slave trade to "Islamic slave trade".
I was unable to access the third source, but I do note the title says "The Mediterranean Islamic slave trade out of Africa", not "Islamic slave trade". There are two points:
That a part of the Trans-Saharan slave trade may have been called "Islamic slave trade" does not mean the whole of Trans-Saharan slave trade is synonymous with "Islamic slave trade".
Secondly, in the term "Mediterranean Islamic slave trade out of Africa" if you drop either the "Mediterranean" or "out of Africa", the meaning changes. If you drop "Mediterranean", then you include Indian Ocean slave trade (the Mediterranean is not a part of the Indian Ocean); if you drop "out of Africa" then you include Barbary slave trade.
It's the other way around - the Trans-Saharan slave trade was part of the Arab or Islamic slave trade. I'll look at the sources you weren't able to access and get you better quotes later. Andre🚐20:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't an "Arab slave trade," and even "Islamic" isn't quite appropriate, even though I replaced "Arab" with "Islamic" in January to reach a compromise. Just because it's "sourced" doesn't mean it should be included, especially in the lead section. It's problematic and lacks neutrality. TybenWelcome20:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alternate names should be included in the lead section because it helps explain to readers what vocabulary we are dealing with. The article text can explain in depth that the name is a bit of a misnomer. Andre🚐20:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
