Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

[Sri]

Parsuram Ji: I am with you on Alexander. Just that what I stated about international boundaries are a fact and their are aspects of his personality that I feel we could learn from ....

A_Gupta: Thanks for a new prospective. Really interesting and I think correct to a large extent.

[shiv]

A Scott Levi paper: (PDF)
https://sites.google.com/site/arunsmusi ... slaves.pdf
From a few years before his book, so those conclusions may be dated.

Ah thanks - just saw it: the paper concludes thus:

It is an underlying thesis here that the escalation of the slave trade during the era of Muslim dominance in South Asia should be understood in the context of the general intensifcation of Indo-Central Asian trade in this period. The history of slavery in India long predates even the early Ghaznavid invasions. However, in the centuries that followed, frst-hand accounts report of tens ± even hundreds ± of thousands of slaves owned by theTurko-Afghan rulers of the north India. While many of these individuals were enslaved as a result of the expansionist efforts of the Delhi Sultans and Mughal emperors, others were forced into slavery to satisfy the tax demands of the state treasury. Still others were motivated to sell their children, or themselves, in an effort to avoid starvation during times of famine or other economic hardship.

The majority of these slaves lived out their lives in South Asia. However, their comparative affordability and availability in large numbers made them an attractive commodity for the international markets of the time. While some Indian slaves in Central Asia are likely to have worked as domestic labourers, those who were skilled engineers were put to work building early modern Central Asia's grand imperial architecture. Still more could be found working in such labour-intensive jobs as manufacturing bricks and textiles, building and maintaining roads, digging irrigation canals, and tending to the crops
and herds on the plantation-style farms of Central Asia's great dynastic families. The comparatively advanced nature of Indian craft production most certainly added signicantly to the demand for Indian slaves in foreign markets.

Of interest to me is the statement :"The majority of these slaves lived out their lives in South Asia.". That means Pakistan.

I have still not seen any reference to "kaffir alleles"

The other point that comes out is that atrocities against Hindus are remembered by Hindus in family narratives but it seems to need some documentation by firangi authors to exonerate Hindus of the accusation that they are liars. But no one in Pakistan, that bore the brunt of this (I presume) is complaining. The need to praise Islam is higher than the need to complain against Islamic rapists and kidnappers perhaps?

[parsuram]

Surasena ji: There is no dispute about there being enslaved Hindus from India that were in other parts of conquored muslim lands. The discussion is only concerning the quantity of such slaves that were taken out of India. The reference you site mentioned skilled labor as slaves in central asia, and also ghasni's claim of having taken 100,000 slaves from Punjab. He apparently took these to gasni. But the claims of numbers approaching a million slaves, with no corroboration (even in your reference, the author only quotes the ghasni's claim of 100,000 etc., that does not corroborate it). As for the reference to the "abundant slaves" during the sultanate period, I do believe that represents the invading muslims' ability to capture members of the free population at will into slavery. The numbers of muslims in that early period was miniscule compared to the resident Hindu population, and as the invaders operated in a state of general anarchy, they could capture free people at will, by force, so in principle, the author therefore refers to the general population as slaves. That was not true. To a limited extent, in that situation, persons captured by force could be enslaved locally, but to move large numbers of them out to central or west asia would have been logistacally very problematic. The general concensus by shiv and others here is that while slaves may have been acquired by muslim invaders in India, the numbers were far more modest than their personal accounts of history boast about. Either way, even if it was one Hindu who was enslaved and taken against his will anywhere, that was an outrage. And if Hindu outrage at this history grows, as it should, then there will come a time of recconing for the barbarian desendants of those who did this to Hindus, and now sit on usurped Hindu lands, both to their west and the east.

[darshhan]

The more I think about it , the more I am convinced with Shivji's argument that the end destination for Indian slaves was somewhere in Undivided India(atleast for bulk of them).Just think of the logistics involved in transporting 100,000-500,000 slaves through Afghanistan in terms of food,water and clothing.And I am not even talking of the harsh climates present in Afghanistan with temperatures regularly falling below 0 deg C.Apart from this the invaders would have to depute manpower and resources just for surveillance and security of these prisoners ,cause you can bet some of these prisoners would always be looking to escape.

Some resourceful king like Timur or Abdali would have managed to transport 10,000 to 20,000 prisoners in one go to Afghanistan and beyond , but that is about it. Even then a fair percentage would have perished midway due to starvation or cold.

However murders, rape and robbery definitely took place on a massive scale.Millions of Hindus had been butchered.Countless women were raped.This was nothing but genocide.

[SBajwa]

Regarding the transportation of slaves you guys are missing some simple facts.

1. It is not possible to transport millions of slaves across in a single raid.
2. Slaves were just like Gold/Silver i.e commodity.
3. Each Jihadi (soldier) only captured as many as he could transport to his final destination.

Thus if 20,000 Jihadis attacked India they could only take back at max 60,000 (3 per soldier). The stories of million slaves to middle east could be as "1 million indian slaves were sold in the markets of Baghdad in 10 years"

The journey back was always close to the foothills of Himalayas and close to the rivers.

The local Nawabs/Rajas/Zamindars provided them with food and water as a tribute and safeguard for future attacks.

More prized slaves were put atop camels.

[Jarita]

The more I think about it , the more I am convinced with Shivji's argument that the end destination for Indian slaves was somewhere in Undivided India(atleast for bulk of them).Just think of the logistics involved in transporting 100,000-500,000 slaves through Afghanistan in terms of food,water and clothing.And I am not even talking of the harsh climates present in Afghanistan with temperatures regularly falling below 0 deg C.Apart from this the invaders would have to depute manpower and resources just for surveillance and security of these prisoners ,cause you can bet some of these prisoners would always be looking to escape.

Some resourceful king like Timur or Abdali would have managed to transport 10,000 to 20,000 prisoners in one go to Afghanistan and beyond , but that is about it. Even then a fair percentage would have perished midway due to starvation or cold.

However murders, rape and robbery definitely took place on a massive scale.Millions of Hindus had been butchered.Countless women were raped.This was nothing but genocide.

If the gypsies could move all the way to Europe, why would it be hard to move the slaves across the Arabian sea or Hindukush.
Even the ROmans took slaves from all corners with the Nubians being the most prized - central Africa was quite far.
There are enough accounts about the slave market in Bagdad where slaves were brought from surrounding regions. I would not say that slaves from India went all the way to Saudi Wahabia which was uninhabitable in most part, but definitely upto the slave markets of Bagdad.
The tragedy is that Indics will repeat the same mistakes again and again because they do not remember history. People want to feed their kids the Kool aide of all is hunky dory rather than keeping the gory details.

[Agnimitra]

I personally know families from Iranian Khorasan who claim to have some Indian ancestry - something that was apparent from a few of their faces too. These people actually seemed to 'boast' the mystique of the Indian connection in one sense, but at other times they didn't seem too happy if one of their children turned out much darker than normal Iranian complexion. Iranian and Afghan Khorasan has large populations of Turkomans - a nationality that is notorious for slave-taking and auctioning as its main and most lucrative occupation for centuries. Its also common in some parts of Iran for people to call a slightly dusky complexioned person "Hendi".

[darshhan]

The more I think about it , the more I am convinced with Shivji's argument that the end destination for Indian slaves was somewhere in Undivided India(atleast for bulk of them).Just think of the logistics involved in transporting 100,000-500,000 slaves through Afghanistan in terms of food,water and clothing.And I am not even talking of the harsh climates present in Afghanistan with temperatures regularly falling below 0 deg C.Apart from this the invaders would have to depute manpower and resources just for surveillance and security of these prisoners ,cause you can bet some of these prisoners would always be looking to escape.

Some resourceful king like Timur or Abdali would have managed to transport 10,000 to 20,000 prisoners in one go to Afghanistan and beyond , but that is about it. Even then a fair percentage would have perished midway due to starvation or cold.

However murders, rape and robbery definitely took place on a massive scale.Millions of Hindus had been butchered.Countless women were raped.This was nothing but genocide.

If the gypsies could move all the way to Europe, why would it be hard to move the slaves across the Arabian sea or Hindukush.
Even the ROmans took slaves from all corners with the Nubians being the most prized - central Africa was quite far.
There are enough accounts about the slave market in Bagdad where slaves were brought from surrounding regions. I would not say that slaves from India went all the way to Saudi Wahabia which was uninhabitable in most part, but definitely upto the slave markets of Bagdad.
The tragedy is that Indics will repeat the same mistakes again and again because they do not remember history. People want to feed their kids the Kool aide of all is hunky dory rather than keeping the gory details.

Jarita ji , The question is not whether Indians were taken as slaves to Afghanistan or not.We all know that many Indians were definitely taken.The question is about the quantity specifically wrt any single campaign.

Yes there was a tremendous genocide which was extremely gory and brutal , the story of which should be told to every Indian generation.In words of Will durant

"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period"

[Jarita]

Bagdad market was reputed to be built on trade of Indian slaves

[member_19686]

That's right SBajwa and that number is still massive even if its in 10 years or 50 years.

Much nearer to our own times as you must be aware, the Afghans used to capture thousands of women during their raids into Panjab and try to take them back to Afghanistan, many were saved by bands of Khalsa.

We were told about how Hindu mothers could have made a difference in their offspring's attitude and Atish Taseer was given as an example!

Never mind that Tavleen never married Salman Taseer, Atish rarely if ever saw his dad or lived in a Muslim society, never mind that there was no mullah who would have Tavleen stoned to death as it might have happened in medieval times for trying to lead her son to "kufr".

You must be aware of the Ranghar half breeds in Panjab, descended from Hindu women kidnapped and they were just as cruel to Hindus if not even more so.

Likewise many if not most Ottoman Sultans had Christian mothers.

Jarita good points about the Romany people and Roman slave taking but do facts matter when we have already established pet theories?

[parsuram]

SBajwa ji: The only point here is that if millions of Indians were relocated to the middle east, their desendants would today represent a distinct ethnic group there. Nothing like that is observed. You could say that they all returned to India at the time of british colonization, in which case we would know them by their narratives and their distinctive background. Nothing like this is observed in India. Given such facts, it is hard to believe that such level of slaves were transported to west or central asia.

Jarita ji: The gypsies have a clear ethnic, genetic identity in Europe. No such distinct groups exist in the middle east that can be identified as "Indian". Well, I take that back - there are the Kurds - now those mystery peoples may be desendents of Hindus taken to the middle east as slaves. Here is a PhD thesis in Human genetics waiting to happen

[brihaspati]

Are we seriously going into Paki genetics?

Shiv ji, the paleodna studies of CAR are ongoing. Moreover, there is such a great similarity in late antiquity in the gene pool that it will be difficult to identify any specific "Indian" content. This however does not rule out Indian presence as abductees. Some more insight could be obtained from gender profiles of the DNA id's - especially the X component of males. There are some ongoing work on this - but it is a very sensitive issue - and hence research conclusions are usually toned down or made extra-cautious.

We should not rule out either direction. Evidence for male replacement in the gene pool [SNA's appearing only from after a certain time while female match comes from earlier indicates obvious] is possible to obtain.

While we wait for that, Scott Levis' conclusions on the case by case basis - actually tends quite logically and used earlier by other professional historians as a technique - based on retrieved documents about possession of Indian slaves - to conclude relatively high proportion of Indian descent in certain areas of CAR - from slaves.

General : if the loss over "rough terrain" argument is used - should it not apply equally to the jihadis? How many of the jihadi army perished in the crossings? Or is it to be claimed that the jiahdis or turks are somehow superhumans who had no losses in similar terrain? Lets say Indian softies wilted in the snow - [but even modern KV jihadis and Afghan marads close down into hibernation mode during winter!] - but how much - what proportion? 25% -30%-50%? Any logical estimates? Slaves from the foothills of the Himalayas or upper Punjab would have regularly grown up with close to 0 temperatures in most winters out in the villages.

Afghans and Turks both moved in summer in their predatory forays. Before the rainy season and after rains. Its not so bad for people growing up in contiguous areas - even on the Indian side.

[Agnimitra]

SBajwa ji: The only point here is that if millions of Indians were relocated to the middle east, their desendants would today represent a distinct ethnic group there. Nothing like that is observed.

Parsuram ji, as I mentioned in my previous post above, there are many families in parts of the middle east who know vaguely of an indian ancestor or two. When I ask they always mention it was a woman.

A separate "caste" of such halfbreeds is not to be expected in certain areas such as Iran or parts of Iraq and Syria, etc. This is because the Islamic culture encouraged such intermarriage and discouraged separation. For example, some of the Prophet's descendents who count as the 12 Shi'a Imams went out and set an example. I think it was Ja'afar Sadeq who took a north african slave girl, taught her how to read and write, made a scholar out of her, and then married her. Her son became the next Imam.

Besides, with just one Indian woman ancestor, the physical features are mostly washed out over the generations. It shows up only in the odd baby today.

However, if you are looking for such a separate "caste", look closer to the subcontinent (or in it), and you will certainly find it. Pashtun areas of Pakiustan clearly have that. I would say that at least half of the "native" population of NWFP are "second-class" and not "true Pathans". They reluctantly admit to being halfbreeds. They themselves will admit it. They also tend to be real bootlickers of the "true" Pathans. Same case with Ranghars of Punjab which has already been mentioned.

[member_19686]

SBajwa ji: The only point here is that if millions of Indians were relocated to the middle east, their desendants would today represent a distinct ethnic group there. Nothing like that is observed. You could say that they all returned to India at the time of british colonization, in which case we would know them by their narratives and their distinctive background. Nothing like this is observed in India. Given such facts, it is hard to believe that such level of slaves were transported to west or central asia.

Jarita ji: The gypsies have a clear ethnic, genetic identity in Europe. No such distinct groups exist in the middle east that can be identified as "Indian". Well, I take that back - there are the Kurds - now those mystery peoples may be desendents of Hindus taken to the middle east as slaves. Here is a PhD thesis in Human genetics waiting to happen

Okay let's assume you are correct.

How many "distinct" Balkan, Ukranian, Greek Christian communities descended from slaves do you see today in Turkey?

Yet this act of slave taking is a well documented phenomenon.

So this didn't happen either?

How much of a Black population do you see today in the various ME states?

They should right, given the well documented Muslim accounts about slave trade of Africans?

Even today the Arabic word for black or slave is "abeed".

We do know through genetic studies that some Arab countries like Yemen have substantial amounts of sub-saharan ancestry (mostly from the female line). You can even tell by the way that certain Arabs have Black ancestry just by their looks.

Now most Indians are Caucasians as are Arabs, this is one reason why such distinctions are harder to tell by looks alone (but as Carl pointed out, if you look carefully sometimes you can), it is up to Indians to carry out genetic studies now. But the Muslims accounts are unanimous (they are sometimes backed by European travelers) in declaring that substantial numbers of Indian slaves were transported to Central Asia and Arabia as far West as Baghdad.

[shiv]

It's not that slaves did not go far. But it is easier to put slaves on a ship and sail them 1000 km than walk them 500 km across mountains and desert. But that apart the point I want to make is that the presence of Indian slaves in faraway places like Arabia or Central Asia actually diverts from a simple fact. That slave trade was conducted by Islamic monarchs in the lands that they occupied. The part of India that those rapine kings occupied first and for the longest period is the area that is called Pakistan. That is where the maximum number of slaves were probably sourced from. And most remained in the local area. That is pretty much what all the refs posted here say - save some mention of Gujarat and some other parts of modern India.

Even today that attitude sums up how the Paki military and establishment behave.

[parsuram]

Bagdad market was reputed to be built on trade of Indian slaves

Jarita ji - In fact the city of Baghdad was built by Hindus at the insistance of the Caliph. He was adamant that Hindus being the best city planners and builders, he wanted them to build his city (that is not the present city, the original was destroyed by the Mongols). anyway, that is how the Arab Caliph got himself his hindu city "Baghdad" (Bhagwan-dayn - gift of God) But the Hindus' desendents are not to be found in Iraq oh- unless they are the Kurds, and I hereby give authorship to this theory of the Hindu origin of the Kurds - to BRF)

[abhijitm]

I guess population of Delhi Sultanate could be ~40 million and in Mughal Empire ~90.

[abhijitm]

But the Hindus' desendents are not to be found in Iraq oh- unless they are the Kurds

Kurdish history is more ancient than the period you are discussing here.

[JE Menon]

>>How much of a Black population do you see today in the various ME states?

Depends where you go of course, but there are quite a few... especially in the Gulf.

[Theo_Fidel]

Vast majority of Indian women carry M* and its descendent Haplogroups. Especially the very old ones not more recent descendent lines. There is the odd one or two in Middle east but there are about 150-200 very old M* clades in India. Kaffir Alleles anyone. There is nothing like that diversity seen anywhere else but places like Fiji, Guyana, South Africa, etc. where known migration took place.

There is very little sign of this old lineage in the Middle-East or for that matter even in central asia. There is no way to wipe out this trace.

TSP is filled with M* and its old lines.

[parsuram]

SBajwa ji: The only point here is that if millions of Indians were relocated to the middle east, their desendants would today represent a distinct ethnic group there. Nothing like that is observed. You could say that they all returned to India at the time of british colonization, in which case we would know them by their narratives and their distinctive background. Nothing like this is observed in India. Given such facts, it is hard to believe that such level of slaves were transported to west or central asia.

Jarita ji: The gypsies have a clear ethnic, genetic identity in Europe. No such distinct groups exist in the middle east that can be identified as "Indian". Well, I take that back - there are the Kurds - now those mystery peoples may be desendents of Hindus taken to the middle east as slaves. Here is a PhD thesis in Human genetics waiting to happen

Okay let's assume you are correct.

How many "distinct" Balkan, Ukranian, Greek Christian communities descended from slaves do you see today in Turkey?

Yet this act of slave taking is a well documented phenomenon.

So this didn't happen either?

How much of a Black population do you see today in the various ME states?

They should right, given the well documented Muslim accounts about slave trade of Africans?

Even today the Arabic word for black or slave is "abeed".

We do know through genetic studies that some Arab countries like Yemen have substantial amounts of sub-saharan ancestry (mostly from the female line). You can even tell by the way that certain Arabs have Black ancestry just by their looks.

Now most Indians are Caucasians as are Arabs, this is one reason why such distinctions are harder to tell by looks alone (but as Carl pointed out, if you look carefully sometimes you can), it is up to Indians to carry out genetic studies now. But the Muslims accounts are unanimous (they are sometimes backed by European travelers) in declaring that substantial numbers of Indian slaves were transported to Central Asia and Arabia as far West as Baghdad.

Arabs are Semitic not Caucasians. The genetic and even the physical charateristics are different. As for Turkey - that is almost purly Turkic with the Kurds and some Armanians as minorities. Once the Otman Empire broke up, the other minorites in Turkey left for their own homelands - Greece, Serbia, croatia. etc The defeated Turks could not hang on to them. As for Arabs and africans, once slavery was abolished, the Africans did not stick around as the Arabs are very racist and dicriminatory. Even mixed african/Arab people are considered black by the Arabs. Consider the genocide/ethnic cleansing going on against black muslims by arab muslims in Sudan. So all black were ethnically cleansed from arab lands. If large Hindu populations were there, they should still be there and identifiable. That is a reasonable to deduce. they could have been all killed in a genocide. The Arabs are not beyond doing that. Even the Turks tried to eliminate the Arminians, killing over a million of them - 1915-17. All I am saying is that if Hindus were there in million plus numbers, there has to be a resedue we can see. That is all. As I said earlier, my maternal side of the family had some ancesters who were in Iraq, but they returned to India after the battle of Karbala in which they participated on the loosing side. I can see maybe thousands of Hindus who slowly, in small groups, returned to India. But very large numbers (millions) requires some explanation on their fate in the middle east.

[Agnimitra]

As for Turkey - that is almost purly Turkic with the Kurds and some Armanians as minorities. Once the Otman Empire broke up, the other minorites in Turkey left for their own homelands - Greece, Serbia, croatia. etc

Turkey Turks are not "pure" by any measure. They are mostly products of abduction and rape. They all acknowledge and sing in their ballads about taking Armenian, Kurdish, Persian and Greek Byzantine women as trophies. Only occasionally in some parts of Turkey do you actually see a real Turkic face. Otherwise they are hybrid.

When Turgut Ozal visited the CA stans fter the break-up of the SU, one Kyrghiz poet read out a poem welcoming him back to the CA homeland of the Turks. One line in the poem read: "When you left us you had slanted eyes and rode a horse. Now when you are returning you have blue eyes and come in an airplane."

[Jarita]

SBajwa ji: The only point here is that if millions of Indians were relocated to the middle east, their desendants would today represent a distinct ethnic group there. Nothing like that is observed. You could say that they all returned to India at the time of british colonization, in which case we would know them by their narratives and their distinctive background. Nothing like this is observed in India. Given such facts, it is hard to believe that such level of slaves were transported to west or central asia.

Jarita ji: The gypsies have a clear ethnic, genetic identity in Europe. No such distinct groups exist in the middle east that can be identified as "Indian". Well, I take that back - there are the Kurds - now those mystery peoples may be desendents of Hindus taken to the middle east as slaves. Here is a PhD thesis in Human genetics waiting to happen

The romany people were not dispersed. One of the theories is that they were bards and moved together.
The slaves were a different story. They were separated from each other. As an example look at the slaves in the US. Before genetics they had no clue of where they came from. All took their masters names and religions. If not for their skin colour we would never know. With Indian slaves they would easily blend.

[Jarita]

Bagdad market was reputed to be built on trade of Indian slaves

Jarita ji - In fact the city of Baghdad was built by Hindus at the insistance of the Caliph. He was adamant that Hindus being the best city planners and builders, he wanted them to build his city (that is not the present city, the original was destroyed by the Mongols). anyway, that is how the Arab Caliph got himself his hindu city "Baghdad" (Bhagwan-dayn - gift of God) But the Hindus' desendents are not to be found in Iraq oh- unless they are the Kurds, and I hereby give authorship to this theory of the Hindu origin of the Kurds - to BRF)

Met a kurdish person who claims that they worship Skanda.

[shiv]

General : if the loss over "rough terrain" argument is used - should it not apply equally to the jihadis? How many of the jihadi army perished in the crossings? Or is it to be claimed that the jiahdis or turks are somehow superhumans who had no losses in similar terrain? Lets say Indian softies wilted in the snow - [but even modern KV jihadis and Afghan marads close down into hibernation mode during winter!] - but how much - what proportion? 25% -30%-50%? Any logical estimates? Slaves from the foothills of the Himalayas or upper Punjab would have regularly grown up with close to 0 temperatures in most winters out in the villages.

Terrain and weather being constant, slaves are more likely to die from want of food or care. Having said that if slave traders were escorting them, the slaves were worth money and may well have been looked after. Still, in rough terrain when mules/horses are lost along with supplies, the trader/slaver is more likely to reserve food/fuel for himself. These are clearly guesses. But then again a lot of this is guesswork.

If you counted aloud at one number per second it would take you about 26 hours without stopping to take a breath to count up to 100,000. So how does anyone reach an estimate of "100,000" slaves? On BR I have often tried to estimate the size of a crowd in a photograph. It's remarkably difficult. Even 200 are difficult to count. You can only guess. That is why I believe that we can only get indirect proof of numbers. Absence of proof is not evidence that people did not migrate or did not travel. But when it comes to slaves and who was kidnapped - it seems to me that the maximum raping of population, looting and enslavement went on in the Indian North West in areas that are now Pakistan. The proof that Hindus were raped, enslaved and killed in the area that is Pakistan is abundant and irrefutable and that is highly relevant.

The fact that slaves were also taken to central Asia gets one tied up in arguments about numbers and proof and to me serves only as a diversion from the issue that Islamic invaders enslaved people right in their own lands, killing them and exporting them and it is a curious fact of indoctrination that Pakistanis now revere those very rapist invaders as heroes. As I see it Pakistanis use the name "Hindu Kush" with pride as though they were the ones killing Hindus there. It is up to us to call their bluff and point out that it was the Pakistanis own ancestors that were raped and the Hindu Kush deaths may well be exactly what Rudradev points out - Hindu slaves dying in transit leaving a bunch of very frustrated slave traders. Proof? Who has proof?

[member_19686]

parsuram,

Arabs are considered to be Caucasian by the way.

Today a paper was published by Rosenberg et al in the free wannabe tabloid studying the Indian populations using a sample of Indians living in the US. The conclusions are not unexpected but worth reiterating nevertheless:
1) Indians are a distinct population. When you do K-means type clustering with K=7 using a panel of autosomal genetic variation at 729 microsatellite and 471 insertion/deletion polymorphisms we see the following populations of the world fall out as clusters:
1) “Blacks/Africans”: Bantus, Bushmen, Pygmies included
2) Whites: Europeans and Middle Easterners included.
3) Indians: from Kashmir to Tamil Nad, Gujarat to Bengal all major varNa populations included.
4) Mongoloids (Asians): Chinese Han, Japanese, Mongols, Koreans, Indo-Chinese and Yakuts included.
5) Papuans and Melanasians.
6) Native Americans from North and South America.
7) The Kalash.
Baring the Kalash who are a uniquely isolated population, the remain categories are pretty reasonable racial categories which correspond to what American have on their forms.

http://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/20 ... -our-race/

What I was getting at about Turkey is what happened to the Christian women and boys that were captured every year?

Why didn't they retain their distinctiveness like you expect Hindu slaves would have?

By the way Turkey itself was the homeland of these people's and the Turks conquered it from the Byzantine Greeks. There was a substantial Greek population and Armenian population until WW1 and even later but wiped out through genocide. Vallianatos had written quiet a bit about this.

Do you have any evidence that millions of black slaves were chased or left Arab countries after slavery was abolished?

Note that slavery was abolished quiet late in the Arab world.

The point people miss when they bring up Atish Taseer or Blacks in US is the different nature of the slave systems.

The Arabs did not have a one drop rule like the US, they looked down on blacks racially but were not as racially conscious as the whites in US. So the men used to be made eunuchs while Black women were used as sex slaves, some of them bore children who over time through repeated intermarriages gradually blended into Arab society so that now except in some places like Yemen it is not obvious to a casual observer how many Arabs have black ancestry.

The same thing happened with the Turks, they would repeatedly capture white Christian women and boys, the boys were not allowed to marry and were put into madrasas and taught absolute devotion to the caliph and then unleashed on the very Christian society they sprang from. Almost none of these women or boys managed to retain any distinctiveness in the end. As I said virtually every Ottoman Sultan seemed to have a Christian mother.

A very similar thing could have been at play with Hindu slaves as well, which is why you don't see their obvious imprints in Arabia today.

[abhijitm]

Voice of India paper on slave trade

[brihaspati]

There is another angle to it : the Pakis and even surviving Afghans might consider the following :

(1) think of the prevalent period of public health and the jihadi lifestyle. The common jihadi would have short life expectancy, lots of infections sapping life expectancy and advanced age health prospects, and most importantly lots and lots of STD's. No condoms at the time in common usage - at least not in jihadi circles. Taking captive women and boys to camp and having gangb would help ensure that any STD's in any one beloved of the supreme would become a shared pride of the camp ummah.

This would actually affect long term potency, and viability of reproductive abilities as well as progeny.

(2) The more powerful would corner the more of captive women, and hence this would also reduce the pool available to the lower ranks. Remember that Muhammad lowered the bandit chief's share in ghazwas from the prevalent 1/4 to 1/5th [khams]. But even then at each level if chiefs begin to take a 20% cut [we know that this was actually practised in terms of women captives - both by Muhammad as well as later emulators of the theology] - we can guess reasonably as to the quantity and "quality" of material available to the lower ranks. This would lead to "sharing" and again gangb. [In fact the Hadiths have stories that this even happened in Muhammad's times - with two jihadis being given the same captive - who was appropriated by Muhammad for himself after he happened to see her being taken by the two to the market after enjoyment].

So even this would increase camp STD status, and possible doubtful descent of any child conceived under such situations even if one jihadi finally takes the mother as a slave or wife.

(3) (1)+(2) would show that the more likely scenario would be a few powerful pious having lots of children from most of the women, and cornered for their personal use. Even afterwards, as even now seems to be the common practice - the powerful pious easily take lower order-serfs-bonded labour women and boys - as non-chalantly as they probably have hashis or whiskey.

So genetics will probably lead to a few male clades, and most common Pakistani being iteratively descended from biological fathers not wedded to their female ancestors.

[shiv]

How many "distinct" Balkan, Ukranian, Greek Christian communities descended from slaves do you see today in Turkey?

Yet this act of slave taking is a well documented phenomenon.

Yes doctor, but the numbers of slaves may be grossly exaggerated. If the original estimates were rubbish then the fact that there are no recognizable remnants now is easy to understand. Absence of proof means nothing either way.

This is not about absence of slave trade, but about the numbers. The presence of cultural. linguistic or genetic proof would certainly aid your argument, but no such proof has been provided other than a reference "kaffir alleles" posted by you.

[Jarita]

There is another angle to it : the Pakis and even surviving Afghans might consider the following :

(1) think of the prevalent period of public health and the jihadi lifestyle. The common jihadi would have short life expectancy, lots of infections sapping life expectancy and advanced age health prospects, and most importantly lots and lots of STD's. No condoms at the time in common usage - at least not in jihadi circles. Taking captive women and boys to camp and having gangb would help ensure that any STD's in any one beloved of the supreme would become a shared pride of the camp ummah.

This would actually affect long term potency, and viability of reproductive abilities as well as progeny.

(2) The more powerful would corner the more of captive women, and hence this would also reduce the pool available to the lower ranks. Remember that Muhammad lowered the bandit chief's share in ghazwas from the prevalent 1/4 to 1/5th [khams]. But even then at each level if chiefs begin to take a 20% cut [we know that this was actually practised in terms of women captives - both by Muhammad as well as later emulators of the theology] - we can guess reasonably as to the quantity and "quality" of material available to the lower ranks. This would lead to "sharing" and again gangb. [In fact the Hadiths have stories that this even happened in Muhammad's times - with two jihadis being given the same captive - who was appropriated by Muhammad for himself after he happened to see her being taken by the two to the market after enjoyment].

So even this would increase camp STD status, and possible doubtful descent of any child conceived under such situations even if one jihadi finally takes the mother as a slave or wife.

(3) (1)+(2) would show that the more likely scenario would be a few powerful pious having lots of children from most of the women, and cornered for their personal use. Even afterwards, as even now seems to be the common practice - the powerful pious easily take lower order-serfs-bonded labour women and boys - as non-chalantly as they probably have hashis or whiskey.

So genetics will probably lead to a few male clades, and most common Pakistani being iteratively descended from biological fathers not wedded to their female ancestors.

Only propped up by oil

[member_19686]

How many "distinct" Balkan, Ukranian, Greek Christian communities descended from slaves do you see today in Turkey?

Yet this act of slave taking is a well documented phenomenon.

Yes doctor, but the numbers of slaves may be grossly exaggerated. If the original estimates were rubbish then the fact that there are no recognizable remnants now is easy to understand. Absence of proof means nothing either way.

This is not about absence of slave trade, but about the numbers. The presence of cultural. linguistic or genetic proof would certainly aid your argument, but no such proof has been provided other than a reference "kaffir alleles" posted by you.

And to support this claim of "exaggeration" what proof have you provided?

Any primary sources for a start that refute these claims?

"may be", there are many such "may be's" but until you show us some primary sources on why you think these were all exaggerated claims the evidence stands.

What about your pet theory about Atish Taseer and the role of women?

So the Ottoman Sultan's or their chroniclers were lying when they pointed to some Christian woman as their mom?

After all it is not 1 or 2 sources making these claims but volumes upon volumes written by various Muslim authors (sometimes corroborated by non Muslims) from Turkey to India and widely separated in time.

[shiv]

The same thing happened with the Turks, they would repeatedly capture white Christian women and boys, the boys were not allowed to marry and were put into madrasas and taught absolute devotion to the caliph and then unleashed on the very Christian society they sprang from. Almost none of these women or boys managed to retain any distinctiveness in the end. As I said virtually every Ottoman Sultan seemed to have a Christian mother.

A very similar thing could have been at play with Hindu slaves as well, which is why you don't see their obvious imprints in Arabia today.

Clearly this did not happen in Pakistan doctor, though you are confident that it happened in central Asia. The same Hindu origin women who were raped in the area that is Pakistan bore children who spoke Sindhi and Punjabi. How come cultural and genetic traces of Indian admixture remain in Pakistan but not central Asia/Arabia given that you think huge numbers went. The quoted numbers may be trash.

Or are you one of those people who believe that Sindh and Punjab were converted peacefully?

[parsuram]

Re:

A very similar thing could have been at play with Hindu slaves as well, which is why you don't see their obvious imprints in Arabia today.

Very well Surasena ji, if you say that vast numbers of Hindu slaves were there in the middle east, and they were fully assimilated in the Arab population and gene pool so we dont see them today. There is no way to argue against this, and that can be your opinon (until genetic evidence takes us one way or another) By the way, Theo has posted (above) that there is the very little of the maternal M* gene family charateristic of Hindus found in the middle east. I for one do not trust any historic accounts coming from the mussalmans. They exagerate, lie and distort the record to their advantage.

[shiv]

And to support this claim of "exaggeration" what proof have you provided?

Any primary sources for a start that refute these claims?

"may be", there are many such "may be's" but until you show us some primary sources on why you think these were all exaggerated claims the evidence stands.

What about your pet theory about Atish Taseer and the role of women?

So the Ottoman Sultan's or their chroniclers were lying when they pointed to some Christian woman as their mom?

After all it is not 1 or 2 sources making these claims but volumes upon volumes written by various Muslim authors (sometimes corroborated by non Muslims) from Turkey to India and widely separated in time.

Yes the numbers are exaggerated. You are welcome to believe them doctor, but I don't. You may like to believe that the Ottoman's chroniclers were very scientific and accurate but to be fair, you also believe in the existence of "kaffir alleles" which makes your assertions very suspect in my view.

Incidentally what about "kaffir alleles" in Arabia and Central Asia? Arun Gupta's link does say that slaves often got freedom or were freed. Surely there must be some of those floating about eh Dr. Surasena?

[brihaspati]

The same thing happened with the Turks, they would repeatedly capture white Christian women and boys, the boys were not allowed to marry and were put into madrasas and taught absolute devotion to the caliph and then unleashed on the very Christian society they sprang from. Almost none of these women or boys managed to retain any distinctiveness in the end. As I said virtually every Ottoman Sultan seemed to have a Christian mother.

A very similar thing could have been at play with Hindu slaves as well, which is why you don't see their obvious imprints in Arabia today.

Clearly this did not happen in Pakistan doctor, though you are confident that it happened in central Asia. The same Hindu origin women who were raped in the area that is Pakistan bore children who spoke Sindhi and Punjabi. How come cultural and genetic traces of Indian admixture remain in Pakistan but not central Asia/Arabia given that you think huge numbers went. The quoted numbers may be trash.

Or are you one of those people who believe that Sindh and Punjab were converted peacefully?

Shivji there are two possible factors :

(a) the initial campaigns and even that of Mahmud were more "successful" raids rather than long term sustained campaigns which are needed to have a regular large scale slave export business. This is the reason we hear more of this "export" on a sustained basis - during the Sultanate and Mughal times. Mughals made it a state enterprise - especially the lover-boy dad-and-son pair of Jahangir and Sha-jahan [boths ons of Hindu mothers and hence suffering from ummah induced inefririty complex perhaps].

(b) if the established Muslim regimes exported large manpower out of their own territory - their own economy would suffer. However, this consideration would not apply if the "sultans" went out of their territories into outer circles from their Punjab base. We know that they did this into modern Himachal-Kangra direction, into Gujarat, and into GV.

So the early export was perhaps sporadic, and not necessarily huge. But the later export could have been well-organized and hence sustained and much higher.

Shiv ji - too much genetic material is shared between Indian coasts and ME coasts. Same goes for the Indo-Bactria-Iran stretch. These two directions have slightly different signatures - but still they are in common. It is most difficult to rule out flows in any one direction. How would we know that a marker very much in common with surrounding population came from slave or free-trader if we do not have conclusive markers for the ancient populations of those places as a standard?

[member_19686]

The same thing happened with the Turks, they would repeatedly capture white Christian women and boys, the boys were not allowed to marry and were put into madrasas and taught absolute devotion to the caliph and then unleashed on the very Christian society they sprang from. Almost none of these women or boys managed to retain any distinctiveness in the end. As I said virtually every Ottoman Sultan seemed to have a Christian mother.

A very similar thing could have been at play with Hindu slaves as well, which is why you don't see their obvious imprints in Arabia today.

Clearly this did not happen in Pakistan doctor, though you are confident that it happened in central Asia. The same Hindu origin women who were raped in the area that is Pakistan bore children who spoke Sindhi and Punjabi. How come cultural and genetic traces of Indian admixture remain in Pakistan but not central Asia/Arabia given that you think huge numbers went. The quoted numbers may be trash.

Or are you one of those people who believe that Sindh and Punjab were converted peacefully?

Seriously you are comparing Pakistan with far off Central Asia & Arabia?

Pakistan was a Hindu-Buddhist majority area when it was first attacked under Hindu control and it used to be Hindu majority quiet late, so of course there was a much better chance for abducted women to give birth to sons/daughters speaking IA languages.

Were Hindus ever a majority in Central Asia or Arabia when these slaves were carried there like they were in Pakistan?

But in the area neighboring Pakistan (now called Afghanistan) which was also under Hindu control, we do see this gradual replacement of culture in addition to religious because the Hindus completely lost hold of it after the Shahiya defeat.

IA languages have shrunk/are shrinking and going extinct in Afghanistan with Iranic languages replacing them.

The post Prakrit IA languages from gandhAra that still survive of which we have a record are:
lahndI - close to kashmiri
khetrAnI - North of Baloch
poThohArI - Ravalpindi and further north
Hindko- Peshavar and North
Shina -upper Indus Swat Gilgit
BashkarIk/gAwrI -Kohistan
maiyA
kanyawAlI -- all further north TSP-Afg border zone
gawar-bAtI -- south Afghan near Bashgal river.
ningalAmI, gR^ingalI, shumAshtI kaTArqala, sAvI, tirAhI all extinct or nearly extinct distributed throughout Afghan and remnant of the old Gandhari
pashaI- gAndhArI descendant in Lamghan region
kalaSha- the language of the Kalasha who were denuded by the jihads of Timur, Akbar, Jahangir and finally by Abdur-Rahman Khan the 1800s precursor of the modern Talibs.

If these women were abducted and taken to Pathan controlled areas of NWFP as many were (SBajwa can confirm this) through Afghan raids, they gave birth to children who began speaking not their mother's Panjabi or Seraiki but Pashto because Hindu presence had been almost wiped out in these areas.

[shiv]

Shiv ji - too much genetic material is shared between Indian coasts and ME coasts. Same goes for the Indo-Bactria-Iran stretch. These two directions have slightly different signatures - but still they are in common. It is most difficult to rule out flows in any one direction. How would we know that a marker very much in common with surrounding population came from slave or free-trader if we do not have conclusive markers for the ancient populations of those places as a standard?

Exactly. As far as I know, in the absence of irrefutable documentary evidence the only reasonably sure method of figuring out mass migration is by linguistic and cultural proof. The presence of linguistic and cultural evidence is a sure sign that some migration has occurred. Its absence indicates nothing, It does not mean that no migration has occurred, but it also does not prove that any migration has occurred.

If hundreds of thousands of slaves were taken to central Asia, what explanation exists to explain why there are no cultural or linguistic markers? The link posted by A Gupta says that many of the people who were taken to central Asia were artisans, builders and brickmakers but that the vast majority remained behind in "South Asia". Skilled slave workers were most likely adults to be bought and used as workers, not as madrassa material for indoctrination. They all vanished without trace? or are the numbers exaggerated?

In Pakistan however we have living proof of all the excesses that islamic hordes are accused of perpetrating.

[Singha]

- gypsies are not a very good case because they moved to europe over a period of hundreds of years - slowly, and keeping a low profile because pretty much nobody liked them and wanted to loot and slap them around.
- egypt was a roman province with a permanent couple of legions based in alexandria. so they had the local muscle to go south and capture slaves, before shipping them by sea. egypt was also a rich source of grain to feed the euro part of roman empire. the decline in grain supplies from egypt later caused untold problems.

[Rudradev]

Are we seriously going into Paki genetics?

Shiv ji, the paleodna studies of CAR are ongoing. Moreover, there is such a great similarity in late antiquity in the gene pool that it will be difficult to identify any specific "Indian" content. This however does not rule out Indian presence as abductees. Some more insight could be obtained from gender profiles of the DNA id's - especially the X component of males. There are some ongoing work on this - but it is a very sensitive issue - and hence research conclusions are usually toned down or made extra-cautious.

We should not rule out either direction. Evidence for male replacement in the gene pool [SNA's appearing only from after a certain time while female match comes from earlier indicates obvious] is possible to obtain.

While we wait for that, Scott Levis' conclusions on the case by case basis - actually tends quite logically and used earlier by other professional historians as a technique - based on retrieved documents about possession of Indian slaves - to conclude relatively high proportion of Indian descent in certain areas of CAR - from slaves.

General : if the loss over "rough terrain" argument is used - should it not apply equally to the jihadis? How many of the jihadi army perished in the crossings? Or is it to be claimed that the jiahdis or turks are somehow superhumans who had no losses in similar terrain? Lets say Indian softies wilted in the snow - [but even modern KV jihadis and Afghan marads close down into hibernation mode during winter!] - but how much - what proportion? 25% -30%-50%? Any logical estimates? Slaves from the foothills of the Himalayas or upper Punjab would have regularly grown up with close to 0 temperatures in most winters out in the villages.

Afghans and Turks both moved in summer in their predatory forays. Before the rainy season and after rains. Its not so bad for people growing up in contiguous areas - even on the Indian side.

B-ji, great post as always.

I'm not sure however that paleo DNA studies will be able to elucidate much on this particular issue, except perhaps a thousand-plus years from now. The sort of halplogroup variations people have been looking at, whether in Y-dna (paternal) or mt-dna (maternal) typically take millennia to be able to "resolve" into a level of significance that is useful in making conclusions about catastrophic population events. So, while they've been useful in debunking the canard of Aryan Invasion Theory, I don't know if marker segregation from relatively recent events will show up consistently enough to draw conclusions about Islamic slave-taking.

For example, the entire AIT-debunking evidence derives from the fact that there is *no* significant divergence between the Y and mt haplogroups of an "Aryan" Punjabi (even a Pakjabi) and a "Dravidian" Tamilian... as there would be, had a catastrophic event of invasion, autochthonous male decimation etc. taken place. By that same token it may be difficult to associate haplotypic segregation events with things that happened far more recently, and were to a large extent "M-clade-on-M-clade" in genetic terms. Also, in another theory of migration, it is postulated that Ms went into CA as well as the subcontinent and Australasia (see http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... n_map4.png ) which may indicate that the presence of M haplogroups in Central Asia need not necessarily arise from the forced migration of Indian slaves there... it may derive from the pre-existing M's who went over there long before there was any Islam.

Also, on the "Hindu Kush ...rough terrain" business... could it not simply be a situation where the jihadi guards got so much more daily caloric intake, better clothing and shelter etc. than the slaves, and hence the slaves died in huge numbers? Such things can make a huge difference to surviving harsh conditions irrespective of the hardiness of the individual. It doesn't have to justify jihadi supremacism or Hindu "softness", any more than the number of relative deaths between guards vs. inmates at Nazi concentration camps justifies Germanic superiority or Jewish "softness". For that matter it may also have been impacted by exposure to pathogens against which the immune systems of the Hindus (further challenged by harsh climatic conditions) were not responsive. I don't think there is necessarily a value judgment on general hardiness or softness to be derived here.

[brihaspati]

In support of Surasena ji - even the modern experience should support this. How many of Indian mothers married to foreigners in foreign nations - are able to impart their mother tongues to their kids - especially if those kids have to interact in the larger society in the tobgue of their fathers. This is about well-observed linguistic trends. I am not extending it to other cultural aspects. But given that mullahs would keep a much more keen eye in areas where Isalm entrenched earlier - it is possible that any attempt by the mothers would be literally durra-ahed out of the mothers.