IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

AFRO-TURKS IN POST-OTTOMAN TURKEY

TİMUÇİN BUĞRA EDMAN
Timuçin Buğra Edman, Assist. Prof. Dr., İstanbul Aydın University

ABSTRACT
Although Afro-Turks have been long confused with Arabs, they are people of African descent brought by Arab
slave traders from Zanzibar, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Sudan and Kenya more than a few centuries ago. Therefore,
the phrase “Afro-Turk” is a relatively new word in the colloquial language of the Turkish people. It is true that
the slavery system in the Ottoman Empire was somewhat different from the notorious Atlantic Slave Trade due
to perception of Islamic emancipation based on the Holy Quran. On the other hand, this understanding will not
obscure the very fact that these people were enslaved. Today, Afro-Turks live in different places throughout
Turkey. They are, however, mainly settled in and around Aegean and Mediterranean cities. Only a few studies
have been conducted with the intention of changing the level of consciousness regarding the real identities and
stories of Afro-Turks in Turkey. As a matter of fact, both due to their skin color and physiology, they have
generally been treated as a foster children rather than Turkey’s own children. In this respect, this paper will try to
concentrate on the hardships Afro-Turks have been enduring.

INTRODUCTION
The slaves who find the Gold are all black but, if, by a miracle, they manage to escape from the mines, they
become white” (Valentim Fernandes, c. 1500).
History of slavery dates back to beginnings of ancient civilizations. Aristotle long before stated the system of
mankind plainly: “Humanity is divided into two: the masters and the slaves.” When we look at the slavery
system and its yielding, economical facts cannot be deniable. For thousands of years, not only did people earn
money through selling slaves, but also they did earn through making these people work for them. Historically
speaking, “slavery was a major institution in antiquity.” Excavations prove that “prehistoric graves in Lower
Egypt suggest that a Libyan people of about 8000 B.C. enslaved a Bushman or Negrito tribe.” (Thomas, 1999 p.
25) In slavery, without considering the numbers, there are two sides. One is the oppressor; the other is the
oppressed one. The oppressed one is considered inferior to his/her master. Oppressors have seen this so-called
inferiority due to oppressed people’s skin color, religion, social status, cultural background or so on. On the
other hand, many local people have been enslaved after a conquest or war. Therefore it is hard to paint slavery
with a broad brush. Though many different races have been enslaved, African people perhaps suffered the most
from this evil institution most. The numbers of the enslaved African people easily bewilder any historian. Hugh
Thomas states the numbers of the slaves into history as the following:
Slavery existed in the societies of antiquity, but it reached unprecedented and systematic proportions in the
Muslim world and in European societies and their colonies. Blacks were captured, bought, sold, transported, and
put to work. In the framework of its westward expansion starting in the seventh century, Muslim civilization
operated a trans-Saharan slave trade involving 7.5 million people between 650 and 1900. To that figure must be
added the approximately 11 million. Eleven million is also the generally accepted estimate of the total number of
slaves shipped to the Americas during the transatlantic commerce between the sixteenth ad the nineteenth
centuries: 4 million to Brazil, 2.5 million to the Spanish colonies; 2 million to the British West Indies; 1.6
million to the French West Indies and Guyana; 500,000 to North America (the British colonies, then the United
States); and 500,000 to the Dutch West Indies and Suriname (Thomas, 1999 p. 25?)
Nevertheless, this papers’ main target is not to debate on the Atlantic slavery nor general history of slavery. This
paper concentrates on slavery of the African people in late Ottoman Empire, around 19th century and onwards.
On the other hand, to understand the Afro-Turks’ situation today, we need to understand the state of slavery in
Ottoman Empire yesterday. African people were enslaved in Ottoman Empire as well, but notwithstanding this,
the slavery system in Ottoman Empire might have been more humanistic than the infamous Atlantic Slave
Trade. For this reason, this article purports to demarcate slavery in Ottoman Empire from the notorious Atlantic
slave trade by trying to establish the historical facts. I would also like to point out that academic and historical
sources regarding slavery in Ottoman Empire and Today’s Turkey are relatively few for several reasons. First of
all, both academia and the education system in Turkey and Ottoman Empire haven’t covered this issue in a
substantial way. Secondly, the Ottoman Empire didn’t enslave masses of African people since the Ottoman
Empire lacked vast technology, industry and farming fields. Finally, the understanding of slavery and
emancipation (azat means emancipation in Turkish) is totally different in Islam. Whatever the reason, slavery is

23
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

an affront to humanity. In addition, being a mere spectator to slavery is another shame. This paper doesn’t tend
to underestimate slavery in Ottoman Empire, nor does it reject it. Nevertheless, as it is emphasized, meaning of
slavery was a relative concept in Ottoman Empire. The Holy Quran doesn’t approve slavery though it doesn’t
totally forbid it as well. What is more, the Holy Quran encourages setting slaves free. Owing to the fact that
slavery is an old and widespread tradition in Arabic world, it wasn’t very easy to give up that tradition abruptly.
Another significant intention to maintain slavery is due to wars. According to sharia laws, war captives could be
taken as slaves. Although it doesn’t sound like a humanistic approach, it used to be better than killing these
captives as many armies practiced this during the middle ages. In addition, some Ottoman Sultans were famous
for their vast emancipations of captives taken as slaves. To give an example, Murad the Second emancipated his
slaves who worked inside the Palace in addition to the ones worked outside the palace in 1446. (Erdem, Y. H., &
Tırnakcı, 2004 p. 21) To reify all the assumptions above, it is better to determine some crucial points in
Ottoman Empire that directly affected Slavery. Therefore, this paper will try to maintain the main argument
through sub-titles starting by a concise history of slave trade in Ottoman Empire.

Concise History of Slavery in Ottoman Empire

Ottoman Empire’s military policy relied on expansions through conquests. After each occupation, the treasure of
the invaded land was Ottoman Empire’s main economic income. Moreover, revenue gathered either through the
soldiers surrendered to Ottoman officials or especially the young people of these lands. According to Sharia
laws, these people either pay ransom to maintain their freedom, or if they didn’t have enough money, they could
serve maximum ten years to earn back their liberty. While the young boys are taken through the system called
‘devshirmeh’ (devşirme in Turkish) to be raised through Turkish customs and traditions, girls were generally
becoming either concubines or servants at homes. Especially in devshirmeh system, these boys could be either
soldiers, especially kapıkulları and (part of janissaries), or made work in agriculture. Madeline Zilfi claims that
[t]hey could rise as far as their talents and ability to attract favor could carry them. Indeed, the roster of Ottoman
grand viziers and admirals is filled with these slaves turned potentates. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 101)
It is known that most of these devshirmehs were able to reach to a position as high as grand viziers. This system
continued till Ottoman Empire reached to the borders of strong neighbors like Austria or Russia. Frankly
speaking, this paper doesn’t intend to talk about this well-known history of devshirmeh of Ottoman Empire.
Rather, the main intention is to draw attention on the slavery of African people. It was around seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries that Ottoman Empire’s power started to fade away due to strong rivals as it is mentioned.
Besides, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Istanbul was a cosmopolitan city engulfed around four
hundred thousand inhabitants. Among these people, there were Muslims, Christians and Jewish people as well as
converted Muslims. Not only Istanbul was the midpoint of many travelers and merchants, but also one of the
most crowded places among European and Asian minor cities. Still haunted by the soul of East Roman Empire,
Istanbul was -and still- regarded as an attraction center. Being the capital city of Ottoman Empire, Istanbul had
to tackle with the military burden as well as migrations. This, without a doubt, created both an economic
encumbrance as well as hardships in urban planning. Finding an appropriate or even a job to survive was
becoming nearly more and more impossible everyday:
Both Muslim and non-Muslim migrants counted themselves decidedly unfortunate if they found themselves
swept up in the regime’s population-culling drives. Newcomers to the city, even those of some years’ habitation,
were sometimes expelled en masse, victims of periodic campaigns to reduce surplus labor and ease pressures on
the capital’s resources. Very often it was İstanbul’s policing capability that required relief, as migrant flows were
predominantly male, and male unemployment was an all-too-familiar trigger of urban unrest. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 3)
In a nutshell, in Ottoman Empire, most of the slaves captured as contrabands of war till 17th century as . As
expansionist military activities nearly came to a halt in 17th and 18th centuries, mostly Georgian, Circassian and
Caucasian slaves captured or traded over Crimean Khanate. After the invasion of Crimean Khanate by Russian
powers in 1783 Ottoman Empire had to turn his face into North Africa and Caucasus in 19th century. As a matter
of fact, slavery in the Late Ottoman Empire, especially in 19th century was different. The Ottoman Empire didn’t
acquire slaves through wars as they used to in classical ages. Conversely, slave traders brought those slaves from
North Africa and Caucasus. (Şen, 2007 p.73) Merchants who were trading concubines and gulams officially had
some rights. For instance, as long as these merchants were ‘legal’ taxpayers, they had the right to legal remedies.
This was the relationship of willing buyer with a willing seller. (Şen, 2007 p.74) However, after the
emancipations in different regions occurred, Ottoman Empire had to tackle with slave smugglers as well as the
dictations of England and France. England declared emancipation in 1833 and France on March 4, 1848. The
U.S.A declared it after Civil War in January 31, 1865. Other countries declared emancipation as the following:
Spain in 1835, Portugal in 1839 and Brazil in 1850.

24
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

While these countries were declaring general emancipations, Ottoman Empire was executing privileges
especially to English and French merchants around İzmir, Antalya and Bursa under the name of capitulations.
Therefore, tremendous diplomatic and supplementary privileges were given to English and French merchants. It
was these merchants who wanted to maintain the slave trade to benefit from the lands around İzmir. In 1861,
French ambassador suggested that French merchants in İzmir ‘had to’ import slaves to maintain agricultural
activities since neither French nor Austrian or other Europeans were eligible to work under the harsh conditions
in İzmir save for Africans. (Şen, 2007 p.73)
Consequently, while the end of the Ottoman Empire was approaching, even in the first 20 years of the twentieth
century, slavery was an institution fading away but still valid in law. On the other hand, there aren’t any traces
left of slavery. Not only there are many people who don’t know the history of slavery in the Ottoman Empire,
but also academicians haven’t displayed a particular interest in researching slavery until recently. (Erdem, Y. H.,
& Tırnakcı, 2004 p.7)

Education and Institutions after Abolishment

Education in the Ottoman Empire based on madrasahs, theological schools of Islamic tutoring. This training was
following sharia laws. Since slavery was a valid but discouraged institution, a modern awareness cannot be
expected for those days. In other words, until the mid 19th century, slave trade was a legal business since
Ottoman Empire depended on sharia laws. On the other hand, we can’t talk today about the slave trade in
Ottoman Empire as if it had never happened. First of all, it is because we can’t compare the mass volume of
slave trade that occurred in imperial countries such as France, England, Spain or Portugal with Ottoman Empire.
In the Ottoman Empire, almost all of the African people have been recruited at homes for domestic works. It is
not very possible to talk about tortures, rapes or extreme humiliations in Ottoman Empire since Shariah laws
strictly forbid such atrocities as long as slaves yield to Sultan and accept the superiority of Islam. For sure, such
perception would be against human right today, but that was at least more humanistic than inquisitions applied
on innocent people in Middle Ages. Besides, to some extent, some slaves in Ottoman Empire had privileges and
advanced rights such as marriage or even enslaving others. Regarding the examples given above, education in
the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey has somewhat underestimated the history of the slave trade in Ottoman
Empire. This is because either slavery was a legitimized and systemized habit for thousand years through Islamic
tradition or the understanding of slavery was different in Ottoman Empire. Emancipation was inevitable and
necessary in Islam. For this reason, people considered this institution like a custom or more, something usual. In
addition to these reasons, Europe hasn’t considered the slavery in Ottoman Empire much around 20th century. It
is mostly because of their disgrace on slavery. It would be meaningless to blame a country while knowing that
greater atrocities have been committed in your country. Thus, they didn’t particularly focus their interest on this
matter. Moreover, there used to be neither an organized movement nor any literary movement to represent the
sufferings of the Afro slaves in Ottoman Empire. (Erdem, Y. H., & Tırnakcı, 2004 p.9) That being said, the
Turkish Republic signed the 1926 Slavery Convention or the Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and
Slavery international treaty agreed by League of Nations in June 5th of 1933. There ‘s not much to say about this
issue except admitting that education in both Ottoman Empire and Turkish Republic didn’t put enough
emphasize regarding Afro-Turks in education. Madeline C. Zilfi drops an interesting line here about this
particular matter. She says:
[T]he Ottoman case has not had the benefit of a large scholarly literature to take the measure of popular
perceptions. By contrast, the Americas’ lasting slavery debate continues to generate fruitful discussion about the
nature and legacy of Atlantic slave systems. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 97)

Psychological Resonances
Today, when we move our house from one street to another, we claim that it is very hard to get used to new
surroundings. When we imagine that these Africans had been captured, enslaved and taken from their lands by
force to be sold someone else, their bewilderment can’t be put into words.
They were thousands of miles away from their lands. Neither did they know the language of Ottoman Empire,
nor did they know something about Islam most probably. It was a completely strange land for them. Yet, they
had to cope with it and integrate themselves into a new society. They needed a nation and a civilization to adapt
their lives. At this point, Freud says that “civilization is necessary for the survival of the species, but the pressure
to conform makes it hard for individuals to be happy.” (Snowden, 2010 intro.XV)
We can understand that most of these Africans must have shifted from pagan beliefs to Islam. This conversion
was relatively since there wasn’t suppression on them. It was merely due to Islamic emancipation that Africans
widely accepted Islam. Nevertheless, we still need psychoanalysis since it deals with treating how “human

25
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

personality develops and how it works” as well as providing “theories about how individuals function within
personal relationships and in society.” (Snowden, 2010 intro.XVI)
Therefore, such an approach towards Afro-Ottomans might support more insight into this debate. In the Ottoman
Empire, enslaving Muslim people was strictly forbidden. Besides, enslaving non-Muslim people was also
restricted so long as these people yield the authority of the Sultan. Then these people were classified as dhimmi
(zımmi) folks and they were exempted from enslavement. Yielding to the Sultan didn’t necessarily mean
becoming Muslim; in fact, it just meant they agreed with the superiority of Sultan and accepted Ottoman laws.
According to the documents in Ottoman archives, Ottoman people respected dhimmi people. When it comes to
African people either bought from slave markets or brought by slave traders especially from Ethiopia and
Algeria, it is known that rich people were buying these African slaves for domestic purposes. Some of these
African people chose to become Muslim willingly, which required the owner to emancipate the slave after 10
years. Unlike the slaves in Europe, this limited time of enslavement might have lessened the criminal psychology
of the owners. Besides, some of these slaves were receiving special training to become masters in craft
workshops around İstanbul and Bursa. After becoming a master, they could even continue to work at workshops
or even could pay their ransom to become free and open their personal workshops. (Erdem, Y. H., & Tırnakcı,
2004 p.30-32) More than that, they could marry their masters or a slave could marry another slave. These were
common cases in the Ottoman Empire. From that perspective, the psychologies of both the oppressor and the
oppressed ones were relatively eased. It was mainly because the super ego was in line with Suras:
Therefore when you encounter the infidels, then there is smiting of the necks, till when you have fully
slaughtered, then tie fast, and afterwards leave them, either by grace or for ransom, till the war lay down its
burdens. This is so. And had Allah willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them, but that He may try
among you one against the other. And those who have been killed in the way of Allah, Allah shall never render
their works vain. (http://islamawakened.com/quran/47/4/Surah Number 47: Muhammad or Al-Qitâl Muhammad
47:4. n.d.)
Moreover, it is also stated that “It is not for a prophet to have captives [of war] until he inflicts a massacre [upon
Allah's enemies] in the land. Some Muslims desire the commodities of this world, but Allah desires [for you] the
Hereafter. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” (http://islamawakened.com/quran/8/67/Al-Anfal 8:67.
(n.d.). Retrieved August 19, 2016)
Since the id was suppressed through the orders of the Holy Quran, Africans in the Ottoman Empire didn’t
undergo atrocities as their relatives witnessed in Europe and America. From that perspective, we can also assume
that most of the African people were becoming Muslim willingly when they witness the lenient politics towards
them. However, even that event wouldn’t change the fact that they were enslaved and their freedom had been
taken from their hands if not permanently but temporarily.

Imperialism/New Slavery
While England was demanding the abolishment of the slave trade, a new era was yet to start. From 15th to 18th
centuries, Imperial powers were importing slaves. The numbers of both settlers and slaves improved gradually.
Therefore, establishing imperial models of the motherland became more plausible and economical. Instead of
importing slaves and forcing them to work, the next level of slavery appeared: so-called free labors who worked
excessively, sometimes 18 hours or more each day, appeared. These people were either from local populations or
descendants of the first slaves brought. Once England got enough black slaves, they decided to abolish the slave
trade lest other countries provide economic development through free work force. As a matter of fact, they
created a new slavery institution through using commodities and factories. On the other hand, England started to
observe her competitors such as France, Spain and Ottoman Empire very closely by forcing them to emancipate
all existing slaves and declaring the abolishment of the slave trade. They sent their diplomatic envoys to inspect
Ottoman customs close to borders and Ottoman regulations. The sincerity of Britain here is speculative. (Erdem,
Y. H., & Tırnakcı, 2004 p.91-98) They tried to prevent any slave trade because after the slavery system in
colonies collapsed, Britain didn’t want other countries to have such an opportunity to develop their economies
fast. England knew it very well that it didn’t matter how hard-working they were, salary based labors were no
match against no-cost or low cost labors, that is to say, the slaves. (Bales, 2002 p.16)
Today we see that most of Afro-Turks are very poor and they deserve better education, better jobs and life
conditions. We should always remember that it is not the skin color which defined slavery in the past of
mankind. Yet it was the reality that these people were so vulnerable that they were enslaved. Today, the new
slavery lies on low-cost workers regardless their religion, skin color or ethnicity or so on. (Bales, 2002 p.17)

Religion and Geography

26
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

As mentioned before, the Holy Quran has clear perceptions towards slavery. Moslem people were encouraged to
set their slaves free. Moreover, the Holy Quran has a lenient policy and embraces people who wants to become
Muslim regardless his skin color. For instance Jalaluddin Rumi said:
Come, come, whoever you are.
Wanderer, worshipper, lover of leaving — it doesn't matter,
Ours is not a caravan of despair.
Come, even if you have broken your vow a hundred times,
Come, come again, come. (Translated by Robert Ornstein)
On the other hand, though slavery wasn’t approved by Jesus Christ himself, somehow slave traders depended on
some verses from the Holy Bible to legitimize slavery and thus self-appointed themselves as masters:
1 Timothy 6:1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that
God's name and our teaching may not be slandered.
Colossians 3:22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and
to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord..
1 Timothy 6:1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that
God's name and our teaching may not be slandered.
(http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/6-1.htm, Retrieved August 19, 2016,)
Another example can be given as:
Titus 2:9 Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,
Jesus:
Luke 12:47 "The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master
wants will be beaten with many blows. Luke 12:48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving
punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded;
and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (http://biblehub.com/luke/12-
47.htm, Retrieved August 19, 2016)

From this perspective, some religious differences between the Ottoman Empire and the rest of the imperial
countries regarding slavery are visible. The Ottoman Empire’s milder attitude may have been one of the reasons
why we don’t have any serious records about a total revolt of African slaves in the realm of the Ottoman Empire.
Thus, uprising movements of black people in England, France or America might not have a similar reflection or
acknowledgement in the Ottoman Empire or later in the Turkish Republic. Another reason for this variance in
the reaction of African people and the Ottoman Empire can be found in geographical aspects of Ottoman
Empire. Slave trade had reached to its peak point in the mid-18th century. It was during this time that over 80,000
Africans per annum crossed the Atlantic to devote their whole lives in chains. The reasons behind this massive
trade were the gold mines and sugar plantations of the New World, America. Although the Ottoman Empire,
from 16th to 19th century, was controlling vast amount of lands, neither plantation nor gold mining was available
or possible like in Americas. Thus, slavery was conventionally limited within domestic and small-scale
workshops and preliminary factories. Naturally, huge amounts of African people were not imported. Still, some
French entrepreneurs around İzmir thought just the opposite:
In the 19th century, Western Anatolia was one of the attractive regions. Back in that time, the Ottoman Empire
executed concessions and protective jurisdiction areas (with capitulations) on foreign merchants. Due to these
privileges, state control over the market diminished. This created a stimulus to attract more foreigners especially
to İzmir. Between the years of 1847-1880, the number of foreigners in İzmir rose from 15,000 to 50,000. In this
incident, it was European citizens who imported slaves to Ottoman Lands since these European merchants and
traders had lots of privileges at that time through several capitulations. Zilfi states that
With regard to the demography of slavery, the Ottoman narrative centers on the male slave experience end the
shifting ethnicity of slave recruitment. The map of large-scale enslavements over the centuries generally follows
the historical course of the empire’s military raids and conquests. Like Ottoman territorial incursions, slavery’s
ethnic trajectory moved from southern Slavs and Greeks in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries to Austro –
Germans, Hungarians, northern Slavs, Iranians and sub-Saharan Africans in the sixteenth and seventeenth, to
Abkhazes, (Abazas), Circassians (Çerkes), Georgians, and other Caucasus populations in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. Alongside all of these was an irregular flow of Africans. For İstanbul and the northern-tier
provinces, the rising proportion of African slaves relative to “white” slaves climaxed in the nineteenth century.
(Zilfi, 2012 p. 104)

Factories/Farming

27
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

We cannot talk about an industrial revolution in the Ottoman Empire. Production depended on craft guilds and
masters. The master-apprentice relationship was an essential part of the infrastructure of any guild. On the other
hand, the Timariot system had been necessary in farming. In this system, Timarli Sipahi cavalries were serving
the Ottoman Sultan and in return the Sultan was arranging a fief called a timar. These timariots had the
responsibility of preparing an army to aid the Sultan in times of war whereas in times of war they had to take
care of the lands granted to them. Thus, they were both soldiers and most of the time serfs of Sultans. However,
in the beginnings of this system, since Ottoman economy mostly depended on war of conquest, prisoners of wars
have been used in Timariot system. These people were generally acquired from the Balkan states and raised like
a genuine Ottoman. Slaves were used domestically since Ottomans lacked technology and industrial fields.

Manumissions
Manumissions in Ottoman Empire had a great impact on Muslim people. Slaves generally worked for their
masters around 10 years and then they were set free. Such emancipation could be commented upon as
redemption of their freedom. The Holy Quran heartened liberation. Some of these slaves continued to live with
the family members who formerly enslaved them. This is because they had no better solution to do. Moreover,
most of these slaves were domestic slaves; therefore their workload can’t be the same as their relatives used to
have in Americas. Actually, positions of Africans in Ottoman Empire were more or less like foster children
rather than slaves. Although they were slaves, their slavery was limited. Although there can’t be any excuse for
slavery, history must be analyzed in terms of its peculiar time and demeanors.
Zilfi states that “because abolitionism coincided with Europe’s expansion into the Middle East and North Africa,
it was also perceived as another, barely camouflaged thrust of European imperialism.”( Zilfi, 2012 p.97)
When it comes to Ottoman Empire, “the existence of slavery was readily admitted, but its comparability with
New World slavery was firmly denied.” (Zilfi, 2012 p. 98)
According to Zilfi, the discourse on slavery in Ottoman Empire “focused not on the brutalities of human
merchandising or on the character of slavery’s legacy but on the Ottoman Islamic institution’s purported
mildness, even kindliness, at least insofar as its dominant variant, domestic slavery, was concerned and always it
contrast to New World systems. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 98)
In Ottoman Empire, slavery was more than a single institute. Many different professions have been told to these
people and they acquired different positions among the rest of the free people of Ottoman Empire, though they
were slaves. Zilfi states that slaves
[S]erved as guards and lackeys, porters and field hands, miners, and masons, scribes and musicians. Most of all,
they were household workers, everything from house stewards, gardeners, eunuchs, and wet nurses to
laundresses, maids, cooks, and bedmates. Manumission was encouraged by law and commonly practiced. The
pool of enslaved persons was thus not strikingly different from the freed and free men and women who inhabited
the major cities. Resistance in the form of collective rebellion was rare, and significant numbers of manumitted
slaves not only inherited from their former masters and mistresses but also outdistanced many freeborn
contemporaries in social status and material condition. This was the Islamic adaptation of the region’s Near
Eastern and Mediterranean heritage. It was an open slave system. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 99)
Ottoman Sultans had their own slaves as it is mentioned. The general tendency of Sultans’ was to conform with
shariah laws though they could make different decisions. It is stated that,
In acting against their most prominent officials, whether slave or free in origin, the sultans often sought judicial
sanction in the form of the şeyhülislam’s fetva. Formal legality was thereby observed, but rulers were not
obliged to pursue the shari’ah route with their kul servitors. The sultan’s discretionary authority with regard to
punishment of his subjects was, for all intents and purposes, absolute, although he tended to reserve its full
weight for his own officials and for the askeri class generally. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 102)
Meanwhile it shouldn’t be forgotten that these slaves were privileged ones first because they were serving
Sultans second because they were either soldiers or high ranked officials. From that perspective “they were not
slaves in the traditional sense- that is, they were not shielded by the ameliorating code of shari’ah law – their
personal vulnerability was arguably greater than that of ordinary slaves.” Moreover, their fate and disposal from
their position were at the hands of sultan, but no one else. (Zilfi, 2012 p. 103)
Except from these fortunate slaves, there were other slave classes as mentioned before. North Africans were one
of these. Manumissions were also applied to them. Today, it is difficult to track down the ancestors of people
whether to detect they are the descendants of slaves or not because of their skin color. Nevertheless, when it
comes to Afro-Turks, due to their skin colors, not only they but also people who know a bit about history are
aware of their histories. Although it must not change anything directly, their peculiarity will not prevent those
becoming exposed Diasporas in Turkey.

28
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

African Diaspora in Turkey

First of all, we should clarify, or at least try to understand what the term Diaspora stands for. According to
Joseph Harris,
The broadest definition is the one given by the historian Joseph Harris in 1982: “The African diaspora concept
subsumes the following: the global dispersion (voluntary and involuntary) of Africans throughout history; the
emergence of a cultural identity abroad based on origin and social condition; and the psychological or physical
return to the homeland Africa” (Harris, 1982 p.3)
Today Afro-Turks have become both the Diasporas and the symbols of cosmopolitan İzmir. Most probably, they
didn’t imagine their current position when they first brought to İzmir in the mid of 19th century. We have been
introduced to Afro-Turks in Reşat Nuri Güntekin’s Miskinler Tekkesi as well as Halid Ziya Uşaklıgil’s İzmir
Hikayeleri. Not only through their calf feasts, but also their vivid dances and celebrations made them the point of
attraction for over a century in spite of the fact that not many of people know who they are actually. Mustafa
Olpak, the president of Africans Solidarity Association claims that, today Afro-Turks connection with their real
past is in its breakaway point. Now these people are searching their ancestors and questioning their pasts. Second
generation of the first African Slaves in Turkey has experienced the years when they ignored their origin, but
today the third generation is questioning their ancestors and the places that they had been brought from. (Vurucu,
Çamiçi., 2013 p.10) Today we can find most of these people (except the Africans who have married white Turks
so they become mulattos and later on totally assimilated) Çimentepe, Eşrefpaşa, İkiçeşmelik, Yapıcıoğlu,
Karabağlar, Balçova, Bornova, Basmahane, Yurtoğlu and other surrounding towns of İzmir. There are also some
Afro-Turks in the towns of Antalya, as well. It is also known that a minority of these people migrated to
metropolitan cities in Turkey. Some of these people were sent to Turkey from Cyprus and Crete after the general
population exchange. Therefore, we must accept that they have an incredible history in Turkey in such a limited
time. However this practice is unlike the inhumane racist atrocities that they witnessed in Atlantic Slave Trade.
First of all, today, most of the Afro-Turks regard themselves as both Turks and Muslims. Not all the Afro-Turks
are very interested in their ancestral origins save for some members of the new generation. The members of the
new generations do define themselves as the descendants of Africa, so they are Africans indeed. This distinction
can be understood in the light of religious and educational aspects defined earlier in this text. In other words,
since Afro-Turks have been treated relatively sincere and mild, they have seen no problem in becoming Muslims
and consider themselves as Turks too. On the other hand, thousands of these people married white Turks and
assimilated gradually. Most of their grandsons skin colors turned into white. On the other hand, for the people
who have inbred, very striking experiences have been going around. To give an example, once police stopped a
bus full with Afro-Turk considering these people as refugees and the others human smugglers. Sometimes
people pinch their arse off (it is a racist superstitious behavior in Turkey; people do it because they believe that if
they don’t pinch their arse off, they can have black skinned children) when they see black skinned people. It is
believed that if they do so, their children won’t be black skinned. Afro-Turks always become the luckiest should
Turkish police have a hunch about possible criminals. They always become the first people to hold their identity
cards over. When a policeman checks their ID, he becomes surprised to see ‘a black skinned Turk from Didim’
and so on so forth. Most of these people are really poor and uneducated due to the problems they have
encountered during their educational lives. White states that
Slaves, generally speaking, are more happy, better treated, and less subject to the vicissitudes of life, than free
servants in Turkey [the Ottoman Empire], and superior in these respects to the general class of Menials in
Europe. Under every circumstance, their condition may be considered as consummate felicity, when compared
with that of the vast majority of slaves in Christian colonies and in the United States. (White, 1846 p.304)

CONCLUSION
History, in other words, is not a calculating machine. It unfolds in the mind and the imagination, and it takes
body in the multifarious responses of a people’s culture, itself the infinitely subtle mediation of material realities,
of underpinning economic fact, of gritty objectivities. (Basil Davidson, Africa in Modern History)

Regardless their physiologies, African Turks are Turks as much as we are. We should educate people and raise
awareness about the conditions of African Turks. We have brought them here. We have taken them from their
motherlands. They have become the sons and the daughters of Turkey.
If we were to accept that any man can be a commodity of another man, it means we are referring to an inferior
side of any society. In other words, social and economic values are not stable. Therefore, like one fatty and one
skinny on a teeterboard, one side of the society outweighs and dominates the other. Therefore, we cannot
assume that one ethnic group is more important or valuable from another one. It is true that Ottoman Empire
enslaved African people. It is true that there can be no excuse for such a treatment nor does this paper seeks to

29
IJSSIS VOLUME :1, NUMBER: 2

conform or vindicate the things happened in Ottoman Empire’s history. However, one should bear in mind that
history has to be commented through the facts of its time. Likewise, Edward Said confirms that,
Appeals to the past are among the commonest of strategies in interpretations of the present. What animates such
appeals is not only disagreement about what happened in the past and what the past was, but uncertainty about
whether the past really is past, over and concluded, or whether it continues, albeit in different forms, perhaps.
This problem animates all sorts of discussions¬ – about influence, about blame and judgement, about present
actualities and future priorities. (Said, 1993 p.3)
Therefore, we must seek a compensation for the things done to these people in the past. We must help these
people find their own ancestral identities as well as keeping their Turkish identities. It is their very right to be
known as Afro-Turks and they deserve to be treated as one of us regardless their skin colors. To do this, we must
raise the awareness of our society that these people had been enslaved by Ottoman Empire once upon a time and
now they have become our brothers and sisters. We shouldn’t forget that any of us might be coming from
humble origins or slave origins. Our skins’ whiteness will not ensure that all of us coming from ‘royal’ or
‘noble’ blood. We must seek nobility in our minds rather than our ethnicity or ancestral background. We mustn’t
let anyone to demarcate us like ‘we’ and ‘they,’ as stated by Said:
What are striking in these discourses are the rhetorical figures one keeps encountering in their descriptions of
“the mysterious East” as well as the stereotypes about “the African [or Indian or Irish or Jamaican or Chinese]
mind,” the notions about bringing civilization to primitive or barbaric peoples, the disturbingly familiar ideas
about flogging or death or extended punishment being required when “they” misbehaved or became rebellious,
because “they” mainly understood force or violence best; “they” were not like “us,” and for that reason deserved
to be ruled. (Said, 1993 Introduction)
Finally the questions we should be asking about Afro-Turks might be the questions raised by Dufoix:
Do they and their descendants still share–or have they ever shared–a common identity? If so, what is it? Their
origin in Africa? Their skin color? The transmission of practices and beliefs across the ocean through the
generations? The experience of slavery itself? These are the questions around which the debate about the
black/African community–or communities–has focused. Its main thrust is an examination of the connection with
Africa: continuity with rupture from the origin; or to the contrary, the absence of an origin and the development
of a common culture precisely founded on hybridity. The word “diaspora” gives meaning to both. (Dufoix, 2008
p.14)

REFERENCES
Al-Anfal 8:67. (n.d.). Retrieved August 19, 2016, from http://islamawakened.com/quran/8/67/
Bales, K. (2002). "Kullanılıp atılanlar": Küresel ekonomide yeni kölelik = disposable people: New slavery in the
global economy (P. Öǧünç, Trans.). İstanbul: Çitlembik.
Dufoix, S. (2008). Diasporas. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Erdem, Y. H., & Tırnakcı, B. (2004). Osmanlıda köleliğin sonu, 1800-1909. Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi.
Harris, J. E. (1982). Global dimensions of the African diaspora. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.
Luke 12:47 "The servant who knows the master's will and does not get ready or does not do what the master
wants will be beaten with many blows. (n.d.). Retrieved August 19, 2016, from http://biblehub.com/luke/12-
47.htm
Muhammad 47:4. (n.d.). Retrieved August 19, 2016, from http://islamawakened.com/quran/47/4/
Ornstein, R. E. (1988). Multimind. London: Papermac.
Said, E. W. (1994). Culture and imperialism. New York: Vintage Books.
Snowden, R. (2010). Freud: The key ideas. London: Teach Yourself.
Şen, O. (2007). Osmanlıʹda köle olmak: Esaretten özgürlüğe geçiş süreci. Cağaloğlu, İstanbul: Kapı Yayınları.
Thomas, H. (1999). The slave trade: The story of the Atlantic slave trade, 1440-1870. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
1 Timothy 6:1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that
God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. (n.d.). Retrieved August 19, 2016, from
http://biblehub.com/1_timothy/6-1.htm
Vurucu, I., & Çamiçi, I. (2013). İzmir'de yaşayan Afro Türkler. İzmir: Altın Nokta Basın Yayım Dağıtım.
White, Charles. (1846). Three Years in Constantinople; or Domestic Manners of The Turks in 1844. Vol II.
London, Henry Colburn.
Zilfi, M. C. (2012). Women and slavery in the late Ottoman Empire: The design of difference. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

30