Banian was a name for indians. They were very active sailors and traders in the Indian ocean. I am pretty certain writers from 1800s were not gathering around analyzing physical appearances to determine what ppls ethnic or cultural origins are. They spoke to them and asked and those people told them what they are. There are cases of Somalis taking european captives though so you are not wrong.
Also slavery was a business thing not a race thing, especially on the Muslim side of it
Mentioned a bit about this before and it had nothing to do with being madow. There are cases and instances of various groups being captured and sold even arabs, europeans, asians etc. Sometimes even other Muslims being captured by other bandit Muslims acting outside the law, looking for a quick buck to make
Compared to the West. Slavery in Muslim world was a small trickle trade drawn from all types of races/groups highly individualized only rich elites could afford a few and rarely used as a means of crop production; slaves were not the economic engine behind Muslim economies until the 19th century boom which was a due to a capitalist market demand introduced and created by the Portuguese. They had far greater treatment, rights and higher social mobility than in European systems.
As such from ''Slave to Sultan'', was pretty common occurrence throughout the Muslim world.
Even in the Muslim history of Horn of Africa you see this happen, Habash slave of Nur Ibn Mujahid became the Emir of Harar after his passing. This was pretty much unheard of in both Ethiopian and European slave systems.
There is nothing nice about being a slave of either Arabs, Europeans or even Africans(Like Somalis or Habeshas). Slavery, mild or otherwise, is a crime against a human being. But it would be historically and morally inaccurate not to cite that there is a serious difference between vassalship and Chattelship.
Somali captives never figured significantly in the slave trade at any point in time, the biggest reason is that they never captured and sold eachother.
the Somali never figured significantly in the slave trade as captives, they are generally ignored in the literature of the African diaspora.
Also because of our diplomatic/political and economic position in the Indian Ocean and red sea, made us able secure protection for eachother.
Somalis didnt enslave each other he most likely indian. I remember seeing another report about abanian slave in mogadishu too
Correct. Somalis did not enslave each-other as it was forbidden in the xeer laws mainly because most Somalis were socio-economically tied to each-other , so it would be like taking a blood relative who you are economically reliant on, whereas in other groups another person from a seperate village was a stranger and economically disconnected.
The Somali customary law forbade enslavement of fellow Somali, thus the enslaved people were all categorised as foreigners.
A big contrast to this is oromo's who are heterogenous, they enslaved and sold off other Oromos in droves for profit and their costumary law did not forbid it. Because to them another oromo was a de-tached stranger and it did not hurt them.
slavs got cooked. Probably why they hate arabta
