Slavery in the Ottoman Empire - Devşirme etc.

[SinekSekiz]

And I want to say another thing about Ottoman empires disolvment. There is many reasons for that none of them because they were wrong. Because other empires during the time wanted to destroy it. However Empire had its worst blow from Geographic Discoveries and change in economics. Bofore the discovries the land was precious after that it became gold and since we did not go to America and asimilate indians and mayans we did not get free gold like any other Erupeon empire.

Along with Discovery of America came the slavery. Islam and Turkish culture does not have any place for slavery in it. So we did not enslave people and rebuild our country for free like any other of your civilised country. We did not colonised countries so we could get their resources and people to build our country for no cost at all. They took their gold, their resources to build an at the end them to build...

So Ottoman empire startet to get weak day after another. After they shared America they turn back to weakend Ottoman Empire and shared them on table...

So please make sence when you talk about last period of Ottoman empire.

[Piling]

Islam and Turkish culture does not have any place for slavery in it.

Slavery was legal in islamic countries and Ottoman Empire instutionalized with the ""devşirme" system" among Christian populations. So your example is badly choiced...

[SinekSekiz]

Islam and Turkish culture does not have any place for slavery in it.

Slavery was legal in islamic countries and Ottoman Empire instutionalized with the ""devşirme" system" among Christian populations. So your example is badly choiced...

If you can give me one example of slavery in Islam from Kuran I will stop writing any message to this topic.

And about the "Devsirme" system. It was an instutution to help poor families or orphan kids to study and work in Ottomon Empires official structure. Devsirmes has not been taken by force but with will. They have been choosen from poor families and these people were in many high official position in Ottoman Empires. They were even in "Divan-ı Hümayun" (wich is Emperor's consulting group) and high military positions or mayors...

We did not pay to chief of some tribes with trinkets and buy their tribesmen or just capture them. Your defination of slavery is so different then mine. Or you really have no idea of slavery. Maybe you are in deniel. I have no clue but as I said before neither in Islam nor in Turkish culture there is no place for slavery. But thank you for bringin "Devsirmes" up so I was able to explaing who they were trully are.

[Piling]

And about the "Devsirme" system. It was an instutution to help poor families or orphan kids to study and work in Ottomon Empires official structure. Devsirmes has not been taken by force but with will.

Sure ! and happy christian families in Balkans were so happy that their children were kidnapped by Ottomans for becoming muslims, that they used to marry them in their early childhood, for only bachelors were taken !

There is 15 surats which mentionned slavery. No onde condemened it, ecxept for it forbids to make slave a muslim. For that reason, Slavian, Turkish people before their conversion and African ppl were the great favorite products of slavery.
And concerning islamic slavery, just open a book about your own history : what do u think that "mamluk" means in Arabic ?
And concerning Qur'an and sunna the rules are clear :

Surat IV, 3, 92
Surat XXIII, 1-6.


Bye bye, then...

[SinekSekiz]

If you call someone who knocks your door and offers your son a better future and give you the choice of keeping him or sendng him as a Devsirme as kidnapping you do not have any idea abot kidnapping either.

You might read this about mamluks as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk

It clearly says that they were not slaves but captives. Even after they had build their own empire they have kept their name as "The Mamluk Sultanete"... We saw what does america did their captives recently. If you relally think it is wrong to relase a captive when they turn to islam well then I really should not be here anyways. I mean 1000 years ago they had to use internet to accomplish this. Or maybe they should blame them being a witch and brn them instead of try to reason them to Islam. : )

I would say some stuff about that surats aswell but unfortunatly I do not have a Kur'an and I was not able to find them on net. If you kindly write the full surat in english (whitout changing) I would be able comment on them.

However I said I am going to leave and I am. Because Our definatons of slavery is totally different. We should have come to a common point before I bet on that.

I hope at least one of you had perspective after what I have said.

Good bye.

[xosere]

Sinek thinks Slavery in terms of American slavery of Africans. That is what Turks think of because
they watch lots of American movies

That one was very brutal, however, different forms of slavery was instituted in the middle east.
And yes, devsirme was one of them. That was also brutal, but not as brutal as American one.

[SinekSekiz]

Sinek thinks Slavery in terms of American slavery of Africans. That is what Turks think of because
they watch lots of American movies

That one was very brutal, however, different forms of slavery was instituted in the middle east.
And yes, devsirme was one of them. That was also brutal, but not as brutal as American one.

No I meant that slavery and captivity two different things. Slaves can be taken by force agains their wills while there is no reason at all. Captives are generally captured during a war or after a crime.

My american example was about more recent, lets say todays news. You remmember there was many footage that during the invasion of Iraq what did American soldires do to the Iraqi captives. Most sadistic one is put 4 -5 oftem together naked and try to take forcebly orgy pictures.

You think this ,or as your example their actions during colonisations, are exactly same with being a mamluk idea. If it would be something really bad or to be asahmed of or lets say a kind of insult they would not choose it as a name of their country like "The Mamluk Sultanete"....

I expalined what is a devsirme and how they were important and well educated. How making someone the highest goverment official or army captain/general can be brutal? If you think that education process was hard you should read about Ottoman emperrors educations. : ) If you keep saying the same thing whitout explaining how it will be pointless. It is something we proud of actually. That is why people target devsirmes. Given the orphans and poor kids to get good education and lifestyle. It is may be the first form of scholaship. : ) So stop being funny.

Well someone said something about insecurity of Republic of Turkey and everybody lives in it. There is no nation in this planet which does not lives in insecurity and take necessary steps. America is the most powerful country on the planet right now. Look at them. And if we would not feel insecur and act accordingly before you Israel will come to northen Iraq and almost half of the Turkey for his promised lands. You really do not think they will be really merciful to the any races lives in this are would you? I mean you can ask Palastanians about that.

Judgment trough history has to be made by their own time. You can not judge the actions which has been taken 1000 years ago with today ideal life style and informations...

I will give you some examples and I will finish my membership here and I will finish it not because of you are right, I will finish it because I want to.

Everybody admires ancient greek culture as they have many similatiries with todays Democracy. We call them Democracies Father. We alway talk about their laws and philosophy. But along with democracy like parlament they also had slavery and people would be easly slaves if they could not pay their debts or as punishment by law. But when you think of 2000 maybe more years ago you can easly admire them.

Same with roman empire... Every body say they brought enlightinment and change world destiny for hundreds of years but they had slavery in them. They had the arenas to make captives fight to the death against to eachother or some wild animals. But this does not stop us to admire them by their times standart...

Or a different example. Everybody says Islam alllowed man to marry with (up to or more then) 4 women. On the contrary Islam LIMITED man to marry with more then 4 Women. During the age (and before islam) womans were no better then animals when their husbands dead. In some european countries and india they were either killed by people and burried with their husband or just taken to the Palace or force to live ont the streets as a whore. You can easly ask "Why did not they build some sort of shelters for them because there is a lot of shelters in every modern country including Turkey for woman in need?" now. But we are talking about 1400 years ago. You can not expect same modernizm from people because of the life standarts of today and then. (and actually shelter system does not work even now proply how can we expect it to work more then 1400 years ago) People were not even able to look aftert themself and their own how can you expect them to look after a group of woman in a shelter. They would turn in to whores because law enforcment was not as good as nowadays or first ones to be captured during wars.

Or let me talk about cihad. As I said before it was almost imposibble to spread any religion without force so cihad concept was taken as "You might fight to spread islam if you are not able to any other ways" because when feodal countries or cities closed their gates and get back in to their castles you had no other way. This is why we first send a Kur'an an tell them to let people know about islam. (Christianism and Jewsim used same ways as well) Nowadays there is may be hundreds of other way to accomplish to spread a religion. So todays jihad should be different. Now this is why I hate Al Qaeda all the way. Because these idiots does not have any idea about neither islam nor modernzm...

So you can not judge history with today or you can not live today with historical ways.

Turks history is not without its mistakes and I am not saying we are perfect. But if you look at the history carefully (and in your case with perspective) you can not see any other race had respect to human rights more then ours....

I was able to find those surats you were talking about;

Except those who seek refuge with a people between whom and you there is a covenant, or (those who) come unto you because their hearts forbid them to make war on you or make war on their own folk. Had Allah willed He could have given them power over you so that assuredly they would have fought you. So, if they hold aloof from you and wage not war against you and offer you peace, Allah alloweth you no way against them. (90) Ye will find others who desire that they should have security from you, and security from their own folk. So often as they are returned to hostility they are plunged therein. If they keep not aloof from you nor offer you peace nor hold their hands, then take them and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant. (91) It is not for a believer to kill a believer unless (it be) by mistake. He who hath killed a believer by mistake must set free a believing slave, and pay the blood-money to the family of the slain, unless they remit it as a charity. If he (the victim) be of a people hostile unto you, and he is a believer, then (the penance is) to set free a believing slave. And if he cometh of a folk between whom and you there is a covenant, then the blood-money must be paid unto his folk and (also) a believing slave must be set free. And whoso hath not the wherewithal must fast two consecutive months. A penance from Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. (92) Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is Hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom. (93) O ye who believe! When ye go forth (to fight) in the way of Allah, be careful to discriminate, and say not unto one who offereth you peace: "Thou art not a believer," seeking the chance profits of this life (so that ye may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils. Even thus (as he now is) were ye before; but Allah hath since then been gracious unto you. Therefore take care to discriminate. Allah is ever Informed of what ye do. (94)

This is clearly a process about war captives and prisoners. If you read it carefully you can see that it talks about how the man or woman can be freed as a bleawing slave till they pay the neccesary blood money to the families of victims. And this is for Non-Muslims. If you are muslim and murder a muslim on purpose you wont be freed but killed. You can not take one passage of Quran and say that "It is allows you to enslave people."...

Successful indeed are the believers (1) Who are humble in their prayers, (2) And who shun vain conversation, (3) And who are payers of the poor-due; (4) And who guard their modesty - (5) Save from their wives or the that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy, (6) But whoso craveth beyond that, such are transgressors - (7) And who are keepers of their pledge and their covenant, (8) And who pay heed to their prayers. (9) These are the heirs (10) Who will inherit paradise. There they will abide. (11)

The right hand possess has more then many meanings and people who target islam gets one of its meanin as slave. Actually it also means captive of war, orphans that the man and woman looked after and/or household retainers... In here it says because of the owner of the house and leader of the family god will not punish everybody else connected to him.

Good luck to you with your last holly crusade against to islam, turks and free minds.. May god and people in future forgive you...

PS: I am not leaving this site because I am wrong. I am leaving this site because your judgement is cloudy. I am not saying that I know everything but at least I do have perspective and most of the time looking stuation from your eyes and explaining our actions as you can simply understand them. But I hate when my words fall to the deaf ears. You are like children. You close your ears and sing loudly because you do not like what i said...

I did not lose this bet as you claimed. I lost my will and patience...

[Yıldız]

They are brainwash so they dont understand.

[Piling]

No need to be offended just because you face contradiction.

Concerning the Devshirme, just answer : if it would be a social advantage, why only Christian populations were concerned ? Would not it be normal that Ottomans helped in first poor muslims ?
Christians were only concerned by Devshirme because it was slavery and slavery was not legal among muslim populations.

If it was a "social help" for poor ppl, why ALL christians were concerned, even wealthy and noble families ?
But surely, rich Christians escaped from Devhsirme by corruption toward officials. There are also families who secretly exchanged their children with Muslim families, because some Muslims would have like to send their children in Janissery schools, but NOT Christians.

And why ? When you suppose that a poor family would be happy to give its children to an institution where they will become Muslims, just because financial and social advantage, you make the most serious mistakes that could be made in history : you suppose that people in 16th, 17th, 18th, and even 19th, had your own point of view about religion. Christians believed that Muslims went to hell after their own death, because only a Christian could be saved in paradise. Muslims thought the same thing, moreover. So, of course,in Muslim mind, Devshirme was a good action : they saved Christian children from hell and offered them a promotion. But it was a great sin for Orthodox or catholic churches to give a child's soul to Satan, especially against money.

In general people don't like assimilation. Even now, if you propose to a poor Turkish family to send its children in a country where they will lost their faith and become Christians, where they will forget their origin and become greek or Armenian, be sure you'll have the same hostile reactions !

Devshirme was anti-islamic because it violated the protection of "dhimmi." And at the end it was a political mistake, because Christian populations in Balkans, who firstly appreciated the religious tolerance of Ottomans (comparing to Austrian Empire, for example), felt humiliated and above all, it was the most serious who could happened at this time : etenral damnation of children who were converted. For that reason, Bektashi order were populars, because most of tariqat sheltered "hidden christians".

Concerning the distinction you make between captivity and slavery, it is no sense. In all society, slavery institution has its own rules. In Ancient Times, for examples in Roman Empire, it was not allowed to make slave a free borned citizen, except if a man sold himself for debts. In Jewish society, it was forbidden to enslave a Jewish brother. Islam adopted the same rule, and if the Coran insists many times about the fact that it is bad to enslave a Muslim, it is because bedouin tribes fought each others and all captives could be ransomed or enslaved. The 2nd Caliph Omar, that no one could suspect to not be a sincere Muslim (except Shiites) reaffirmed clearly that slavery is not allowed among Muslims, but if a slave become Muslim, it was not an obligation to release him, it was only a pious action. So as they could not take slaves among muslims, islamic rulers encouraged slavery among captives, as Roman Empire did it also.

If islam would have firmly condemned slavery, it would have been suppressed, as the custom to kill female babies, for example. It was not the case, and slavery was general, as in China, African kingdoms, and many other civilizations.

In islamic civilization, so from the 7th until 18th century A.D, there were so 3 sources of "slaves' markets" : Wars with captive ; Turkish or African tribes who sold their own population (captives from internal war or even their own children) ; some population who were kidnapped by traders, in Eastern Europe, for example.

The condition of these slaves was, of course, very different in all the levels of the society :

You could be a military slave (mamluk), in army, or palatial service ; you could even became a vizir, and if you was tricky, you could killed your own king and became the sultan (as Ghurid dynasty in India), or Egyptian Mamluks.

You could be a Eunuch, so castrated and employed not only in harem, as much ppl supposed but also as high political functions, because as a Eunuch, you could not be tempted to betray the Sultan and founded your own dynasty. But in general, I don't suppose that most of Eunuchs were very happy to be sexually mutilated. By the way Islam was not the inventor of this practice, it was Byzantine empire who learnt to Caliphs. But it was largely used in islamic empires.

Except these cases, a slave could have the life of an ordinary servant, some of them had a "familial" status ; of course much young boys or women were also sexual servants. If we compare the condition of a slave in a rich and healthy family and the life of a poor "fellah", of course the last one was more unfortunate. But there were also many slaves who knew a life comparable to the Black Slaves in Southern States of America and French Haitian plantations : For example, in the 9th cenury A.D, the Zanj (Black African) people, who were employed in sugar-cane and irrigation plantations in Southern Iraq (Basra). Their life was so horrible that they revolted, and inspired by shi'a ideology, helped by the ground (Iraqi marshes) they succeed to resist at the Abbasid power during 15 years and weakened for a long time central power.

So slavery condition was radically different according to individual and social cases. Moreover, slavery was not an islamic institution. It was a universal fact, as so long as human economy need human workers, so until the industrial Revolution. Of course, in European Christianity, slavery was soon forbidden,but instead, serfdom was spred among peasants' class. In American and Caribean isles, economical needs were stronger than moral, and at the end, there were racial theories aiming to prove that Afro-American population were not so human than others, or that Bible did not condemn slavery (and that was true).

Progressively, machines have replaced slaves ? I don't even think so. The social situation of workers during the capitalist area (19th in Eruope and USA) was worse or equal than slavery. And even now, most of people are working against their own will or happinness, just because they have no choice. The only difference is that employers has not the obligation to shelter and give food to workers, but modern slavery is still persisting.

[SinekSekiz]

To understand the Devsirme you have to understand Ottoman Empires and Turkish culturel military formation.

In Turkish culture every male -if he does not have a phsiycal or mental problem- borns as a soldire. I have not done my military service but I will soon enough. So every male in Ottoman Empire was actually a potancial soldier as well. So christian, muslim or jew you have no chance but had to answer to military call if you lived in Ottoman Empires borders. This is still the case in Republic of Turkey. They do not ask your religion before they call you to make your military service. If you are a citisen you have to do it after the age of 20.

I gave you the surats you exampled of and my quick research shows these are two of 14 surat which talks about this kind of stuations. If you read it again it states how important orphans are and how we should look after them. Devsirmes was mostly collected after wars from families or selected by orphans... This is a kind of way to look after the kids. In todays world goverment still uses the same system. Orphenages attepmts to give kids different skills to use when they released after 18 and try to find them jobs.

Devsirmes is actually a smal porportuion of Ottoman Empires goverment and army. Devsirme is a special name that states the origin of the person joind is from another religion. Like mamluks they were gayri muslim. So that is why just christians and jews have complaints about Devsirmes.

A small thing about it so to make it clear. I do not now if you ever heard about Ottoman Slap but it is very famous. The kids choosed the train for it comes from Edirne and they were Turks. Ottoman Slap is required a training of almost 15 - 20 years. It is basiccally trained by hittin a olive oil covered marble stone piece. These soldiers sent to front line of the army and they sent with their "Kefen" (a white sheet that you cowered when you buried) and they knew they go to death when the go to war. And they would slap enemy HORSES.

While we were training Turks this way to train a captured countries orphan as a palace guard should not be so bad. And you have to think about age as well. If you are a small orphan you either used as a slave or death in Europe. Look at the opening dates of the Orphaneges in Europe. you will se what I mean.

Another thing about you example is blaming islam for muslims mistake. If islam does not have any place for slavery then muslims or muslim countries whom had slavery were against to islam. Military and educational training given by Ottoman Empire or capturing someone and use them as free human resources is two different thing.

Another thing about Devsirme system is it was not by force. So if a familiy does think they could not look after their kid and gives away to a muslim school its their choice. Nobody can do anything about it. In case of orphan cause of the holyness of orphanege in islam (Allah wants everybody look after them as their own otherwise they are not like holy in a magical or unnatural way. : ) ) official had to collect them.

And I do not care how did Arab countries lived islam because it their choice. But islam does not have any places for slavery. This is clerified by profit Hz. Muhammed as well.

I want to go back to the topic now because It can not be explained any clearer then this;

As I said numbers are not important. Turkish army targeted 350 - 400 terrorist in region and almost half of it eliminated in 5 days. This means this will be wery short and sharp operation so do not panic about it. There is no need for speculation either because we will now all the numbers for shure in max 10 days...

[Piling]

To understand the Devsirme you have to understand Ottoman Empires and Turkish culturel military formation.

In Turkish culture every male -if he does not have a phsiycal or mental problem- borns as a soldire. I have not done my military service but I will soon enough.

once again you suppose that Ottomans in 16th, 17th, 19th century were exactly like current "Turks", which are a modern creation. War is not a good thing in islam, and more and more, it was considered as a job let to "military slaves" or professional soldiers. For that reason, Mamluks were largely used as soldiers.

So christian, muslim or jew you have no chance but had to answer to military call if you lived in Ottoman Empires borders.

Wrong. Jews for example were exampted of military service against special tax. The same for Christians. Devshirme took non-muslim children and converted them. But Jannissary, officially were muslims after their conversion. And in fact, only Balkanic Christians were concerned, not Eastern Suryani or Armenian, or Greek, who were traders.

You can explain all the courage and training of Ottoman army and especially janissaries. It was precisely the product of an intensive education and total devotion to Sultan from slaves who depend only of one man... That the aim of all muslim sovereigns with their mamluks... since the Turkish guards in Samarra, in Abbasids' rule, in 9th century A.D

Moreover you are not logic when you praise the "Turkish military mentality" about Devshirme, because these children were NOT Turkish So these exploits were from Serbian, Croatian people not Turks...

Devsirmes was mostly collected after wars from families or selected by orphans... This is a kind of way to look after the kids. In todays world goverment still uses the same system. Orphenages attepmts to give kids different skills to use when they released after 18 and try to find them jobs.

Devhirme surely recruited among orphans but not only orphans, precisely it was stipulated that when a family had only one son, he was exampted from devshirme, so you can imagine that most of these children had family.

And concerning the fact that Islam was against slavery it is just historically wrong. BUT devshirme was against the dhimmi protection of minorities, and then a violation of islamic law. And in fact it did not last more than 2 centuries, the institution declined and degenerated. But other slaves were still employed in Ottoman Empire : look at the number of slaves living in Topkapi, for example as Harem Guards. Was it because of military ability of Turks ? ... In all the Empire, slaves were sold until the 20th century. And what about barbary Pirates in North African, taking European captives who were sold in Ottoman provinces of Algeria, Ifriqiya ?

If you want to read serious sources about Islam and slavery, and Devshirme, read Bernard Lewis, that you can not suspect of anti-islamic or anti Turkish feelings, and who is a great historian of Ottoman period. I recomamnd especially "Race and Slavery in the Middle East" , "Race and Color in Islam", and all his studies about Ottoman Empire, especially his Istanbul and the Civilizations of the Ottoman Empire. He estimated that 1/5 of population in the capitale were slaves.

[SinekSekiz]

There was slavery in Istanbul and some other locations of Turkey. However this is not because of Turks oppreation over other race. Because Istanbul and other cities (like Bursa and Izmir) were home for many race and religion. You can not keep responsible Ottoman Empire for it because as you said begining to end other races have had some specific rules to themself.

I can not remmember the name of the tax you are talkin right now. Because I came here just a matter of coincidence. I really need to regain my knowledge as I supress them under full of technical because I am studying engineering. Thus I will read the book that you recommend as well. Anyway the tax was not mandattory. You could have given tax or come an become a soldier.

Turkish Army still does allow students to extend the begining of military service or people whom works outside of country can do a very short version of it for a cost. (It is I belive around 7500 euros and after you pay you still have to have the basic training for 28 days)

Of course there was slaves in Ottoman Empire but slavery was not Empires strategy or or a part of goverment politics. Your examples does not prove that Ottoman Empire was forcing people to slavery and its strange that every time you have to state that slaver in Empire was a lot differnet than anywhere else. So it does not make it slavery. At the very least it does not make Ottoman empire as bad as others and shows it respect to minorites.

And about to diversity and sepperatism. If the sepperatism and diversity would be so perfect, European Countries, Northern American countries and States and Islamic countries would not try to become one nation... EU has its own money. It has its own stative rules. It is basically taken steps forward to become one nation. Why would you think people try to sperrate us try to unite whit eachother???

Unification of the similar culters alway is the main goal of these cultures in Europe and America and even in Asia. So their goal iss something else I guess.

I will read about slavery and its history more and from suggested soruces so there is no need to carry this forward.

By the way Turkish Military Office (Genel Kurmay) anounce that the numer of that terrorist rised up to 230 after 77 dead militans last night operation. They said 5 soldiers and 3 professional village keeper are dead.

I think I have red in the newspaper called Milliyet or Sabah I can not remmember. They are saying the standart ratio in this kind of operations is 17 soldiers to 1 terrorist. So I think this is a very succesful and quick operation. However I would like to ask you about this ratio as well.

This topic is stating numbers from Turkish side of the operation so you need to change that numer to 230 on subject of the topic.

[zurderer]

Concerning the Devshirme, just answer : if it would be a social advantage, why only Christian populations were concerned ? Would not it be normal that Ottomans helped in first poor muslims ?

Just for note, Bosnian muslims demanded from ottomans that their children should be taken as devshirme.(So we can say, Infact some families liked from devshirme system. Infact, christian brother of sokullu benefitted a lot from slavery of sokullu.)

Also, It is not christian population, there are other limits too.. Like not taking, iranians, arabs or roma people.

Devsirme was even an unislamic act, infact ottomans took it from byzantium.



Ottomans had slavery, better than european slavery but still have slavery.

[Savy]

Hi All,

I would like to pass my sincere greetings to the participants on this very first moment of joining the forum

European slavery was in the sense of the commodification of labour. That means production was carried out by the slaves; the masters sequeezed out coercievely the slaves in order to make the maximum output. Whereas in Ottoman and Eastern societies slaves were mostly "employed" in household; there was not an intense use of slave labour in production, it was carried out largely by peasants.
Therefore, Ottoman-Islamic slavery did not become as brutal as Western one.

Regarding the Devshirme system.. Prime concern of the devshirme system was to supply the army and buraucracy with the men who had no ethnic-familial loyalty other than the loyaly to the Sultan. By devshirme system, Sultan prevented the fragmentation of the state and averted any possible threat coming to his throne from the army and allying nobility. So, political motives were behind it.

[SinekSekiz]

I am just curious about this. If everybody had slavery during the time and if you say it was better in the Ottoman Empire and Islamic countries why would you make it a problem?

Would it still called slavery after all? I still strongly deny the fact Ottoman Empire did not encouraged it or used it as a goverment policy but would it still called slavery if that was the labouring system of the age?

At the other hand we are far from the subject and noone changed the subject to 230 yet. If this is a Turkish propeganda what kind of is it? GKB (Turkish Military Office) said it is 230...