comparing Roman slavery and Islam's treatment of slaves.

A mister from the quora dare to commit buzg against al-islam by fabricating abd distorting history now let us see how slaves were really treated by Rome,as compared to Islam's treatment of slaves:- slavery under Roman empire (

What was life like for the enslaved?

Under Roman law, enslaved people had no personal rights and were regarded as the property of their masters. They could be bought, sold, and mistreated at will and were unable to own property, enter into a contract, or legally marry.

Most of what we know today comes from texts written by masters. These authors had little interest in describing servants' daily lives and they only present us with polarised depictions of enslaved individuals. They are presented either as stereotypical 'good slaves' or, more commonly, as 'bad', 'disloyal', 'lazy' and deceitful people. Despite the text's elite bias, we get a sense of how differently people could be treated, often based on their occupations and skills. 

Some of the worst working conditions were those in mines or quarries. Enslaved people were forced to work with no respite, in deep, dark and narrow tunnels. The work was both physically demanding and dangerous, with the tunnels risking collapse. Describing the harrowing working conditions in Spanish mines, the historian Diodorus Siculus wrote in 1st century BC:

… the slaves who are engaged in the working of [the mines] produce for their masters' revenues in sums defying belief, but they themselves wear out their bodies both by day and by night in the diggings under the earth, dying in large numbers because of the exceptional hardships they endure. For no respite or pause is granted them in their labours, but compelled beneath blows of the overseers to endure the severity of their plight, they throw away their lives in this wretched manner […]; indeed death in their eyes is more to be desired than life, because of the magnitude of the hardships they must bear.

– (Diodorus Siculus 5.38.1) And now we can see,how islam how actually treats slaves and the best example we provided here is of Slavic slaves or saqaliba:-There were several major routes for the trading of Slavic slaves into the Arab world: through Central Asia (Mongols, Tatars, Khazars, etc.) for the East Slavs; through the Balkans for the South Slavs; through Central and Western Europe for the West Slavs and to al-Andalus.[citation needed] The Volga trade route and other European routes, according to Ibrahim ibn Jakub (10th century), were serviced by Radanite Jewish merchants. (Compare Crimean–Nogai raids into East Slavic lands.) Theophanes mentions that the Umayyad caliph Muawiyah I settled a whole army of 5,000 Slavic mercenaries in Syria in the 660s.[citation needed] After the battle of Sebastopolis in 692, Neboulos, archon of the Slavic corps in the Byzantine army, and 30,000 of his men were settled by the Umayyads in the region of Syria.[4][5]


In the Arab world, the Saqaliba served or were forced to serve in a multitude of ways: as servants, harem concubines, eunuchs, craftsmen, mercenaries, slave soldiers, and as Caliph's guards. In Iberia, Morocco, Damascus and Sicily, their military role may be compared with that of mamluks in the Ottoman Empire. In al-Andalus, Slavic eunuchs were so popular and widely distributed that they became synonymous with the term Saqāliba, though not all Saqaliba were eunuchs.[6][7] Some Saqāliba became rulers of taifas (principalities) in Iberia after the collapse of the Caliphate of Cordoba in 1031. For example, Mujāhid al-ʿĀmirī organized the Saqaliba in Dénia to rebel, seize control of the city, and establish the Taifa of Dénia (1010–1227), which extended its reach as far as the island of Majorca.


Popular posts from this blog

Establishing proof and evidence that Mecca is Macoraba.

Hadeeth does not permit umm al walad

Did umar ibn al khattab(ra) prohibited hajj tamattu and nikah mutah?(Is Hajj al tamattu same like nikah al mutah)