No Islam - What about Slavery?

[legumes]

Big Question regarding a long period affected by a swarm of butterflies. But it's something I've pondered about before.
The first type of slavery in the Islamic world that comes to popular imagination would be that of harems/concubines full of women from many places. Whether something like this would occur without Islam is hard to say. Christian rulers took plenty of mistresses and later in the New World would have sexual relations with slave girls, but not much of the sort happened in the Middle Ages as far as I've found. Further east, there will be Zoroastrian, Buddhist, and Hindu states. I know the former frequently outlawed slavery altogether, but I don't know about the other two.

Next is the enslavement of men and boys, most commonly done to gather mamluks and other enslaved armies. I haven't found any record of non-Islamic states before the conquest or their contemporaries doing something similar. This also had a great effect on both the Middle East and especially India, both of which saw several empires arise founded by Turkic or Caucasian slave soldiers. Of course, the Byzantines and Sassanids heavily employed mercenaries from various bordering lands so it's likely that this process will continue. What this would entail exactly? Again I'm not sure.

Lastly, there's the slave trade itself. This includes the mass enslavement of Slavs that helped bolster the economies of Venice and much of Europe, and also East Africans along the Swahili coast. One also can't forget the Barbary corsairs of Northwestern Africa, who will likely be Western-leaning Christians ITTL, making them far less likely to enslave Europeans. Also, the Vikings are lacking major markets in Al Andalus and Iraq.
From the rough outline of this timeline, it looks like although slavery may be less prevalent in ITTL, many regions may be less economically developed compared to our world at this time.
Have at it.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

Slavs that helped bolster the economies of Venice and much of Europe, and also East Africans along the Swahili coast. One also can't forget the Barbary corsairs of Northwestern Africa, who will likely be Western-leaning Christians ITTL, making them far less likely to enslave Europeans. Also, the Vikings are lacking major markets in Al Andalus and Iraq.

Not sure about the Slavs, but I don't see why the rest would matter much. Genghis Khan had slaves (over a thousand were buried with him IIRC) and he wasn't Muslim. As to being western-leaning Christians less likely to enslave Europeans, I would point out that Britain basically did that to her own countrymen (Scotland and Ireland) after the 1745, so not really buying that rationale.

The problem with any question of "how does Islam's lack affect slavery" is that people often forget that without a single religion (Islam), much of the areas covered by it are going to be competing tribes/civilizations with different religions. And my god is better than your god has always been a good excuse to go to war*. The defeated side is usually either executed or sold into slavery by the winning side. So the "slave pool" has the same depth (if not deeper) as OTL.

*as are scarce resources, due to an expanding population (which can easily be seen as a blessing by the divine)

 

[Jürgen]

Not sure about the Slavs, but I don't see why the rest would matter much. Genghis Khan had slaves (over a thousand were buried with him IIRC) and he wasn't Muslim. As to being western-leaning Christians less likely to enslave Europeans, I would point out that Britain basically did that to her own countrymen (Scotland and Ireland) after the 1745, so not really buying that rationale.

The problem with any question of "how does Islam's lack affect slavery" is that people often forget that without a single religion (Islam), much of the areas covered by it are going to be competing tribes/civilizations with different religions. And my god is better than your god has always been a good excuse to go to war*. The defeated side is usually either executed or sold into slavery by the winning side. So the "slave pool" has the same depth (if not deeper) as OTL.

*as are scarce resources, due to an expanding population (which can easily be seen as a blessing by the divine)

From what I understand slavery got something of a revival in the Mediterranean with the expansion of Islam. It wasn’t that Christians didn’t practice slavery, it was just a far less important part of their economy and culture. It’s quite likely that without Islam we won’t see a transsaharan slave trade and a very limited East African slave trade. This will create much more stable states in Africa, making trade European focus on the trade of goods instead of people.

In Europe the main effect will be on Ukraine and Southern Russia, we will likely see denser agricultural population in the region without states whose main funding was slave raids. Either the local Tatars establish agricultural populations or they rules over Slavic populations of farmers.

 

[Silver01]

Zoroastrian

The Sassanids didn't outlaw slavery

Lastly, there's the slave trade itself. This includes the mass enslavement of Slavs that helped bolster the economies of Venice and much of Europe

The Slavic slave trade while not as big was already a thing prior to 610, even with out the caliphate demand would be lower but it would still exist

East Africans along the Swahili coast.

This trade long predates Islam so it depends how much Arabia evolves but yeah importation of black slaves to pre Islamic Arabia was thing

 

[Silver01]

As to being western-leaning Christians less likely to enslave Europeans

It was not established yet by this pod but it was growing sentiment that enslaving fellow chirstians was wrong selling them Jews was seen as wrong and that evolved to selling them at all it took time for the people to accept these rules as social Norms but I think that what's the op is referring

 

[Silver01]

transsaharan slave trade

I don't see why the amazigh kingdoms or if they become unified larger kingdoms wouldn't also be trading slaves considering that Ghana would not be christian for a time