Talk:Black Guard

Hm.

Why would they be so loyal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.36.46 (talk) 11:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

150,000 is a too exaggerated number

There is no possibly way that the black guard numbered 150,000 this a huge exaggerated number, first of all why would a personal guard of the king be larger than the size of the entire Moroccan army, the Moroccan army at those ages was probably not more than 100,000. How or why would there be a personal guard numbering 150,000! guards? And it is a personal guard that means it would never be a very high number.

It is also impossible if you look at the demographic history of Morocco, Morocco has now a population of 35 million, in 1950 it was 10 million, in 1800 it was 3-4 million(Africans: the history of a continent), in 1700 it was probably 3 million.

So an army of 150,000 means 5% of the total population of Morocco was part of the Black Guard. That means 10% of the male population of Morocco was a member of the Black Guard. This is ofcourse a too high number, I think the Black Guard was maybe 150 or at its hight 1,500. Even 15,000 is impossible, Where did all these guards live?

The biggest city in Morocco was Casablanca in 1921 and had a population of 102,000(Cities and economic development: from the dawn of history to the present) in 1700 probably no moroccan cities had a population higher then 40,000.DragonTiger23 (talk) 08:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Understand. maybe we should consider to take a look further through morocco's population history to measure the correct number. and how the method of those recording it. are they include the Garrison soldiers as population or not139.192.143.74 (talk) 22:54, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

This is the second Morocco page with next to no References

I don't know who is makeing these morocco related pages but the things put down have to be substantiated. There is no source for well over 3/4 of the content. The last page I came from had none at all!

Please fix this, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.89.123.154 (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Merger with Abid al-Bukhari

I went ahead and merged the pages as no-one was objecting and it had been a year. There was next to nothing on the abid al-bukhari page and the main source was Encyclopedia Brittanica which I have and could verify and ad into this page. speednat (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Slaves not indentured servants

The Black Guards' and their families were slaves, not working as indentured servants, as claimed.Royalcourtier (talk) 06:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Black Slave Drivers

According to Giles Milton Author of White Gold Ismail Ibn Sharif used black slave drivers? Any Comments?Yonk (talk) 01:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Racism

Where are reliable sources to support these claims that All Africans were made slaves in Morocco? Where is the evidence the Africans were slaves in the Moor army? If there are no reliable sources in academia that supports such claims it should all be removed. Madkeyra12 (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Madkeyra12, the information is accompanied by citations to reliable sources, as is required by Wikipedia. In this case, the statements most relevant to what you're saying are supported in particular by professor Chouki El Hamel's extensive studies published on this subject, but the general information is easily verified by other sources, whether cited here or not.

You're also paraphrasing the information in a somewhat exaggerated way: the article says that Isma'il gave orders to enslave all Black Africans in his territories, but that doesn't mean that they all ended being so, though certainly a very large number where. Perhaps there's a better wording for this, but any phrasing must reflect what reliable sources say. It is inappropriate to arbitrarily delete text across the article as you did in your recent edits. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm having a look at the text of the sources (mainly El Hamel) to ensure that the article's wording is correct. I'll make changes if the text doesn't fully and correctly reflect the details of what is said there. R Prazeres (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

After reading the source, the relevant statement in the article looks correct. Since it's a sensitive topic, it's worth providing some of the original source material here for any future editors to consult. For clarity, here is the first sentence currently at the beginning of the article's second section: "In 1699, Sultan Isma‘il gave orders to enslave all black Africans in Morocco, even those who were born free or who were Muslim, and, consequently, he violated two of the central tenets of Islamic law concerning slavery and generated a potent new form of racist discourse in the region that associated black Africans with slavery.[citation to El Hamel 2002]" Here are the most relevant passages from El Hamel's source that support this statement:

As stated earlier, Islam brought three fundamental changes to ancient slavery: first it encouraged the manumission of the slaves; secondly, it decreed that the child of a concubine and her master was legally free; and lastly, it banned the enslavement of free Muslim persons. In 1699, however, Mawlay Isma'il gave orders to enslave all blacks including the haratin; thus, generating an unprecedented racial discourse in Morocco. The debate that was generated was not so much about defending a group of people from being enslaved, but rather of defending the Islamic tenet that makes it illegal to enslave a fellow Muslim. This was a crucial turning point in Moroccan history, shaping the future of racial relations and black identity. Official texts were created to justify the legality of the compulsory buying of slaves from their owners and the enslavement of the haratin. Every register of slaves was annexed by a long list of names and signatures of the learned men and another list of notaries. The haratin, being conscious of their status and 'identity', refused to accept the servile status which has been attributed to them and hence refused to submit to the order of the Sultan. This self-perception is expressed in the protests of the haratin of Fez in the year 1110/1699. Similarly in other regions, the haratin of Tetouan to the north of Fez, for example, contested the project of the Sultan and took refuge in the sanctuary of Ibn Mashish. These protests slowed down the progress of the Sultan's project, yet they were not strong enough to counteract it.

(...)

Az-Zayani, a nineteenth century Moroccan chronicler, in his book at-Turjuman al-Mu'rib, said Sultan Isma'il gave the order to collect all black people. No black person was spared whether the person was slave or free black or hartani. In one year, 3,000 blacks were gathered from the area around Marrakech alone. There, the colour of the skin was reason enough for a person to be enslaved and enrolled in the army of the Sultan. Regardless of the nature of Mawlay Isma'il's intent, his decree was unprecedented in the history of Islamic Morocco. It posed a challenge to the first and third fundamentals that Islam had introduced to reform pre-Islamic slavery. Cognisant of a potential confrontation with Morocco's ulama, Mawlay Isma'il had prepared a legal defence of his actions based on interpretations of shari'a precedents.

(...)

Mawlay Isma'il's decision to forcibly enlist all black people in his army seems to be political. What is more, his policy seems to have determined the future image of blacks in Morocco. His initiatives gave rise to cruel practices and racial conceptions that affected how Islam was heard and interpreted in respect of the situation of black people.

Full reference: El Hamel, Chouki (2002). "'Race', Slavery and Islam in Maghribi Mediterranean Thought: The Question of the Haratin in Morocco". The Journal of North African Studies. 7: 29–52 (see pages 44 to 48 for the quoted passages). R Prazeres (talk) 21:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Forces auxiliaires.jpeg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)