When the Ottoman flag flew over part of Britain ...

[Valmy]

"Enslavement" is a very relative thing. Technically a European peasant wasn't a slave and a Mamluk lord was a slave, but which would you rather be given a choice?

Um the Mameluks were DESCENDENTS of slave soldiers they were not slaves themselves.

Being a member of a warrior slave caste?  Not the worst of fates but not great.  Being a member of a warrior caste that has taken over a kingdom?  Now that is pretty nice.

[Valmy]

I think there was overlap.  When the Mongels came west the Kipchaks allied with them, along with the Armenians and Georgians, and iirc the Kipchak slave trade benefited greatly from this relationship.  Much to the later regret of the Mongols when a Mamaluk army (composed of some of those same slaves) defeated the Mongols and marked the end of Mongol expansion in the South West of their empire.

Well I kind of doubt the Mongols were going much farther anyway.  It was sort of like Charles Martel beating the Arabs.  Both were flirting with Imperial overstretch.

Still yep it is funny how things work out.

[Siege]

Where would you beach a boat in that island?
I see no bays or ports.

[Siege]

Anyway, I don't think enslaved and made into a human killing machine would rank as a positive thing.

Depends on whether you ended up ruling the place or not.

Throughout much of human history, being a "human killing machine" was the same as being "a member of the nobility".

In English, the very term of respect - "Sir" - derives from knighthood, and what is a knight origially but a guy on hoseback wearing armour and carrying weapons?

"Enslavement" is a very relative thing. Technically a European peasant wasn't a slave and a Mamluk lord was a slave, but which would you rather be given a choice?

I think the word "knight" originally meant "Servant".  Same as the word "Sergeant".

Samurai= Those who serve

Feudal relations were about service. Everybody was somebody's vassal.

[Siege]

European peasant could also rise fairly high though most did not.  On the other hand, most Mameluke probably spent their lives as common soldiers.

I thought social mobility was pretty low during medieval times.
Becoming a merc being the only honest route to richest (or the dream thereoft) for poor people.

[Iormlund]

That depended largely on the time and place.

[Valmy]

That depended largely on the time and place.

Yeah the marchlands (like that one place where the Muslims and Christians were always trading lands...) were a great place for nobodies to become lords.

[Valmy]

Where would you beach a boat in that island?
I see no bays or ports.

You can see beaches there.  You will just be surrounded by cliffs.  But the high tide might cover them up I guess.  Obviously you would need a small ship but pirates rarely had Ships of the Line.

[crazy canuck]

That depended largely on the time and place.

Yeah the marchlands (like that one place where the Muslims and Christians were always trading lands...) were a great place for nobodies to become lords.

El Cid comes to mind

[The Brain]

The Cisco Cid?

[crazy canuck]

The Cisco Cid?

And you were doing so well today too.

[Malthus]

Um the Mameluks were DESCENDENTS of slave soldiers they were not slaves themselves.

Being a member of a warrior slave caste?  Not the worst of fates but not great.  Being a member of a warrior caste that has taken over a kingdom?  Now that is pretty nice.

Not so. Where are you getting this from?

Mamluks were purchased slaves. While they were technically freed when their training was complete, all Mamluks begain their careers by being slaves. They were not "descendants" of slaves. In fact, their "desendants" were originally *forbidden* to become mamluks!

Under the Mamluk Sultane of Cairo, mamluks were purchased while still young and were raised in the barracks of the Citadel of Cairo. Because of their particular status (no social ties or political affiliations) and their austere military training, they were often trusted. Their training consisted of strict religious and military education to help them become "good Muslim horsemen and fighters."[4] When their training was completed they were discharged, but still attached to the patron who had purchased them. Mamluks relied on the help of their patron for career advancements and likewise the patron's reputation and power depended on his recruits. A mamluk was also "bound by a strong esprit de corps to his peers in the same household."[4]

Mamluks were proud of their origin as slaves and only those who were purchased were eligible to attain the highest positions. The privileges associated with being a mamluk were so desirable that many free Egyptians arranged themselves to be sold in order to gain access to this privileged society. Mamluks spoke Arabic and cultivated their identity by retaining an Egyptian name.

and

While they were no longer actually slaves after training, they were still obliged to serve the Sultan. The Sultan kept them as an outsider force, under his direct command, to use in the event of local tribal frictions. The Sultan could also send them as far as the Muslim regions of Iberia.

Sultans had the largest number of mamluks, but lesser amirs could have their own troops as well. Many mamluks rose to high positions throughout the empire, including army command. At first their status remained non-hereditary and sons were strictly prevented from following their fathers. However over time, in places such as Egypt, the mamluk forces became linked to existing power structures and gained significant amounts of influence on those powers.

A similar evolution occurred in the Ottoman Empire with the Janissaries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk

[Valmy]

Not so. Where are you getting this from?

Everywhere.  Including your Wiki page.  They were always described as 'of slave origin' or 'former slaves' not slaves themselves.  If it is because they were bought and trained and then freed well that is weird.  It just presumed they were descended from slaves since a systematic freeing of them to do perform their duties is...well rather odd.

But in any case your Mameluk lord was still not a slave.  He served a lord same any almost every warrior caste in the world at that time.  Besides plenty of craft apprentices were boys who were bought and worked in exchange for learning the craft in Europe but they were not considered slaves once they became journeymen and so forth.

Further I shot down the Janissary thing right at the beginning of the thread.  Why are you insisting these guys are typical slaves in the Arab world or should even be classified as slaves?  We are talking about actual slaves not some sort of technical rank of a privledged caste.

[Siege]

That depended largely on the time and place.

Yeah the marchlands (like that one place where the Muslims and Christians were always trading lands...) were a great place for nobodies to become lords.

El Cid comes to mind

He was born in the nobility.

[Valmy]

He was born in the nobility.

Well...not really.  He had very minor aristocratic blood but no title or land or anything.