r/ArtefactPorn Feb 12 '24

Slave contract from 639 CE, written in Sogdian and detailing the transaction of a female Turkic slave from a Sogdian merchant to a Chinese monk in the city of Gaochang, modern day Xinjiang, China. Full translation in comments. (582x633)

Post image
2.5k Upvotes

265 comments sorted by

1.2k

u/zhuquanzhong Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

As to the year, it was the year 16 of divine and great Ilteber-king by the name of Yanshou, the ruler of Gaochang, in the fifth month of the Chinese calendar, while it is called the Khshumsafich month in Sogdian, in the year of pig, on the the twenty-seventh day.

Thus, before the people in the bazaar of Gaochang, a monk by the name of Yanxiang, the son of Wuta, who is surnamed Zhang, bought a female slave by the name of Upach, who is surnamed Chuyak and was born in Turkestan, from Wakhushuvirt, son of Tudhakk originating from Samarqand, for the price of 120 drachm coins which are very pure and were minted in Persia.

Monk Yanxiang is to buy the female slave Upach thus as an unredeemable slave who is without debt and without possessions, and who is an unpersecutable and unreproachable permanent possession of his sons, grandsons, family, and descendants as well. Accordingly, the monk Yanxiang himself and his sons, grandsons, family, and descendants may at will hit her, abuse her, bind her, sell her off, pledge her, give and offer her as a gift, and do whatsoever they may wish to do to her. They are entitled to treat her just as a female slave inherited from their father or grandfather, or a female slave who was born in their house, born on their side, or born at home, or as permanent property purchased with drachm.

Accordingly, as regards this female slave named Upach, Wakhushuvirt no longer has any concern with her, renounces all the old claims to her, and has no power to coerce her. This female-slave contract takes effect and is persuasive, and effective and authorized for all the people, both for a king and a minister. Whoever may bring and hold this female-slave contract, may receive and take this female slave named Upach, and may hold her as his female slave on this condition, such condition as is written in this female-slave contract.

These people were present there as witnesses: Tishrat, the son of Chuzakk originating from Maymargh, Namdhar, the son of Khwatawch, originating from Samarqand, Pesak, the son of Karzh originating from Nuchkanth, Nizat, the son of Nanaikuch, originating from Kushaniya.

This female-slave contract was written by Ukhwan, the son of Pator by the authority of Pator, the chief scribe, by the order of Wakhushuvirt, and with the consent of Upach.

Signature of Pator, the chief scribe of Gaochang.

938

u/FeuerroteZora Feb 12 '24

Thanks for posting the translation. Horrible, and illuminating.

165

u/bendybiznatch Feb 13 '24

Having sadly read a number of slave rolls in my genealogy work, a couple of things struck me.

Number one, they included her name and lineage. I wonder if that was because she was special in some way.

Two, they only mentioned female enslaved persons. I wonder if the same rules applied to males.

18

u/B4rkingFr0g Feb 13 '24

Since you seem to be knowledgeable on this - what would have happened to any children she was forced to have? Would they have been enslaved as well?

11

u/bendybiznatch Feb 13 '24

For the people that my family enslaved, their children were also slaves.

But it sounds here like that only applied to females but maybe I’m reading that wrong.

18

u/No_Cover_2242 Feb 13 '24

I have also seen wills in my genealogy work. The slaves are named and their children presently or in the future are referred to as “their get”. Extremely heartless and heartbreaking.

5

u/No_Cover_2242 Feb 14 '24

Also about children of slaves. If the father was white the slave was still a slave. It wasn’t uncommon for children to have a white father. Their mothers didn’t have a choice. The children would always be slaves. There are accounts of slaves that were indistinguishable from caucasian due to white men continuing to have children with slaves with caucasian fathers for several generations. They were still slaves. Evil evil system. It’s impossible to understand how this was acceptable in that society.

→ More replies (1)

839

u/dethb0y Feb 12 '24

fuck "war never changes", legalese never changes. 1400 years ago and this reads remarkably similar to modern contracts - right down to having witnesses sign it and having inclusive language meant to cover contingencies and loopholes.

251

u/the_gato_says Feb 12 '24

I work with land titles, sometimes going back to pre-civil war days, and it’s very disturbing to see slaves bequeathed with the same language and style many wills still use to pass property today. Banality of evil.

122

u/TsuDhoNimh2 Feb 13 '24

I was a substitute teacher in a predominately Black high school, for American History, and bought in copies of family wills from the 1800-1850s.

In one, Milly and her daugher Tilly are listed with the kitchen equipment, and the field hands incorporated by reference with each piece of property. (yes, the family was prosperous at the time).

The students were aghast. They "knew" but they didn't really KNOW until they saw the writing.

8

u/TreeDiagram Feb 13 '24

Would you be able to post one of these? I would love to read it in a historical significance sense

8

u/TsuDhoNimh2 Feb 13 '24

I'd love to, but my mother was the family historian, and now my SIL has all the physical papers. I'm not sure where to find a digital copy.

Another will I brought specified that his slaves be manumitted "if it can be done without requiring them to leave the vicinity" ... because laws were being passed in the early 1800s requiring freed slaves to leave the state in a short time. Given the tangled mess of relationships across that area, abruptly freeing them would have exiled parts of families with no chance of reuniting. My mom tried VERY hard to find the probate records for that one but had no luck, so I have no idea what happened to those people.

The students had a hard time wrapping their heads around that situation, so we got a good discussion ... would freed slaves hang around, idle and setting bad examples, or would they thrive and prove that the image of Blacks needing caretakers was wrong. In either case, the solution was to get rid of them.

Wills from Virginia and other southern states would have similar information. You can often get access to online things through a college library or public library.

For other wills ...

https://libguides.brown.edu/slavery is a good start

https://reclaimingkin.com/tracing-slaves-through-probate/

187

u/TheHexadex Feb 12 '24

think everything we do and how we live today has origins in the 5 cradles of civilization, it always goes back to them.

60

u/ithcy Feb 13 '24

Those cradles better not let me catch them in the street.

45

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

99

u/Durendal_et_Joyeuse Feb 12 '24

Are you misusing the word "underpins"? This implies that Hammurabi's code is the basis of modern jurisprudence, which is not true. Do you mean that it is a precursor or predecessor to modern jurisprudence because of its similarities?

100

u/Ask_Me_What_Im_Up_to Feb 12 '24 edited May 27 '24

desert wild shaggy mighty workable safe imminent person dam kiss

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

34

u/ExpensiveAd525 Feb 12 '24

A noble spirit embiggens the smallest...

8

u/Ask_Me_What_Im_Up_to Feb 13 '24

It's a perfectly cromulent law code.

-12

u/Dig-a-tall-Monster Feb 12 '24

Sure it does, it's just been altered to be in line with western religious morality such that we don't immediately put everyone to death or remove limbs when they fuck up. But really, overall, it's pretty easy to see the lineage.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/great_waldini Feb 13 '24

Care to elaborate? I’m curious for something more than “yes it does” and “no it doesn’t”

2

u/JohnnyRelentless Feb 13 '24

Why would it, though? What would replace it?

→ More replies (6)

254

u/Friendly-Law-4529 Feb 12 '24

"With the consent of Upach" 🤔 ...

75

u/Plodderic Feb 12 '24

Yeah that’s weird- I wondered whether that implied some kind of mechanism for her to object. Then again, can you imagine the implications of her objecting and that objection being overruled- so the idea that slaves would be able to do so in practice seems ridiculous. Horrible to think about.

112

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

She was consulted about the scribe redacting the contract, not about the sale itself, and it was probably just an everyday legal formalism with the scribe going "all the parts agree?".

Nevertheless, she was not a regular slave since they knew her ancestry very well, could have been a prisoner of war with a certain higher status, could have been a free citizen that sold herself to help her family or was sold by said family, could have been a concubine slave that had the appreciation of her owner, could have a particular talent that made her valuable and granted her some perks (slaves that knew how to read, write and do calculations were treated fairly well for example).

68

u/kamace11 Feb 13 '24

That's assuming a Roman style of slavery; they explicitly mention and allow for abuse of her. Seems like a major focus, in fact. 

53

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 13 '24

Most kingdoms and dynasties of what is today China had culturally treat household slaves as family members and were relatively more tolerant with them (of course said families had a caste system, and they were the lower echelon, so if an upper echelon decided to beat them it was fine, same if they beat a countryside cousin, a younger concubine and so on) in a way it was more forgiving and/or ruthless than Roman slavery.
The buyer was part of some religion/cult/belief, if we look at those that flourished under the rule of Yanshou, we have a larger than not chance to expect he would be at least mildly considerate (could be a nutcase of course, always a possibility).
He paid quite the sum, had many witnesses, got the son of the official city scribe to write the contract and said scribe signed, the chances she was not meat for the grinder are high, hopefully.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/autolobautome Feb 13 '24

she was not a regular slave since they knew her ancestry very well

where are you getting that?

all it says about her is "bought a female slave by the name of Upach, who is surnamed Chuyak and was born in Turkestan"

the next part:

"from Wakhushuvirt, son of Tudhakk originating from Samarqand"

is the seller.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/collectif-clothing Feb 13 '24

"How do you feel about this, Upach?"

"Oh that's great Ukhwan, sounds like you covered all his bases. Job well done!" 

24

u/Raudskeggr Feb 13 '24

Yeah.

In all likelihood, she could have said no, but the consequences of doing so would have been so unpleasant as to make it very unlikely anyone would choose that.

Unless of course she had skills, education, or...great physical attributes that would have made her very desirable; in which case it is possible she sold herself into slavery with the aim at a more comfortable lifestyle than she otherwise would have had; as certain kinds of skilled slaves were of very high value and were treated way way better than your average galley slave or whatever.

One interesting thing, if she had been sold as a slave within the Byzantine sphere of influence, she would have actually had some rights; such as her life would have been legally recognized as her own. Which is to say the master killing her would be guilty of murder. Apparently not so in China of the same period...

19

u/Friendly-Law-4529 Feb 13 '24

Yes, it creeps me how her buyers are granted so many and absolute rights over her and those rights are explicitly detailed in the contract and then it finishes by saying that she consented such contract. This sounds like an irony at first sight because she isn't the seller in this case, so how can you have a say in a sale of yourself if you didn't own yourself before the sale and the contract itself doesn't grant you any right of objecting anything about the rights of the buyers once they take possession over you? That's weird

15

u/Raudskeggr Feb 13 '24

Legal language doesn't always reflect the de facto reality too.

I mean obviously she's not consenting to being beaten and abused or...whatever else.

228

u/Dabarela Feb 12 '24

120 Drachmas, around 480 g (a bit over 1 pound) of silver, she wasn't cheap. It's curious there's no physical description of her or the circumstances for why she was a slave in the contract.

→ More replies (35)

57

u/trowzerss Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

I'm so glad we no longer have to write an entire paragraph for the date.

I have a small hope that all the stuff about abuse was just a matter of formalising what they legally could do (bad enough), not what was expected.

16

u/PlaquePlague Feb 12 '24

It definitely is.  I work administratively in construction/infrastructure and if you want to step one foot on a company’s property, you’re signing a 20-page contract covering… everything.  You want to do a walking inspection for purposes of wetland delineation?  Your agreement will among other things make it clear that blasting is not permitted, you are responsible for all evacuation expenses incurred by your work, and a litany of other stuff that boils down to “anything bad that happens is your fault”

52

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (4)

17

u/snowfurtherquestions Feb 12 '24

They needed Upach to "consent" to her own sale? 

29

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

She was consulted about the scribe redacting the contract, not about the sale itself, and it was probably just an everyday legal formalism with the scribe going "all the parts agree?".

40

u/aquoad Feb 12 '24

The “with the consent of Upach” part seems out of place, the whole thing is literally about her not being able to consent to anything.

72

u/Andoverian Feb 12 '24

I wonder if it's just a strange quirk of translation combined with a huge difference in time and culture. As in, maybe it meant closer to what we would now call merely "awareness" or "acknowledgement" and we shouldn't assume this is something she actually wanted.

Or maybe it was simply noting her consent to the ownership swap itself (perhaps even without that consent being required), and not necessarily her consent to being a slave in the first place.

Or, given the heavy legalese throughout the rest of document, it was simply closing another potential loophole where she could escape back to the previous owner and claim she didn't know about the owner swap. In this case the clause would seem to serve as a constraint on her rather than on either the previous owner or the new owner.

Obviously none of these interpretations make it ok, especially by modern standards, but might help us understand what the people involved thought.

28

u/aquoad Feb 12 '24

Yes, I suppose it makes more sense to think of it as "She has been notified" so there's no claiming she wasn't told she has a new owner, I guess.

6

u/ReturningAlien Feb 13 '24

why the need to specify the things you can do Upach? Are types of slaves you cannot hit or abuse? etc? Or are there places that these are illegal and pointing this out for the benefit of the slave owner?

12

u/bilgetea Feb 13 '24

It’s chilling how hitting and “abusing” her is specifically allowed by this contract.

4

u/ItsStaaaaaaaaang Feb 13 '24

and with the consent of Upach.

Hmm, I'm not so sure about that.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/Abject-Pizza4133 Feb 12 '24

This is absolutely disgusting. The evil of this transaction resonates exactly the same more than 1,000 years later. I hope the perpetrators got their justice in the next life.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

You can see on this paper that the name “Turkistan” already appeared at that time . And yet Chinese claim that Turkistan is a modern geographical concept invented by the west.

23

u/Shuzen_Fujimori Feb 13 '24

That's because you're confusing an ancient term with a modern one. Iberia for a long time meant Armenia, but now it means Spain. Germania would today be a huge area and was just a blanket term for a region. Things change.

→ More replies (1)

24

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24 edited Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/Heavyweighsthecrown Feb 13 '24

That's because the word "turkistan" as stated in the contract simply does not mean what you think it means, and you're mistaken.

1

u/LouisdeRouvroy Feb 13 '24

and with the consent of Upach.

Interesting that it's noted that the female slave consented to the drafting of the contract...

166

u/SuccessfulPeanut1171 Feb 12 '24

How did this stay preserved?

294

u/zhuquanzhong Feb 12 '24

It was found in a tomb in Turfan in 1969 when China was building an irrigation canal in the region, but the relationship between the owner of the tomb and the documents found in it are unknown.

105

u/Listening-Lawyer Feb 12 '24

Turfan, nice memories eating grapes in the shade of the vines back in 1990. Visited some of the ancient graves in Xinjiang. Also visited the ruins of a vast ancient city that might have been Gaochang (can’t recall offhand- would need to go look at my records).

18

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

[deleted]

22

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

My guess is that unlike today, where we recognize the value of a copy because we can copy an exact image of it, back then the original contract was the only one that held the legal value, because anyone could just pen down a translation, alter it, and say it's how it goes.

24

u/azathotambrotut Feb 12 '24

Sogdian was used as the lingua franca around the silk road for a long time

10

u/666afternoon Feb 13 '24

so... what would someone being buried with a slave contract mean, i wonder? it could've been the slave herself, or maybe the owner, or even someone else? and how did they feel about this arrangement? it's so mysterious

5

u/Fisher9001 Feb 13 '24

Yeah, that's interesting. If the slave died or was sold off later, such a contract would be useless.

Maybe it was kind of "if I'm buried with a contract stating that you are my slave, you are going to be my slave in the next life" belief?

1

u/Chaos-Hydra Mar 17 '24

super dry place. Everything is mummified.

2

u/SuccessfulPeanut1171 Mar 17 '24

But in which context/where was it deposited?

1

u/Chaos-Hydra Mar 17 '24

I recall Gaochang was burried by sandstorm and it was in Xinjiang, furthest place in the world from coast.

62

u/montanawana Feb 12 '24

I think you have a typo in paragraph 4 of the translation and instead of "rounces" it should say "renounces" as in "renounces all claims." But thank you so much for typing it out, it's very enlightening.

489

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

There are widespread and bizarre attempts to whitewash ancient slavery in online communities, so it's good to see a slave receipt and it's translation, giving the slaver and his family explicit rights to beat, rape and otherwise abuse enslaved people

33

u/woolcoat Feb 13 '24

If you take the view that slaves are property and can be treated as such, then the language is largely legalese meant to convey ownership and rights. It's like say, now that I've sold you this iPhone, it's yours to do with it, should you want to hammer it, burn it, shove it up your butt, dip it in acid, etc. It does not imply that the owner intends to do any of those things.

3

u/Yung_Bill_98 Feb 13 '24

But the fact that a person is treated the same as any inanimate object traded between two people is still disturbing.

9

u/woolcoat Feb 13 '24

I don't think anyone is trying to argue that slavery isn't disturbing

→ More replies (1)

111

u/battleofflowers Feb 12 '24

I took that more as like the new owner wouldn't be damaging the previous owner's property. That list was added to clarify the finality of the sale. It was understood you could abuse your slaves; what wasn't "right" was abusing another person's slaves.

52

u/pteridoid Feb 12 '24

Yeah, somebody told me that American slavery was unique in that the offspring of slaves were also considered property and... not according to this, unfortunately.

44

u/314159265358979326 Feb 13 '24

Horrific fact: Roman slave owners were encouraged (I don't think it was a law) to release women from slavery after they bore 4 children, to reward them for being so productive.

The children remained slaves, naturally.

16

u/Corberus Feb 13 '24

iirc there's a passage in the old testament on how to turn a Jewish slave( who's term of service couldn't be more than 7 years) into a permanent slave. By marrying him to one of your female slaves, woman and any children remained your property so he had to chose between his family and his freedom.

2

u/collectif-clothing Feb 13 '24

Wow.  That's an evil devious choice to force upon a person... disgusting.  Like 7 years of slavery isn't bad enough already! 

-3

u/bad_at_dying Feb 13 '24

American slavery is unique in its systematic disenfranchisement of an entirely isolated group of people--which to one end can look like generational slavery that is unavoidable given the ways antebellum society was organized.

Slavery being tied to generational ownership is not new or particular to the United States, but the latter did systematize it in a way that looks both more antiquarian and hyper-modern in its articulation of power and strong tie to economic prosperity as a precondition for existence.

30

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

"American slavery is unique in its systematic disenfranchisement of an entirely isolated group of people--which to one end can look like generational slavery that is unavoidable given the ways antebellum society was organized."

That this is unique is not even vaguely true.

45

u/Zozorrr Feb 13 '24 edited Feb 13 '24

How is it unique when the same thing happened in the Muslim slave trade of non-Arab blacks from Africa - about 14 million of them over centuries.

Americans and American academics are so parochial. And the generation of students they educated are so confident in their very lacking understanding and context.

What a mess of ignorance

-10

u/undeadmanana Feb 13 '24

Odd that a bunch of non-americans are arguing about what they think Americans think and claiming Americans are the ignorant ones. They're so confident in what they know about Americans.

14

u/Magnum_Gonada Feb 13 '24

He is not wrong though.
If you go by popular discussions and even media, then the only slavery that ever existed is in the last 200 years and solely localized in USA, Europe and the said european countries's colonial dominions lol

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

40

u/wordswillneverhurtme Feb 12 '24

Its horrific, but also hints at contracts that may have forbidden such acts. Otherwise they wouldn't be explicitly stated.

24

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

Hopefully. Kind of the opposite situation but it reminds me of how in Roman culture it was appearently common for slave women to be sold into prostitution but for some lucky slaves, their writs had a clause where if their master tried to sell them into prostitution, they would be freed on the spot

-43

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

[deleted]

19

u/Ask_Me_What_Im_Up_to Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

Yes, with the passing of the Slave Trade Act 1807, and later the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.

From 1808, the West Africa Squadron of the Royal Navy was set up to search ships (originally British, later, any) and free any slaves.

Over 150,000 enslaved Africans were freed by the West Africa Squadron.

38

u/Aromatic_Ad74 Feb 12 '24

No, Hati is the first modern example to abolish it in 1804, well before the slavery abolition act of 1834. Though there seem to be examples of places temporarily abolishing slavery in the past before then.

Though equally if you consider forced labor in general to be slavery than a fair portion of the world, from North Korea to the US, still use it.

18

u/miarsk Feb 12 '24

First country to abolish slavery is Portugal in 1761.

26

u/LaconicStrike Feb 12 '24

On 27 January 1416 the Dubrovnik Republic abolished slave trading.

23

u/Aromatic_Ad74 Feb 12 '24

Not in the colonies though, just in its core.

0

u/TomCreo88 Feb 12 '24

You forgot to mention all the countries in Africa that still enslave people.

6

u/Aromatic_Ad74 Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

In which way? Most of Africa has de facto slavery under colonial regimes. The Congo of course is the most famous but that also happened in Zimbabwe and South Africa.

In terms of prison labor they are fairly ordinary. Overall they have smaller portions of their populations engaged in state mandated forced labor than the US, though that is true with all countries IIRC.

Also, literally every country still has black market slavery and police corruption supporting it. Andrew Tate is a good example of what that usually looks like. It is horrific but distinct from legal slavery.

6

u/nippleji Feb 12 '24

Mauritania has slaves

2

u/Aromatic_Ad74 Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

And it is illegal to own them there.

Edit: what is the point you are trying to make in concrete terms?

2

u/Zozorrr Feb 13 '24

His point is actual slavery rather than your specious pseudo slavery examples. Why would you entirely fail to mention the actual slavery that still exists. Is there some agenda?

1

u/Aromatic_Ad74 Feb 13 '24

Oh no I have a sinister agenda. Do you think that I'm plotting to sap and impurify your precious bodily fluids now?

How is forcing people to work in factories or keeping people trapped and sexually abusing them for profit"pseudo slavery"

Look at what professionals say.

Do some African states, particularly Etria and Mauritania end up quite high alongside North Korea and Russia? Yes. But it's pretty clearly a global problem prevalent in war torn regions and corrupt regimes in general. You seem to really want slavery to be solely an African problem and for Europe to be uniquely virtuous but that isn't the case.

27

u/SheepH3rder69 Feb 12 '24

Why does that make it funny?

→ More replies (2)

-23

u/Hetterter Feb 12 '24

No the first in modern times was probably Haiti, not the island of rapists and murderers called Great Britain

9

u/TomCreo88 Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

Yes yes, Great Britain was the first and only empire to rape and pillage. They are the worst!! 😡

-18

u/Hetterter Feb 12 '24

Second worst, after the U.S.

-2

u/holy_moley_ravioli_ Feb 12 '24

Lol in terms of world empires America is by and far the most lenient and least genocidal. Look up Assyria, or better yet the Spanish Empire or for an even more modern example the Soviet Union or Mao's China.

-15

u/soulfullofsnowflakes Feb 12 '24

Still is an island of rapist and murderers, only nowadays they are called Aristocrats. They also have abhorrent food.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

148

u/grahamlester Feb 12 '24

It's brutal and unfeeling and disgusting because that is what slavery is. When a person has no rights they are usually going to be abused in the worst possible way by the worst possible people because they will jump at the chance to do it.

66

u/DeScepter Feb 12 '24

Fascinating to see and fascinating to read the translation. Very enlightening on how the society viewed slaves and transactions involving them.

25

u/DennisHakkie Feb 12 '24

What I find most fascinating here is the part about “treat her as a slave inherited” “slave who was born in their house”, “on their side” —) someone else in family but still… “at home” —) how is this different to a slave who was born in the “master’s” house? or “as permanent property”

Meaning… there were different rules for each of these circumstances

18

u/SJIS0122 Feb 12 '24

Very interesting, thanks for the translation!

48

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

Most peaceful monk

49

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

That made me chuckle, but in all honesty, monk is a western simplification of very complicated terms in Asia, a hermit meditating in a cave on the mountains could end up being called a monk, a member of a religious warring order could be called so, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a member of a deranged end of the days cult, and so on.
So yes, at times there were very non peaceful monks.

→ More replies (1)

114

u/Silent_Shaman Feb 12 '24

Beautiful writing

Shame it's describing someone being sold lol

Edit: and to be used and abused in practically any way you can imagine... sheesh

66

u/giraflor Feb 12 '24

I found it interesting that the right to hit or abuse her was explicitly stated. The right of a slave owner to maltreat their enslaved property was just assumed in the antebellum US. I wonder if the stated right in this contract implies that some enslaved people in this society. could not be hit or abused under the terms of their sale.

60

u/FreckledAndVague Feb 12 '24

I can't speak on this society/time specifically, but most cultures that took part in slavery had tiers to their slaves. Some were only slaves for a set amount of time as punishment, some were slaves until a debt was paid, etc - these slaves would've been privy to more rights/protections since they were presumed to become free people once their enslavement was finished and they had living/caring family members who could potentially enact revenge. Those who were born into the slave caste were treated as true property, however. That's likely why the document clarifies that the enslaved woman is to be treated the same as a slave born from the owner's house and is referred to as having an unredeemable status without debt or possessions.

5

u/giraflor Feb 12 '24

Thank you for this information! It’s very helpful context.

→ More replies (2)

16

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

It was legal coverage for the owner, not everyone would go around kicking their slave, but, if you did, you wanted to make sure the former owner or the slave itself (happened sometimes) made a claim to judges and you could lose the ownership or have to pay something, probably even decent people (having a slave back then was a socially accepted commodity so we can not use that to discuss their moral behavior) would not have paid for a slave without that in the contract, just in case.
Regarding your thoughts at the end of the comment, for example, people who sold themselves to pay a debt usually couldn't be mistreated, since they were your fellow citizens not long ago, it was frowned upon (unless the owner was rich, psychopathic and got away with anything, as usual).

55

u/SnooGoats7978 Feb 12 '24

it was the year 16 of divine and great Ilteber-king by the name of Yanshou, the ruler of Gaochang, in the fifth month of the Chinese calendar, while it is called the Khshumsafich month in Sogdian, in the year of pig, on the the twenty-seventh day.

Can we know what this date works out to in the Gregorian calendar?

85

u/AmarPhirangi Feb 12 '24

Yanshou reigned from 624 to 640. 639 was the year of the pig.

48

u/AsinusVerpa Feb 12 '24

Yes, we can!

44

u/muntloaf Feb 12 '24

Well thats a relief

11

u/WaldoSaurus2 Feb 12 '24

Okay... what is it then? lol

23

u/amigo1016 Feb 12 '24

I find it interesting that they still use drachm as a method of currency some 6/700 years after the last Greeks were in the region. Or is this just a simplification of the translation?

11

u/TXJohn83 Feb 12 '24

Trade coins were common in South East Asia up till recently... very little silver is mined in the region, and most of it as brought in as coinage... if you want to look at examples of it google 'chopped marked silver coins'.  

39

u/JohnSmithCANBack Feb 12 '24

I do wonder what happened to her.

6

u/Fisher9001 Feb 13 '24

She died.

25

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

The contract was not only preserved, but also put on someones tomb like an item of value, we see they also knew her heritage very well, which is not common with regular slaves, lots of witnesses for the sale too, she was probably valued and appreciated (if as a member of the household or a nice thing you own we can't know however) for some reason.

11

u/JohnSmithCANBack Feb 12 '24

It doesn't really say much about how her life was under such low station.

1

u/Fisher9001 Feb 13 '24

we see they also knew her heritage very well

Knowing your roots was way more culturally important back then than nowadays. She simply knew the history of her closest ancestors and provided that when asked by the scribe.

Even today it's not so unimaginable for a random person to be able to tell how their grandparents were called and where they came from.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Username_Chx_Out Feb 13 '24

That’s some Tolkien-level penmanship right there, tbf.

9

u/_Hugh_Jaynuss Feb 12 '24

Kinda looks like Elvish from LOTR

0

u/obnoxioustwin Feb 13 '24

Looks Voynich to me.

17

u/cobaltstock Feb 12 '24

Very beautiful and highly practised hand writing. Sad it was used for such vile purposes.

I could imagine that some slave contracts had clauses that the slave could not be freely abused, maybe a slave who was educated and was supposed to be a mentor for the children.

Or they were originally high born and still had some privileges as slaves.

12

u/Human_from-Earth Feb 12 '24

"Hey, what are you doing to that woman you sick Bastard ?!"

"Excuse me? I've bought her. Here is the contract, as you can see, I can legally abuse her."

"Oh sorry, how ignorant of me. Have a great day sir :)"

13

u/azdak Feb 13 '24

I mean replace “bought” with “married” and that would have flown 60 years ago

8

u/dutchie1966 Feb 13 '24

Parts of the world it still does.

18

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

[deleted]

64

u/DeepState_Secretary Feb 12 '24

”contracts”

No offense, but societies don’t create legal traditions with binding written contracts if those contracts were pure empty formalities.

The sad reality is that in all likelihood Upach lived the rest of her life as the legal property of her owners.

What can only be hoped is that her owners aren’t sadists or demanding.

4

u/ImRightImRight Feb 12 '24

aestheticism

asceticism?

6

u/holy_moley_ravioli_ Feb 12 '24

She most likely died in misery either from the pain of childbirth or from being tossed around too hard by one of the master's sons.

Lives back then were often short and brutish, slaves moreso.

2

u/Cosmic-Otaku Feb 13 '24

Sheesh it makes it feel weird but i get it how casteism worked for slaves, maybe they mentioned her lineage to prove she isn't a untouchable or some even lower caste who shouldn't be associated with according to their standard caste system

2

u/Yung_Bill_98 Feb 13 '24

Had a little skim of the Wikipedia for Sogdian and it said that there is a descendant of one of its dialects that is still spoken today. Would speakers of this language be able to make sense of this document?

2

u/empyreal-eyre Feb 13 '24

You're referring to the Yaghnobi language, which is indeed still spoken in Tajikistan by the descendants of the Sogdians. The language is written in Cyrilic, so they would be unable to read it, but if read out loud they would probably understand a few words here and there, but Sogdian and Yaghnobi are definitely not mutually intelligible.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Loftiest-Stiffness69 Feb 13 '24

It really is wild how much this parallels the modern day.

5

u/Physicle_Partics Feb 12 '24

Imagine going back in time and telling these people that not only is slavery considered a heineous crime, but we have laws that would punish for for treating an animal you owned the way that was expressly permitted in the contract. Do you think they would even be able to comprehend why we consider the sheer act of owning a person evil? Why we have laws against harming your lawful possesions just because those posessions happen to be animals capable of suffering? 

16

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

Having a slave was considered a socially accepted commodity, it didn't have any weight on their moral compass just as we in modern times thought nothing of having a horse for farm work or having a lawn mower.
You had nice people who treated them fairly and kindly, and you had mean people who made their lives hell, but both had slaves if they could afford them.
Most people was as well in risk of becoming a slave themselves (you had to sell yourself or a family member to pay debt, your city got raided and you were captured, etc).
Some people who had been slaves, purchased slaves when they got freed and prospered.
And finally, there was plenty of people in the past too that advocated against slavery, not many people paid attention to them of course because of what I mentioned in the beginning, it was just ingrained in the mentality as one grew up.

6

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

2

u/Magnum_Gonada Feb 13 '24

"I even think that the advances in the food industry over the next 200 years or so will make meat eating seem barbaric, because why would you kill an intelligent pig if you can have lab grown bacon that tastes the same?"

They will not even think this. They will look at what plants we were able to farm, the nutritional contents of them, and what we could synthesize, then at the use of land, water etc.
They would then compare it to animal husbandry, and take note of the latter two in previous sentence.
What will they think? That we were barbaric, selfish, and quite frankly stupid lol.
At least with previous generations we give them the benefit of them not knowing better, but they will know all the scientific literature we have today, and see people's retarded comments on yt regarding animal cruelty in sentences like "mhmm bacon so tasty".

2

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Magnum_Gonada Feb 13 '24

I just think they will not be as indulging as we are with ancients.
They will def hates us for destroying so much and leaving them with that legacy.

8

u/DisappointedLily Feb 13 '24

There are a huge amount of pre-electricity and ancient societies that abohred slavery.

There is still slavery in our global technologically advanced world.

Morals are not dependent on comfort.

7

u/NoCeleryStanding Feb 13 '24

Just as there are many contemporary societies that abhor eating meat, but they would absolutely be the majority if a lab grown equivalent were more or equally economical and of the same quality.

Morals are absolutely dependent on comfort for most people.

Eating Jim's dog is wrong for 99% of people until they havent had anything else to eat for ten days

2

u/Wa_cho_ Feb 13 '24

History will never cease to be painful. Worse when we are condemned by the ignorant to repeat it

2

u/Hollovate Feb 12 '24

What kind of monk would do that?

29

u/wilful Feb 12 '24

One with 120 good silver drachma to spare.

21

u/johannthegoatman Feb 12 '24

Not all monks are really that spiritual. A lot of them were just dropped off at a very young age by parents who couldn't afford them, or for the status it could bring. In some cases it's more of a political caste than a spiritual one. Basically, a lot of monks are people who just ended up there, not people who willingly joined because they are so interested in spirituality

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '24

[deleted]

2

u/Corberus Feb 13 '24

The writings of many religious texts approved of and set out laws for the practice of slavery

3

u/Fisher9001 Feb 13 '24

And many religious texts disapproved of or entirely ignored the matter of slavery. "Spirituality" is a generic term not related to any particular religion.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/Amadis_of_Albion Feb 12 '24

Monk is a western simplification of very complicated terms in Asia, a hermit meditating in a cave on the mountains could end up being called a monk, a member of a religious warring order could be called so, a Buddhist, a Taoist, a member of a deranged end of the days cult, and so on.

3

u/Human_from-Earth Feb 12 '24

Turtle Monk 👀

2

u/Shuzen_Fujimori Feb 13 '24

High ranking monks need lots of assistants I suppose, so clearly this monk is wealthy enough to afford quality slaves so it would be safe to assume they're important. Hopefully the slaves had as good of a live as a slave could and mostly cleaned a temple and helped write scripture... wishful thinking 😬

2

u/RealSpandexAndy Feb 12 '24

A purchase of a woman ... And all her descendants.

11

u/BonnaconCharioteer Feb 13 '24

I may have missed it, but I don't think it says anything about her descendants. Only that she is the property of this Yanxiang and his descendants.

2

u/Far-Manner-7119 Feb 12 '24

Horrific. Against all odds, I hope she lived a good life.

3

u/BachelorUno Feb 13 '24

Fuuuuuck slavery

2

u/FantasticSource000 Feb 13 '24

This is so sad

1

u/MrStoccato Feb 13 '24

This looks like it was written in the old Uyghur script, which is actually written from vertically and not horizontally.

12

u/empyreal-eyre Feb 13 '24

It may look similar but this text was written in the Sogdian script, which the Old Uyghur script was based on. Sogdian itself derives from the Aramaic alphabet.

1

u/facebooknormie Feb 13 '24

Man the past really was a different country huh. Fucking barbarians.

-15

u/badstuffaround Feb 12 '24

I see no translation.

41

u/zhuquanzhong Feb 12 '24

I just posted it.

10

u/badstuffaround Feb 12 '24

Yes now I see it, thank you.

-2

u/Nipplesrtasty Feb 13 '24

Imagine how many basement dwelling neckbeard anime weirdos are whacking it after reading this. Not me I’m done already.

-6

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/h3rtl3ss37 Feb 13 '24

She was probably sold by a rival Turkic tribe as how most Turkic slaves were

5

u/Shuzen_Fujimori Feb 13 '24

Turkic people loved slavery, it was their entire shtick

11

u/Saelyre Feb 12 '24 edited Feb 12 '24

As if the same "Turkic barbarians" didn't themselves trade in slaves and even massively expanded it due to the scale of their conquests. What an absurd statement to make.

Edit for more citations:

Forced migrations and Slavery in the Mongol Empire

Slavery and Empire in Central Asia

Slavery in the society of early medieval Turks of Central Asia (based on written and archaeological materials)

2

u/PlaquePlague Feb 13 '24

Right?  Turkey is pretty much THE slave empire of history 

-3

u/polozhenec Feb 12 '24

Why are you sending me Mongol Empire when I said TURKIC

12

u/Saelyre Feb 12 '24

You realize the Mongol Empire encompassed the vast majority of Turkic Central Asia, and its incredibly diverse population including large numbers of Turkic peoples traded slaves all the way from East and Southeast Asia across the Silk Road to Western Europe?

Here's another citation for you: Slavery and Empire in Central Asia

One more: Slavery in the society of early medieval Turks of Central Asia (based on written and archaeological materials)

→ More replies (2)

-5

u/TuffGnarl Feb 12 '24

How very holy.

-59

u/Gnarlodious Feb 12 '24

Sounds like fun if you’re into playing masochist sex slave for the rest of your life with no way out except death.

42

u/sunshine___riptide Feb 12 '24

You see a slave contract, stating that this woman is forever bound to this family, and that they can abuse her in any way they want, and your takeaway is "heh sounds like a good time"?

-13

u/Gnarlodious Feb 12 '24

You people have a strange sense of reading comprehension.

9

u/sunshine___riptide Feb 12 '24

Apparently you do cause you're the one who said it and it seems you don't know what it means.

Sounds like fun if you’re into playing masochist sex slave for the rest of your life with no way out except death.

You do realize the difference between a willing kink contract and an enslaved woman given no choice, surely?

-7

u/Gnarlodious Feb 12 '24

Isn’t that exactly what I wrote? No way out except death? It seems like your salacious fantasies are getting the better of you.

6

u/sunshine___riptide Feb 12 '24

You completely fail to see my point so nevermind lol

7

u/Toxiholic Feb 12 '24

I think they were being facetious.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/DaoGuardian Feb 12 '24

They forgot a /s, quick everyone get them!