Version classiqueVersion mobile

Forms of unfreedom in the Medieval Mediterranean

The semantics of Moors’ dependency in medieval Portugal

(12th – 15th centuries)

Maria Filomena Lopes de Barros

Résumé

Muslims especially highlight relations of dependence in medieval Portugal. The semantics of the Moor prevailed, from the twelfth to the fifteenth centuries, as a synonym for slave. Despite the different contexts, from the Christian conquest of the territory extending to the Portuguese expansion in Morocco, this reality indelibly denotes the medieval sociology of an economy of war. 

Entrées d'index

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 For a general view of the bibliography on Portuguese slavery see: Fonseca, 2014. However, the autho (...)
  • 2 Epstein, 2001, p. 19.
  • 3 See González Arévalo, in this book.
  • 4 Pedro de Azevedo referred that the most ancient mention of escravo that he had found dated from 146 (...)
  • 5 See, for instance, Conde, 2016.

1The semantics of slaves in medieval Portugal is a subject not yet approached from the historiographic or linguistic point of view, despite the extensive bibliography on the subject.1 Indeed, the very adoption of the terms ‘slaves’ or ‘slavery’ became generalised in a much later period, due mainly to the Sub-Saharan traffic during the Early Modern period. “Slave” is a term which nevertheless finds its origin in the medieval period, from an ethnic designation, that of the Slavs. In Italy, the term schiavo emerged as early as the eleventh century in the south, although it was in common use throughout the Italian Peninsula by the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.2 In the Spanish languages it appears in thefourteenth century (in quite a restricted way), but its use did not actually spread until thenext century.3 In Portugal, it is documented only in the second half of the fifteenth century (though largely as subsidiary to other designations),4 and its use becomes widespread in the sixteenth century.5

2In fact, the terminology from the twelfth century onwards is deeply marked by the Christian conquest of the territory. The abundance of Muslim captives of war made the term Moor an almost universal synonym for slave, a feature that persisted in medieval Portuguese society even after the final subjugation of the southern territory (Algarve) in the middle of the thirteenth century. With the conquest of Ceuta, in 1415, and the subsequent Portuguese expansion in Morocco, the term Moor once more pervaded the terminology of slavery. Thus, throughout the Middle Ages, hegemonic language crystalised the memory of the process of the Christian conquest of the territory, determining a particular semantic for non-free individuals, that of the Moors, the vanquished of war, which was reinforced by the North African conquests of the fifteenth century. A different ethnicity than that of slaves shaped the semantics of slavery in medieval Portugal, though with a signifier that did not always correspond with the signified.

Mauri and servi

  • 6 See González González, in this book.
  • 7 Gomes, 1996, p. 326.
  • 8 Portugalia Monumenta Historica (onwards PMH). Leges, p. 407.

3As Raúl González puts it we should see “the distinction between slaves and personal serfs is a difference in degree, not in kind. A distinction that lies in the intensity of domination: slaves (…) can never escape from precariousness, for at any time the master could take away their belongings, expel them from their homes, separate them from their families and send them away to work in another land, or even alienate them to a new owner. On the contrary, the master has not this unlimited power over his personal serfs, only some rights over them (which are of course much more constricting than in the case of other dependants)”.6 This feature naturally led to the dehumanisation of slaves. The normative discourses from the twelfth century onwards implied, in any case, the connection between the Moors and animals. For instance, in the model of the foral of Santarém from 1179 (applied to a municipal urban system, considered “perfect”, such as Lisbon or Coimbra)7 the toll to be paid by Muslim men and women, is stated after the mare, the cow, the donkey and immediately before the pig and the sheep.8

  • 9 Apud Gomes, 1996, p. 313.
  • 10 Azevedo & Freire, 2003, p. LXXIV.
  • 11 See, for instance, the expressions: j maurum qui vocatur Mafomede et una asina cum sua filia (“a Mo (...)
  • 12 Gomes, 2018, p. 44.

4This dehumanisation affected private bequests in the same way. The most paradigmatic formula is found in a donation to the Benedictine monastery of S. João de Pendurada (second half of the twelfth century), which consigned the endowment of Iº Mauro, et de alteras bestias (“a Moor and other beasts”).9 The same concordance is also expressed in 1291, in a document which refers to Gaados. Bestas. Mouros. Mouras (“Cattle, beasts, Muslim men and Muslim women”).10 Wills from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries testify the same reality11 and even in 1324 the third will of King Dinis (r. 1279–1325) contemplates between the goods intended for his son and heir, Afonso, servos e servas, e mouros e mouras, e cavallos e muas e todallas outras bestas que eu houver ao tempo de minha morte (“men and women serfs, and Moorish men and women, and horses and mules and all the other beasts that I possess at the time of my death”).12

  • 13 Mattoso, 2002, 196.
  • 14 Verlinden, p. 385 and pp. 392-403.

5In any case the term Moor as a perfect synonym for unfree pervaded documentation from the twelfth century onwards. It is rarely also enunciated as sarraceno “Saracen”, particularly in ecclesial sources. The dehumanisation of the individual as an owned possession, perceived as similar to beasts, clearly defined this statute. In the Cistercian monasteries, for example, it was after 1139 that the bequeathed servants were exclusively designated as mauros. This significant evolutionary terminology expressed “that the servants of Gothic origin became quite rare during the twelfth century, a fact that is well attested to throughout the Peninsula”.13 Verlinden refers to this fact from the eleventh century onwards, which, as he stated, diminished the writings concerning the unfree Christian population and exponentially increased those related to unfree Muslims.14

  • 15 On this theme see for Portugal: Barros, 1833-1925, II, pp. 22-90; see, also, for Asturias Raúl Gonz (...)
  • 16 This happens across all of Europe. In Italy, in the 13th century, serf remained as the most common (...)
  • 17 Azevedo, 1910.
  • 18 Gomes, 2001.

6In this text, we do not intend to discuss the concept of serf as bonded to a land or in other forms of domination.15 Rather the proposition is to analyse a particular moment in its evolution, mainly from the thirteenthto fourteenth centuries, when it becomes exclusively a synonym of slave, although a Christian one.16 The use of this term is largely subsidiary to the predominant Moor, but still persisted at least as far as the second half of the fifteenth century.17 In the aforementioned will of King Dinis, both expressions are mentioned: servos e servas, e mouros e mouras (“men and women serfs, and Moorish men and women”). Three documents from the end of the thirteenth century or the beginning of the fourteenth18 clearly define the two terms as synonyms, with exactly the same meaning for slaves, though of different religions.

  • 19 Gomes, 2001, doc. 1, p. 209.
  • 20 Gomes, 2001, doc. 18, p. 216.
  • 21 Gomes, 2001, doc. 27, p. 221.

7From the scriptorium of the Cistercian Monastery of Alcobaça (one of the most important of the realm), a manuscript preserves a set of formulas. The first one is a manumission entitled De manumissione sarracini vel servi (“About the manumission of Muslims or serfs”). Nevertheless, the text, in Latin, is addressed exclusively to Muslim individuals. In fact, this carta libertatis et ingenuitatis is directed to “Aly sarraceno” (as an example) to whom is added the expression vel tali servo nostro (“or another from our serfs”).19 The second form, De reparandis rebus amissis et fugititiuis sarracenis et servis (“About the reparation of what has been lost and fugitive Saracens and serfs”), written in Portuguese, deals with mouros e mouras e servos e servas (“Moorish men and women, and male and female serfs”) who ran away from their owners, and stole bestas e gados (“beasts and cattle”).20 Finally, the last one, whose title and content are in Portuguese, takes up the issue of the fugitive mouro ou servo (“moor or serf”), in a formula intended to claim the Moors or serfs who fled, as its heading indicates (Para demandar ou mouro ou servo que fugiu).21 Curiously, the gender distinction disappears in this text and gives way to the neutral masculine, a tendency that will dominate the later discourses.

8In any case, while both terms, Moor and serf appear always connected with each other in these formulas as parallel concepts, the manumission letter indicates that the most significant referent is clearly that of Moor. This coincides with what other sources, either normative or particular, show. And yet, both concepts remained in these monastic formularies.

From Free Muslims to Christian Moors

  • 22 This trend in the Portuguese is attested in the forais. See: Verlinden, 1955, pp. 408-412.

9In any case, the term Moor became de per se the synonym of slave.22 So, when a new juridical statute emerged, that of the communities of free Muslims (comunas) legitimised by the Christian powers, another term was created to name those who belonged to them: mouro forro (free Moor). The last word derives from the Arabic (ḥurr –free), whose philological root also evolved to mean the act of manumission itself, always designated in Portuguese as alforria (substantive) and alforriar (verb). Therefore, the vanquished left their linguistic mark on this issue at the expense of the Latin vocabulary.

  • 23 Barros, 2007, p. 52.

10In 1170, the first Portuguese king, Afonso Henriques, granted carta de foral to the Muslims of Lisboa, Almada, Palmela e Alcácer. The expression used to define them was vobis mauris qui estis forri (“you, Moors that are free”). In subsequent documents, granted in the thirteenth century to Évora and to the region of Algarve, the terminology is abbreviated to moros forros and that was the expression subsequently applied all through the Middle Ages, in the definition of the legal status of free Muslims.23

  • 24 ANTT, Gavetas, maço 3, doc. 2.

11The establishment of Muslim comunas in the south of the realm, and more specifically in the territory defined by the Tagus basin, constituted a centre of attraction and concentration for the manumission of Muslim slaves. The status was not immutable and the transformation of slaves into taxable individuals was a trend discernible for both the king and the lords who intended to colonise their domains, at least from the thirteenth century onwards. The comunas provided the necessary context for this development. For example, in a conflict about the jurisdiction of Muslims, that opposed king Afonso III (r. 1248–1279) to the Master of the Order of Santiago, in 1272, the subjects in dispute were not only the free Muslims (mauris forris) but also those who were to become free (qui se forabant).24

12Another example of the increasingly entangled relationship between free and unfree Muslims appears in a document from the city of Santarém (on the river north of the Tagus), from 1286. It testifies a notarial contract between João Viegas, miles (urban knight, i.e. non-noble),25 and his wife Maria Martins, with Fatima “their Saracen”. According to this agreement, the slave had to give a certain amount of money (18 dinheiros) to her owners on a daily basis (cotidie), and she could not leave the city for more than three days without their permission. If she did not comply with these clauses, she would pay “with her body” and one of her feet would be cut off.26 This penalty, although not included in the Customs (Costumes) of Santarém, must have been a common punishment for fugitive slaves as it is inserted in the Costumes of Guarda.27 The economic activity in which said Fatima was involved is not known – and this is the sole identified document on this issue. Even if slave rental was a common practice,28 this situation seems different to that, because there is a high degree of autonomy given to this woman. In fact, the productivity of slaves who dedicated themselves to certain economic activities in an independent way (but necessarily contracted with their masters) constitutes a clause of Santarém's own Costumes: “It is customary for the captive Moor who gives income and trades or purchases to pay remuneration. So, it is done” (Custume he que mouro catiuo que da renda e mercar ou comprar deue a dar soldada. Asy se guarda).29

  • 30 A tie that is particularly documented for the kingdom of Valencia – cf. Soyer, 2007, p. 500.

13Fátima’s situation was certainly encompassed by this clause. Nevertheless, the most significant fact are the witnesses. Eleven men testified to this notarial document, and seven of them were Muslims: Aly Cidey, Mafomade tendario (shopkeeper), Jufez çapatario (shoemaker), Brafame cardaeyro (carder), Bealazyz tintoreyro (dyer), Ally Gaga çapatario (shoemaker) and Mafamede, son of Jufar. The concentration of so many Muslims as witnesses in a single deed is certainly not meaningless. There is undoubtedly a bond between the contract addressed to Fatima and the Muslim community (comuna) of Santarém, perhaps involving the institution as a whole, or only some of its members, who could possibly act as a guarantors of the contract terms, or even as employers of the Muslim woman. If the document does not provide full information of these terms, at least, it strongly appealed to the bonds that tied the free to the enslaved Muslims in the thirteenth century.30

  • 31 Arkoun, 2006, pp. 74-78.
  • 32 See for this process: Losa, 1964 and Barros, 2005.
  • 33 Losa, 1964, pp.10-12; Gomes, 1996, pp. 312-315.
  • 34 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 415; Losa, 1964, p. 8; Gomes,1996, p. 328.
  • 35 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 328; Losa,1964, p. 9; Gomes, 1996, p. 328.

14Another reality emerged in the northern region of the Portuguese territory, implying that if all Muslims were Moors, not all Moors were Muslims. Contrary to the situation in the south, there were no legitimised Muslim communities there. Nevertheless, enslaved Muslims moving north formed a forced migratory current from the south, feeding a thriving market which extended at least to the south of France.31 In the thirteenth century, the Royal Inquiries (Inquirições) conducted in the northern territory of the realm (between the Rivers Minho and Douro – Entre Douro e Minho) gave a different significance to the word Moor as a second onomastic element from the Christian free population.32 The anthroponomic scheme corresponded, generally, to a Christian proper name followed by the nickname Moor. In contrast, in the main population the indication of the patronymic is attached to the first onomastic element. Their geographical distribution encompassed 43 localities in 1220, and 86 localities in 1258, which focused predominantly on rural areas and varying its occurrence between one or more individuals.33 This Christian-Moorish population appeared to be descended from Muslim slaves. A few but significant references attested to this premise in the Royal Inquiries of 1258. The memory of two rural settlements still preserved their Muslim origin. In Santo André de Gondomar (Guimarães), the population attested that the original Monastery was founded by the first king of Portugal (Afonso Henriques r. 1139–1185), who colonised the land with bois e de vacas et de eguas et de seus mouros et de seu auer (“oxen and cows and mares and his moors and his goods”).34 The inhabitants of Santa Maria da Âncora (Ponte de Lima) declared they had heard that Domna Mayor Velia had “one Moorish man and one Moorish woman” whom she set free to colonise the land.35

  • 36 PMH. Inquisitiones, pp. 359-360.
  • 37 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 360. Pedro Cunha Serra attributes the concentration of toponymy based on Ara (...)

15Toponomy also reflects a similar phenomenon. In Aguiar (Barcelos) three settlements were called Mauri de Suieirio Menendi (Moors of Soeiro Mendes), Mauri de Medio de Suerio Menendi (Moors of the Middle of Soeiro Mendes) and Mauri de Johane Menendi (Moors of João Mendes).36 No reference is made to the origin of these populations. Nevertheless, the preposition indicating belonging (“of”) applied to the Moors (even as a place name) strongly suggests a structured action from the original owner of the land - to expand the cultivated and inhabited areas with the recurrence to his contingent of Muslim captives. Three generations had passed from the colonisation of the territory when a text from 1258 mentions the filii et nepotes de ipso Menendi Sueirii (“the sons and grandsons of the said Mendo Soares”), the original lord of the lineage.37

  • 38 Losa, 1964, p. 16.
  • 39 It is, for example, the case of Petrus Maurus, who had donated to the church de Pubelidi unam pezam (...)
  • 40 For example: Domnus Maurus from Almargem, (PMH. Inquisitiones, pp. 877-879), another Domnus Maurus, (...)
  • 41 Idem, p. 865.
  • 42 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 1049.

16These New Christians were well integrated in the social structure of the region. The Inquiries of 1258 mentioned at least four priests who were Moors,38 as well as the practices of donation to churches or monasteries.39 Some individuals even enjoyed a demonstrative title of social prestige, Dom (“Lord”).40 Even so, the nickname Moor persisted into the middle of the thirteenth century. Onomastics blurred this tendency, with the adoption of the patronymic, as is the case of a João Fernandes, son of Fernando Peres and grandson of Petrus Maurus.41 But the collective memory retained the origin of this population, sustaining a mental boundary between the old and the new Christians of the region. In one case, in the village of Alvelos, two individuals with the same name testified as Martinho Moor. In the final part of the text, one of them is identified differently, as Martinho Viegas, dictus Mauro (“said Moor”).42 An endogenous and generational onomastic identity (represented, in this case by the patronymic Viegas – “son of Egas”) that opposed an exogenous and discriminatory classification (the said Moor) insistently and consistently applied by the main population to these descendants of Muslim slaves.

  • 43 The nickname Moor appears in the 13th century throughout the realm, though on a smaller scale than (...)
  • 44 Gomes, 1996, p. 315.

17Though this phenomenon is not exclusive to this region,43 the Royal Inquiries confirm a reality that encompassed the end of the twelfth century and the beginning of the thirteenth (considering the three generations that the text of 1248 consistently referred to), bearing witness to the manumission of the Muslim slaves and simultaneous conversion to Christianity. The assimilation in the social structures of the northern region of Portugal, framed by the parishes, seems to be completed in the next reign, that of Dinis (r. 1297-1325), in which there is a significant decline of the onomastic Moor44 – a referent that paradoxically Christianises but also invokes discrimination.

Slaves and captive Muslims

18The ending of the process of conquest (middle of the thirteenth century) left the realm with no capacity to further reproduce the phenomenon of slavery on its own, until 1415, the date of the Portuguese occupation of the Moroccan city of Ceuta. The war was over and free Muslims also participated in the colonisation of the southern territory of Portugal with the comunas. Moreover, these institutions stimulated the manumission of non-free individuals. In the northern region, on the other hand, the Moors were assimilated into the main Christian population.

  • 45 Customary law is represented by the Costumes (Costums) See, for instance, the Costumes from Santaré (...)
  • 46 See, for example Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, Title CXI, p. 405.

19And yet, the phenomenon persisted mainly due to the Iberian context of the fourteenth century, with the almost permanent state of war between Castille and Aragón with the Sultanate of Granada, on one hand, to the corsair activity, on the other. In this period, the Moor as slave, nonetheless, is semantically referred to as the “captive Moor” (mouro cativo), in contrast to the free Muslim (mouro forro), that was prevalent during this period in Portuguese society. It is this formulation that is found in the customary law,45 royal legislation46 and most of the private documents throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

  • 47 The terminology of Moors of Peace occurs in the 15th century, but only applied to Moroccan Muslims (...)
  • 48 ANTT, Ordem de Cister, Mosteiro de Santa Maria de Almoster, maço 5, docs. 19 and 46.
  • 49 Azevedo, 1903, p. 299, 1; Soyer, 2007, p. 495.

20New terminology, however, was introduced in the documentation due to the recurrence of the purchase of slaves in Seville: the Moors of War (slaves) in opposition to the Moors of Peace. A lexicon was imported from that city and its presence is limited to the deeds attesting to such contracts.47 Two sale contracts, written in Seville, on 10 January 1356, describe the purchase of two Moors by Pedro Roiz, Comendador de Santo Antão; one black, with curly hair, Abdallah from Teba, and the other white, named Homar from Alcácer. In both cases it was expressly declared that each one of them was a “Moor of war and not of peace”, as they expressly had declared themselves.48 In March 1386, in Lisbon, a Jewish merchant, Jucar Abeitar, sold to a nun from the Monastery of Chelas (Lisbon) a white Muslim woman, native from Aragón, named Murayma, whom he had bought in Seville. The contract attested that the Moorish woman had healthy feet, hands and eyes, was free from the devil or any other hidden illness, and that she had been legitimately enslaved as a result of war and not during peacetime (“... a quall moura lhj vendo por ssãa dos pees, e das maãhos e dos olhos e de demonjho e doutra door encuberta e por de bõa guerra e nõ de paz...”).49

  • 50 In 1305, the King Dinis from Portugal asked his homonym, Jaime II, from Aragon, to release two of h (...)
  • 51 Marques, 1988, Suplement to vol. I doc. 17, p. 27.

21The resort to Seville’s slave market, either directly or through Lisbon, seems to mark this second phase of slavery. In addition, the privateers’ activity in the service of the king or even the royal navy also played a role in this period.50 If the terminology of “captive Moor” pervaded the sources as a designation for “slave”, in some cases there is, in fact, a more direct dimension of the status of captivity, as a temporary condition to obtain a ransom. In 1321, King Dinis contracted with Abu Çarffam and Affia, his brother, who were in the royal prison, a large sum of money (10,000 golden dobras, later reduced to 7,000) in exchange for their release from captivity (pera os tirar de cativo). The Lord of Salé had committed to reimburse this amount. These Moroccan Muslims had been captured by the Portuguese Admiral, Manuel Pessanha, along with their mother, Moçaida and another Muslim, Mofamede.51 The social importance of the two brothers led the king to monetise them through a significant ransom.

  • 52 The main authority from Muslim comunas.
  • 53 A.N.T.T., Chancelaria de D. João I, book 5, fls. 33 v. - 34 .
  • 54 Barros, 2019.

22Muslim slaves also served other purposes, namely diplomatic. João I (r. 1385-1433), in 1397, delivered six Moors he had bought, to the alcaide52 and the Muslim community of Lisbon. They were to be delivered to Mafamede de Avis, his servant, who was to take four of them to North Africa to exchange for Christian captives; the other two, Mafomade Alfaie and Azmede, both from Granada, were to be delivered, by the same Mafamede de Avis, to the Sultan of Granada, “in service”.53 It is likely that this action was part of a broader diplomatic project: an alliance with Granada, during a period of war with Castile. There are precedents of a similar aim, in an analogous context (without success, however) in the reign of Afonso IV (r. 1325–1357).54

23The sources attested to the existence of a fluctuating Islamic population, in which captivity was considered as merely transitory and whose outcome was assumed by both sides: a predictable redemption and the consequent return to their homeland. Furthermore, the last document testifies to the relationship between Muslim slaves and free Muslims of the kingdom. The perception of religious identity plays in this aspect a relevant role, as demonstrated by the accountability for the six Muslim slaves bought by the king, who fell on the commune of Lisbon and its alcaide, Mafamede Almayar - the sole person responsible for their vigilance and accommodation at their own expense.

  • 55 Ordenações Afonsinas, book 2, tit. CXVIII, pp. 559-561.

24This perception by the Christian majority led to the protests by the Lisbon comuna to the King, in 1421. When the escape of Muslim captives occurred, they argued that the free Muslims of the city were subjected to violence through the intrusion of slave owners in their neighbourhood, the theft of their property and, also, the torments to which they were subjected when they resisted, even without any legal action – which was against the law. João I put an end to these abuses and established the mandatory institution of a judicial process in cases where the accusation justified it, with the plaintiff's oath and the presentation of competent witnesses.55

  • 56 See on this matter: Saunders, 1982; Fonseca, 2002; Fonseca, 2010.

25After the conquest of Ceuta in 1415, and the consequent Portuguese expansion through North Africa, the Moor became again a common commodity. There were differences, however, with the first period of the Christian conquest of the territory. First, primary sources include a significant number of alforria’s deeds, that is to say, contracts of manumission, proving a general trend to free these slaves, complemented by royal legislation. Secondly, the terminology changed. The general laws of the kingdom contemplate the sole expression of mouro cativo (captive Moor); yet there was a proliferation of terminology in other documentation, namely that of slave. Third, the introduction of black slaves from the African coast, who only in about 1550, replaced Muslims as the main slave ethnic group.56

  • 57 Chronicles report another discourse, namely with respect to the first half of the 15th century. Thu (...)
  • 58 João Álvares, in 1442 – ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 35, fl. 97 v. - and Álvaro da Silva, (...)
  • 59 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 10, fl. 44 v.
  • 60 Murça, - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 14, fl. 8 – and Çoleima - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. A (...)
  • 61 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 16, fl. 121; Idem, book 33, fl. 60; Idem, book 7, fl. 111; I (...)
  • 62 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 153; Idem, book 33, fl. 21; Idem, book 29, fl. 213; (...)
  • 63 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl . 217 V.; Idem, book 33, fl. 73; Idem, book 34, fl. 5 (...)
  • 64 Mafamede, serf of Vasco Eanes de Corte Real - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 30, fl. 55 v.; (...)

26The lexicon of slavery, partly associated to the processes of alforria, is diverse and differentiated, proving the multiplicity of vocabulary that shaped everyday life.57 King Afonso V (r. 1438–1481), for instance, freed two Christians each of which was designated as “our serf when he was Moor and our captive” (nosso servo em sendo mouro e nosso cativo).58 A Moroccan Muslim woman, Fátima, “who at present is our captive” (que ao presente é nossa cativa) was also liberated by the same king in 1454.59 Captive or moorish captive were also denominations applied for other Muslims under private ownership,60 together with those of slave,61 Moor slave62 or even only his/her Moor.63 On a smaller scale, serf was also employed per se, only this time also as a synonym of Muslim slave.64

  • 65 For Islamic onomastics in Medieval Portugal see: Barros, 2007, pp. 251-297.

27These divergent expressions encompassed only Muslim individuals, as attested by their Islamic first name.65 Nevertheless, their presence was complemented by that of sub-Saharan slaves, who gradually enacted themselves as the most socially representative substrate in terms of slavery structures – a reality, however, that only prevailed in the sixteenth century. New criteria were introduced for the differentiation of this heterogeneous slave population, based not only on a referent of religious identity (which ultimately did not include the totality of the referenced object), but also on descriptors of somatic or ethnic characteristics.

  • 66 In 1379, for example, a mention to two Muslim slaves, particularized that one was white and the oth (...)
  • 67 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl. 266 v.
  • 68 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 19 v.; Published Azevedo, 1915, I, Doc. 2, pp. 299-3 (...)
  • 69 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 17, fl. 39.
  • 70 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 15, fl. 18 v.
  • 71 From the plural Azenug (sing. idzagen), a nomadic Berber people who inhabited the Western Sahara – (...)

28In previous periods some of these referents had made an appearance.66 However, this distinction deepened and generalised in the fifteenth century, with repeated references to skin colour, – through the qualifications of negro/preto (niger/black) , branco/alvo, (white) or baço, (brown) – sometimes accompanied or replaced by the geographic origin, globally stated as mouro guineu (Guinean Moor),67 guinéu (Guinean),68 escravo da Guiné (Guinean slave),69 or mouro negro da Guiné (black moor from Guinea).70 Ethnic belonging was also another element of differentiation, as attested by the Moorish Berber azenegues.71

  • 72 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 17, fl. 39.
  • 73 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 61 v.
  • 74 Goldenberg, 2017, p. 106.

29Yet the ambiguity persisted. Neither the skin colour, nor the references to Guinea denote per se a boundary between Muslims and non-Muslim Sub-Saharan slaves. The geographical designation may correspond to Islamised individuals, as it seems with Omar (ár. ‘Umar), a Guinean slave from Beatriz Eanes, a widow from Setúbal,72 or Bucar (ár. Bakr) and his wife Axa (ár. ‘Ā’iša), both Guinean slaves from Gonçalo de Freitas, squire of the infant Fernando and also resident in Setúbal.73 Perhaps there was a distinction between the Berbers of Western Sahara, included in these examples, and other Sub-Saharan populations, both encompassed in Guinea, globally identified as the West African coast, as Goldenberg suggests.74

  • 75 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. CXI, pp. 404-405.
  • 76 Boom, 2011. To other reference to hostages see, for example: ANTT, Corpo Cronológico, Parte 1ª, maç (...)

30Despite particular and explicit referents (like azenegue), in general the diversity of terminology seems to indicate an undifferentiated way of describing slaves, rather than a precise terminology to classify them. Moors, captives, slaves, or serfs, all of them were subdued to the same proceedings of alforria or manumission, and therefore they were all considered as slaves, i.e., unfree population, property of someone else. It is not possible to draw a border between who should be considered as captives of war, namely the most significant Moroccan contingent, and other Muslims or Western Saharan individuals. In 1452, King Afonso V legislated about the conditions of manumission, of the captive Moors, defining them as those captured, those taken to the kingdom or those bought (como os Mouros cativos, que per os nossos naturais erom tomados, ou a elle trazidos, ou delles comprados – “like the captive Moors, who were taken by our natives, or brought to it [the kingdom], or bought from them”).75 No distinction was made between those captured by war or those who were objects of simple trade. Otherwise, the most important Muslim individuals captured in North Africa stayed in the kingdom with the statue of reféns (hostages). This was, for example, the case of Muley Muḥammad al-Burṭugalī (1464–1526), the future sultan Wattasida of Fez and son of the founder of the dynasty. Captured by the Portuguese in the conquest of Asila (August 1471), still a child of 8, his nickname was due to having remained in the kingdom for two years as a hostage.76

  • 77 Barton, 2015, p. 41.

31Women deserve a special mention for they constitute the most vulnerable elements in this sociological framework. The integration of many of them, particularly of slave Muslim women (to which the documentation refers) as domestic servants put them at the mercy of their respective male masters, a precarious position regarding sexual abuse. This is, in fact, “the ultimate colonising gesture”77 of the whole slavery process. Women become visible in the documentation either as sexual offenders and/or as the procreators of their master’s children.

  • 78 Ordenações Afonsinas, book V, tit. XXV, pp. 94-95.
  • 79 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 3, fl. 84.

32In the first case, due to the general law that forbade any interconfessional sexual relations, under the penalty of death, in line with the canonical ruling.78 Even the cases of rape by Christians were subjected to this legal norm. For one, Mariam, a Moorish slave of Master Fernando, cirurgião-mor (master surgeon) was allegedly raped by another slave, this time a Christian, named Diogo de Castro. Her master, who reported this incident to the Royal Chancellery, argued that the alleged rapist was known to be a very violent man (matador e acuitellador – “killer and slayer”), and that he had known this information after he subjected the woman to torment. Even so, Mariam had committed an offence by having sex with a Christian. Her master petitioned for a royal pardon for her, which was granted against the payment of a thousand reais, reimbursed by the surgeon.79

  • 80 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 7, fl. 28 v.

33A second set of cases, in the context of biological reproduction with a Muslim slave woman, the owners felt the need to convert the mothers of their children, even if not accompanied by the respective manumission. Paradigmatic is the case of João de Abreu, a member of the royal upper administration (aposentador mor) who had sexual intercourse with his slave from Asilah (Morocco) when she was still a Muslim. After having a son, he decided “to make a Christian out of her” (ele a tornara christã), with the name of Isabel, as well as baptising the new-born. In 1476, João de Abreu asked for royal forgiveness for his infractions – having sex with a Muslim woman and having a son with her – which the king pardoned. He still “made him mercy" from the said slave, who should have been confiscated by the Crown, as required by law.80

  • 81 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 21.

34Isabel remained unfree, though converted to Christianity. Another Moor captive woman shared the same destiny: Aljofar, who belonged to João Gonçalves Rasto, from Tavira. They had maintained a relationship before her conversion to Christianity, from which two children were born. Alleging the old age of the partners, at the time (the man was 70 and the woman 75 years old) and the physical problems of the woman (she was paralytic and blind), João Gonçalves Rasto asked for royal pardon just for himself, which was conceded, in 1471, in exchange for the payment of a thousand reais.81 Anyway, an old blind paralytic female slave would be of no concern to the Crown.

  • 82 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 9, fl. 91.

35Muslim women were particularly fit to fulfil domestic tasks both for Muslims and for Jews, due to the similar precepts of purity and impurity (though not entirely coincidental) in the two religions. In 1491, the Jew Juda Ambrão, from Santiago do Cacém (Alentejo), reported to the royal administration an infraction he had committed with a female Moor from Asilah, his slave. Being a widower, he had engaged in intercourse with her and had a son, who he had circumcised with auto e cerimónia (“act and ceremonial”) following Jewish custom. His misdemeanour was pardoned against the payment of five hundred reais.82 Once again, the destiny of the female slave is silent.

Manumission

  • 83 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. CXI, pp. 404-405.

36The processes of alforria (manumission) provide supplementary information on the semantics of Muslims, as well as on the mentality and ideology of Portuguese society towards an unfree population. This is evident in the political actions of the monarchy. In 1452, the above-mentioned law about captive Moors determined that manumission could only be carried out with money brought from outside the Kingdom or through the rescue of captive Christians in Terra de Mouros (Land of the Moors). The justification was that the previous “ways” were of little benefit for the Portuguese in general and for their owners in particular, and “damaged the land”.83 In fact, manumission was achieved through the paid work of slaves, in agreement with the respective owners, which implied an economic competition with the Christian majority that clearly was perceived in the middle of the fifteenth century.

  • 84 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 52 v.

37To whom was the law aimed, only to Muslim slaves or in a broader perspective, to all slaves? Actually, it would be at the very least difficult (if not impossible) for Sub-Saharan individuals to achieve these requirements, for they were apart from the Islamic world, socially as well as culturally. On the contrary, Muslims from North Africa would maintain a close relationship with their homeland, through their relatives and previous circles of socialisation. Mafamede Abelhos, captive Moor of Afonso Teles, alcaide-mor from Campo Maior (Alentejo) was, in 1471, authorised by the king to go safely to North Africa, “to his Moor relatives and friends” to work and obtain the sum requested by his owner for his liberty, as well as that of his wife and sons. However, his family had to stay in the kingdom as an assurance of his return, and the Muslim comuna from Lisbon acted as guarantor for the amount contracted with his proprietor.84

  • 85 Failure to comply with this rule led to the confiscation of newly freed by the king. In 1480, that (...)
  • 86 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 22, fls. 102 - 102 v.; published: Coelho, 1943, doc. CXL, p. (...)

38These elements point to a trend that, at least from the middle of the fifteenth century, really divided the slave phenomenon in the Portuguese kingdom on the basis of religious identity. Muslims were the main target of these royal policies. First, with the control of the manumission process. The deeds of manumission (cartas de alforria) were (at least from the 1480s) mandatorily confirmed by the king, surpassing the previous contracts established between the slave and the respective master.85 In 1484, Jufez Alferez from Asilah, who presented himself as a free Moor (mouro forro), requested to the Royal Chancellery, the confirmation of his carta de alforria (manumission document). On 18 March 1473, when he was a captive Moor of the Earl of Atalaia, Pedro Meneses, he contracted his freedom in exchange for his continued work for a period of ten years, during which he would serve his master in weaving and any other services that were required of him, with no attempt of escape. Furthermore, the earl pledged to obtain a royal charter, to allow the Muslim man to return to his homeland in North Africa after his manumission. Among the witnesses of this contract, there was a free Muslim, Omar Alicante, a potter from Lisbon. The alforria of Jufez Alferez was confirmed by the royal administration. Nevertheless, there was a twist from the original contract: he had to live in the kingdom and could not depart from it without a royal licence (comtanto que viua comtinuadamente em nossos Regnos e se nam vaa delles sem nossa lliçença).86

  • 87 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl. 213 (1470); Idem, book 30, fl. 166 (1471); Idem, boo (...)
  • 88 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 14, fl. 8 and fl. 61v. (1466); Idem, book 32, fls. 7 - 7 v ( (...)
  • 89 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 153 (1469).
  • 90 See Barros, 2007, pp. 144-152.
  • 91 These spaces are expressly invoked in the case of a “white slave” named Aixa, who had to live in th (...)

39 This clause was systematically repeated especially in royal documents that allowed Muslim slaves (and only Muslim ones), men and women, to earn the necessary sum to acquire their manumission by performing paid work in the kingdom - in spite of the law issued in 1452 that forbade it.87 In some cases, the formula is supplemented: “and doing otherwise, he will become our captive” (e fazendo o contrairo fique por nosso cativo)88 or “he shall pay us our rights” (e nos pague nossos direitos).89 The royal fiscality plays a central role in the passage from unfree to free Muslim, due to the tributary onus imposed on the mouros forros. It was a way to increase the royal income and to counteract the demographic decline of the Muslim minority.90 The structures already existed to integrate and culturally assimilate these foreigners, the Muslim comunas, with their own living spaces, the Mourarias.91

  • 92 ANTT, Livro 2 de Odiana, fl. 254 v.

40 The significant number of these privileges granting Muslim slaves the right to work to pay their manumission seems to suggest a new trend in royal politics. From the prohibition to do so, with the law of 1452, a new consciousness had been consolidated, especially since the 70's: that of the integration of these foreign Muslims in the structures, even the economic ones, of the kingdom. This tendency was reinforced by João II (r. 1481–1495) in 1487, when he authorised the captive Moors of Tavira (Algarve) to arrange their respective manumissions directly with their masters. He did so under the condition that they remained in the kingdom, “in the manner of the other free Moors” and didn´t leave it without royal permission (na maneyra dos outros mouros forros das mourarias E dellas se nam partam sem nossa liçemca).92

  • 93 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 7, fl. 111.

41 These points of data suggest that manumission was the natural destiny of Muslim slaves. It should not be so, but anyway it was a strong trend in the second half of the fifteenth century. The reasons emerge in the primary sources. In 1476, for example, two individuals from Tavira (Algarve), alleged that, because of the war with Castille, Christians received “great damage” because of the slaves who fled there. For that reason, they agreed with their slaves, Alacem and Barque, that they would free them after they worked for an unspecified number of years, without asking the necessary royal permission. They were forgiven by the king and their contract was confirmed, under the condition that the two Muslims would remain in the kingdom and would not depart to the Land of the Moors93 after their manumission.

  • 94 Ordenações Afonsinas, book II, tit. CXIII, tit. CXIIII and tit. CXVIII.
  • 95 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 11, fl. 34.
  • 96 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 1, fl. 116; Idem, book 13, fl. 132 v.; Idem, book 13, fl. 65 (...)

42The context of war was not the only justification behind the escape of Muslim slaves. The runaway of Muslims is a theme that pervaded fifteenth century documentation. In the second book of the Ordenações Afonsinas (the general laws of the realm), three titles out of the 24 dedicated to the Muslims are exclusively committed to the escaping of captive Moors.94 Although these laws concerned the first half of the century, for they were published during the reign of João I (r. 1385–1433) and Duarte (r. 1433–1438), the same question goes through the whole century. In 1451, the representatives of Faro (Algarve) complained to the king that they were being “very mistreated by the natives of Castile, especially by those from the city of Seville and Andalusian villages” (muyto mall trautados dos naturaes de Castela, especialmente da cidade de Sevilha e vilas desta Andaluzia), who “deceived their Moors and serfs” (engalharem nossos mouros e servos) taking them from the country.95 Furthermore, the theft of captive Moors is reported in some judicial processes.96

  • 97 This privilege was granted to the comunas of Loulé, in 1463 (ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book (...)

43 In the procedures of manumission, free Muslims and their communities (comunas) were crucial. Primarily as individual witnesses of the contracts, but also as guarantors of the conditions agreed and, above all, as supporters in the processes of integration for these foreigners. Between 1463 and 1487, comunas played an even more active role in the liberation of their enslaved congeners. During this period, the main communities of the realm appealed to the king with a petition of the same content: In the times of the previous monarchs, they argued, the comuna and some individuals in it bought enslaved Muslim men and women (captive Moors) to free and to marry them. In this way, they would settle in the territory and live in it. But with the law that forbade them to achieve manumission with money from the kingdom, they did not dare to do so, asking royal permission to surpass it, since that was also a service to the king. The petition was accepted in any case, determining that free Muslims could buy any “captive Moors” and free them, with the condition that they settled in the kingdom and could not depart from it without a royal licence.97

  • 98 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 38, fl. 61.
  • 99 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 60.

44An identical text was used by the different comunas of the kingdom. It envisaged a common and organised effort by free Muslims of the whole kingdom to free and integrate their enslaved congeners. If the aṣabiyya (Islamic solidarity) could play a part in this process, furthermore, it appears to be crucial that the demographic and economic needs of the communities themselves be met. As a matter of fact, although Islamic law prevented its faithful from enslaving their coreligionists, Portuguese society enabled a different reality. Muslims were enslaved by their own kind as, for example, Fátima Azenega, slave (escrava) of Caçome Santolai, a Muslim from Lisbon,98 or a convert named Fernando, who was already a Muslim when he was bought by Brafome, mouro forro (free Moor) from Faro (Algarve).99

  • 100 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. LI, pp. 184-185.
  • 101 Ordenações Afonsinas, book II, tit. CVI, p. 42.
  • 102 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 60.

45Conversions to Christianity, as this last example illustrates, express another trend of the fifteenth century. It is a phenomenon that facilitated but did not determine manumission – Christian slaves still existed. In any case, it played an important role in the limitation of slaves owned by members of religious minorities. A law published by King Afonso V (r. 1438–1481) forbade the Jews to possess any “captive Moors” who converted to Christianity. A period of two months was assigned to sell them to other Christians, under penalty of losing them to the Crown.100 Although this law was not explicitly directed at the Portuguese Muslims, it undeniably also applied to them, given the canonical assertion of Christian superiority over religious minorities and the consequent prohibition of Jews and Muslims to have any Christian servants. King Duarte (r. 1433–1438) fulfilled this canonical precept in respect to Muslims.101 The said case of Fernando clearly illustrated this interdiction. When he was a Moor, he belonged to Brafome (ar. Ibrāhīm), a Muslim from Faro who, as long as Fernando converted to Christianity, “no longer cared for him, because he had no right over him” (nom curara delle mays por nom teer em elle dereito). Ultimately, he obtained manumission,102 as well as many of the other converted slaves.

  • 103 ANTT, Livro 1 dos Reis, fl. 89.
  • 104 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 24, fl. 39 v.
  • 105 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 35, fl. 97 v.
  • 106 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 11, fl. 66 v.

46Conversion also conveyed a psychological factor that led masters to free slaves namely through their testamentary clauses, in conformity to Christian precepts. For instance, the provision of the infant Fernando (1402–1433), son of João I, who by his will granted freedom to four of his serfs “for the honour of Christianity and the water of baptism that they accepted” (por homrra da christiimdade E agua do baptismo que tomarom).103 In 1444, the royal confirmation of one of these serfs, João Fernandes, who was previously Muslim and Fernando’s “captive”, inserted the common formula for these cases: “we make him free and exempt him and his children and heirs who after him come and descend, in the same way that are the other Christians of our kingdoms” (fazemo llo livre e forro e isento elle e seus filhos e herdeiros que depos ell vierem e decenderem asy e pella gisa que o sam os outros christãaos naturaaes de nossos regnos).104 Another previous serf Moor and “captive” of the King Afonso V, João Álvares, was freed, in 1444, “in honour of the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ” (em honrra da morte e paixão de Nosso Senhor Jhesus Christo).105 Other formulas, like “to give him/her grace and mercy in alms” or “for the honour of our holy faith”106 testify the explicit recurrence to Christian doctrine to free those slaves.

47Even so, the archival sources are much more significant in number in respect to the manumission of Muslims than to that of converts. Ultimately, the comunas replicated a valuable model for the integration and cultural assimilations of these ex-slaves as Muslims, “the same way as the other free Muslims of the kingdom”, as the documentation states.

Conclusion

48The figure of the Moor in its different gradations and semantics pervaded Portuguese medieval society from the twelfth century onwards. Furthermore, Portuguese language attained from the Arabic all the vocabulary related to liberty and manumission, still operating in the last quarter of the fifteenth century. From the root ḥurr (to free), free Muslims were designated as Mouros forros (ḥurr, subst. – free), the process of manumission as alforria (al- ḥurriyya – freedom), the verb as alforriar. If doubt persisted this sole fact attests to the importance of the enslaved Muslim, on one side, the permanent possibility for them to acquire freedom, on the other, during the process of Christian conquest, in the twelfth until the middle of the thirteenth century. The state of war replicated this in the fifteenth century, this time in the Moroccan territory. In any case, the Moor again gained a centrality in political discourses, despite the considerable differences between the two temporal contexts. If, in the first period, manumission was a process that seemed more challenging to be achieved as compared to the last – when it seems almost a natural feature for Muslims – in the thirteenth as in the fifteenth centuries the transformation of unfree into fiscal subjects (naturally freed) was a trend encouraged by Christian powers. The communities of free Muslims (comunas) ensured, in any case, the integration of the newly freed individuals. Moreover, the capture of the non-Muslim Sub-Saharan population and its progressive spread in the fifteenth century, permitted the creation of a boundary defined by religious identity. Muslims were more favoured by the conditions of manumission, because they were supported and integrated by the Islamic comunas, in an unstoppable relationship between free and unfree Muslims, from, at least, the thirteenth century.

49The lexicon of slavery changed dramatically along the period considered. The Moor as the sole synonym of slave in conjunction with serf, from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries evolved to captive Moor in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and to a multiplicity of other various referents. The medieval attempts to classify and, consequently, identify different typologies of slaves, from the colour of the skin to ethnic or geographical terms seems to complicate more than clarify this issue: a Muslim could be defined by all or some part of these elements. Even so, Moor continued to be a structured base of slave identification that from the twelfth century extended itself to the whole medieval period.

Bibliographie

Published Primary Sources

AZEVEDO, Pedro A. (ed.) (1915-1934). Documentos das chancelarias reais anteriores a 1531 relativos a Marrocos, 2 vols. Lisboa: Real Academia das Ciências.

AZEVEDO, Pedro A.; Freire, A. Braancamp (ed.) (2003). Livro dos Bens de D. João de Portel. Cartulário do séc. XIII, Nota Prévia ao Fac-Símile de Hermenegildo Fernandes. Lisboa: Colibri.

COELHO, M. P. Laranjo (dir.) (1943). Documentos inéditos de Marrocos: Chancelaria de D. João II. Lisboa: Academia das Ciências.

GOMES, Saul António (2018). “As capelas do rei D. Dinis”. Fragmenta Historica, 6.

MARQUES, João Martins da Silva (dir.) (1988). Descobrimentos Portugueses: Documentos para a sua História, 3 vols. Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Investigação Científica [reprodução fac-similada de 1944].

MARTINS, Diana (2019). “Carta de D. Dinis a Jaime II de Aragão, pedindo a libertação de dois corsários do Algarve (1305)”. Fragmenta História, 7, pp. 99-100.

Ordenações Afonsinas (1984). Ed. Preparada por Martim de Albuquerque e Eduardo Borges Nunes, 5 vols. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

Portugalia Monumenta Historica. (1856-1888). Lisboa: Academia das Ciências.

RODRIGUES, Maria Celeste Matias (1992). Dos Costumes de Santarém, Tese de Mestrado em Linguística Portuguesa apresentada à Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa.

SEABRA, Ricardo (2017). “O tabelião e a escrava: transcrição de um escambo quatrocentista”. Fontes, 4-6, pp. 1-5. https://doi.org/10.34024/fontes.2017.v4.9382

SALICRU I LLUCH, Roser (1999). Documents per a la Història de Granada del regnat d’Alfons el Magnànim (1416-1458). Barcelona: CSIC (Anejos del Anuario de Estudios Medievales).

Secondary sources

ARKOUN, Mohammed (dir.) (2006). Histoire de l’Islam et des musulmans en France du Moyen Âge à nos jours. Paris: Éditions Albin Michel.

AZEVEDO, Pedro A. (1903). “Os escravos”. Arquivo Histórico Português 1, pp. 289-307.

AZEVEDO, Pedro A. (1910). “Cartas de alforria”. Arquivo Histórico Português, VIII, pp. 441-446.

BARBOSA, Pedro Gomes (1991). Documentos, Lugares e Homens. Estudos de História Medieval. Lisboa: Cosmos.

BARROS, Henrique da Gama (1833-1925). História da Administração Pública em Portugal, 5 vols. Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional.

BARROS, Maria Filomena Lopes de (2005). “Mouros da Terra e Terra de Mouros”. In Barroca, Mário Jorge; Fernandes, Isabel Cristina F. (coord.), Muçulmanos e Cristãos entre Tejo e Douro (Sécs. VIII a XIII). Palmela-Porto: Câmara Municipal de Palmela – Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto, pp. 167-172

BARROS, Maria Filomena Lopes de (2007). Tempos e Espaços de Mouros. A Minoria Muçulmana no Reino Português (Séculos XII a XV). Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian / Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia.

BARROS, Maria Filomena Lopes de (2017). “Duarte Fernandes ou Cid Abdallah: um mourisco na Inquisição de Lisboa (1553-1555)”. Actas XIII Simposio Internacional de Mudejarismo. Teruel: Centro de Estudios Mudéjares, pp. 323-340.

BARROS, Maria Filomena Lopes de (2019). “A minoria muçulmana do reino português e os contactos diplomáticos com o dār al-islām”. In Virgil Monte, Nestor (dir.). Comunicación política y diplomacia en la Baja Edad Media. Évora: Cidehus. books.openedition.org/cidehus/6792

BARTON, Simon (2015). Conquerors, Brides and Concubines. Interfaith Relations and Social Power in Medieval Iberia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

BOUM, Aoumar (2011). “Muhammad al-Burtughali (1465–1524)”. In Akyeampong, Emmanuel; Gates, Henry Louis (eds). Dictionary of African Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 300-302.

CONDE, Antónia Fialho (2016). “O quotidiano na clausura feminina eborense e a presença de população escrava: a fronteira entre o servir das portas adentro e das portas afora no período moderno”. Revista Portuguesa de História 47, pp. 35-53.

EPSTEIN, Steven A. (2001). Speaking of Slavery. New York: Cornell University.

FONSECA, Jorge (2002). Escravos no Sul de Portugal. Séculos XVI e XVII. Lisboa: Vulgata.

FONSECA, Jorge (2010). Escravos e Senhores na Lisboa Quinhentista. Lisboa: Ed. Colibri.

FONSECA, Jorge (2014). “A historiografia sobre os escravos em Portugal”. Cultura. Revista de História e de Teoria das Ideias, 33, pp. 191-218. https://doi.org/10.4000/cultura.2422

GOLDENBERG, David M. (2017). Black and Slave. The Origins and History of the curse of Ham. Berlin – Boston: De Gruyter.

GOMES, Saul António (1996). “Grupos Étnico-Religiosos e Estrangeiros”. In Coelho, Maria Helena da Cruz; Homem, Armando Luís de Carvalho (coord.), Portugal em Definição de Fronteiras: do Condado Portucalense à Crise do Séc. XIV, (Serrão, Joel; Marques, A.H. de Oliveira (dir.), Nova História de Portugal, vol. III). Lisboa: Editorial Presença.

GOMES, Saul António (2001). “Um formulário monástico português medieval: o manuscrito alcobacense 47 da BNL”. In Coelho, Maria Helena da Cruz et alii (ed.). Estudos de Diplomática Portuguesa. Lisboa: Colibri, pp. 191-232.

LOSA, António (1964). “Os ‘mouros’ de entre Douro e Minho no séc. XIII”. Bracara Augusta, XVI-XVII, pp. 240-248.

MATTOSO, José (2002). O Monaquismo Ibérico e Cluny. Mem Martins: Círculo de Leitores.

SERRA, Pedro Cunha (1967). Contribuição topo-antroponímica para o estudo do povoamento do Noroeste peninsular. Lisboa: Livraria Sá da Costa.

SAUNDERS, A.C. de C.M. (1982). A Social History of black slaves and freedmen in Portugal –1441-1555. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SOYER, François (2007). “Muslim slaves and freedmen in Medieval Portugal”. Al-Qantara, XXVIII-2, pp. 489-516.

VIANA, Mário (2012). “Os cavaleiros de Santarém na segunda metade do séc. XIII”. In Vilar, Hermínia Vasconcelos; Barros, Maria Filomena Lopes de (eds.). Categorias sociais e mobilidade urbana na Baixa Idade Média. Entre o Islão e a Cristandade. Lisboa – Évora: Ed. Colibri-CIDEHUS-UÉ, pp. 61-82.

VERLINDEN, Charles (1955). L’esclavage dans l’Europe médiévale, Tome I, Péninsule Ibérique-France. Bruges: De Tempel.

Notes

1 For a general view of the bibliography on Portuguese slavery see: Fonseca, 2014. However, the author does not mention the article of Soyer, 2007.

2 Epstein, 2001, p. 19.

3 See González Arévalo, in this book.

4 Pedro de Azevedo referred that the most ancient mention of escravo that he had found dated from 1462, related to sub-Saharan individuals – Pedro de Azevedo, 1903, p. 290. Epstein, 2001, p. 19.

5 See, for instance, Conde, 2016.

6 See González González, in this book.

7 Gomes, 1996, p. 326.

8 Portugalia Monumenta Historica (onwards PMH). Leges, p. 407.

9 Apud Gomes, 1996, p. 313.

10 Azevedo & Freire, 2003, p. LXXIV.

11 See, for instance, the expressions: j maurum qui vocatur Mafomede et una asina cum sua filia (“a Moor who is called Mafomede and a female donkey and her calf”), from the will of D. Garcia (end if the 12th century or beginning of the 13th) – Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (onwards ANTT), Mosteiro de Chelas maço 3, doc. 49; totos meos mauros et meas mauras et duas mulas et duos rocines et XXij vacas [cows] et XXX oues [sheeps] et totos meos porcos (“all my Muslim men and women and two mules and two nags and 22 cows and 30 sheeps and all my pigs”) – will of Elvira Peres, 1151- ANTT, Stª. Cruz de Coimbra, maço 3, doc. 31; Ib. book 4, fls. 8 – 8 v. For other references to Moors slaves in private wills for the 12th and 13th century see: Soyer 2007, pp. 491-482; Barbosa, 1991, p. 129.

12 Gomes, 2018, p. 44.

13 Mattoso, 2002, 196.

14 Verlinden, p. 385 and pp. 392-403.

15 On this theme see for Portugal: Barros, 1833-1925, II, pp. 22-90; see, also, for Asturias Raúl González González, on this book.

16 This happens across all of Europe. In Italy, in the 13th century, serf remained as the most common word to refer to slaves – Epstein, 2001, p. 18

17 Azevedo, 1910.

18 Gomes, 2001.

19 Gomes, 2001, doc. 1, p. 209.

20 Gomes, 2001, doc. 18, p. 216.

21 Gomes, 2001, doc. 27, p. 221.

22 This trend in the Portuguese is attested in the forais. See: Verlinden, 1955, pp. 408-412.

23 Barros, 2007, p. 52.

24 ANTT, Gavetas, maço 3, doc. 2.

25 About this concept see Viana 2012; on the miles João Viegas – Idem, pp.66-68.

26 ANTT, Convento de Santa Clara de Santarém, maço 3, doc. 88.

27 https://sites.google.com/site/foraisextensos/foros-de-castelo-rodrigo/foros-da-guarda#_ftn1, item 185 [last consulted 4th august 2020].

28 Cf. Verlinden,1955, p. 492.

29 Rodrigues, 1992, p. 181.

30 A tie that is particularly documented for the kingdom of Valencia – cf. Soyer, 2007, p. 500.

31 Arkoun, 2006, pp. 74-78.

32 See for this process: Losa, 1964 and Barros, 2005.

33 Losa, 1964, pp.10-12; Gomes, 1996, pp. 312-315.

34 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 415; Losa, 1964, p. 8; Gomes,1996, p. 328.

35 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 328; Losa,1964, p. 9; Gomes, 1996, p. 328.

36 PMH. Inquisitiones, pp. 359-360.

37 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 360. Pedro Cunha Serra attributes the concentration of toponymy based on Arab personal names in the peninsular Northwest to this movement of colonization of Muslim enslaved individuals – Serra, 1967, pp. 101-111.

38 Losa, 1964, p. 16.

39 It is, for example, the case of Petrus Maurus, who had donated to the church de Pubelidi unam pezam de hereditate forariam Regis in Vallis, in the time of the king Sancho II (r. 1223-1248) - (PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 866).

40 For example: Domnus Maurus from Almargem, (PMH. Inquisitiones, pp. 877-879), another Domnus Maurus, from Coja (Idem, p. 1103) or D. Johannis Maurus, from Sta. Eulália de Nespereiro (Idem, p. 795).

41 Idem, p. 865.

42 PMH. Inquisitiones, p. 1049.

43 The nickname Moor appears in the 13th century throughout the realm, though on a smaller scale than the region of Entre Douro e Minho – cf. Barros, 2017, pp. 38-39.

44 Gomes, 1996, p. 315.

45 Customary law is represented by the Costumes (Costums) See, for instance, the Costumes from Santarém, in which mouro cativo (captive Moor) is repeated nine times, in contraposition to mouro forro (Free Moor), quoted 17 times – cf. Rodrigues, 1992.

46 See, for example Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, Title CXI, p. 405.

47 The terminology of Moors of Peace occurs in the 15th century, but only applied to Moroccan Muslims allies of the Portuguese.

48 ANTT, Ordem de Cister, Mosteiro de Santa Maria de Almoster, maço 5, docs. 19 and 46.

49 Azevedo, 1903, p. 299, 1; Soyer, 2007, p. 495.

50 In 1305, the King Dinis from Portugal asked his homonym, Jaime II, from Aragon, to release two of his corsairs from Algarve, whose boat was apprehended by the Aragonese admiral – Martins, 2019. In 1433, Queen Maria of Aragon asked João I of Portugal for the release of Abdurramen Madçor, a free Muslim from Valencia, imprisoned by the captain of the Portuguese fleet when he was going from Almeria to Tlemcen “to learn and study ” (por aprender e studiar) - Salicrú I Lluch, 1999, doc. 284, pp. 337-338.

51 Marques, 1988, Suplement to vol. I doc. 17, p. 27.

52 The main authority from Muslim comunas.

53 A.N.T.T., Chancelaria de D. João I, book 5, fls. 33 v. - 34 .

54 Barros, 2019.

55 Ordenações Afonsinas, book 2, tit. CXVIII, pp. 559-561.

56 See on this matter: Saunders, 1982; Fonseca, 2002; Fonseca, 2010.

57 Chronicles report another discourse, namely with respect to the first half of the 15th century. Thus, in his Crónica do Descobrimento e Conquista da Guiné, (Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guiné), Gomes Eanes de Zurara used the term Moor to designate the Other in general, namely the populations of the West African Coast.

58 João Álvares, in 1442 – ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 35, fl. 97 v. - and Álvaro da Silva, in 1444 - Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 24, fl. 80 v.

59 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 10, fl. 44 v.

60 Murça, - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 14, fl. 8 – and Çoleima - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 14, fl. 61 v. – are expressed referred as being from the Kingdom of Fez (Morocco); also Moroccan was Ali, from Gebel Sidi Habib – Idem, book 29, fl. 217 v.; Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 30, fl. 166; Idem, book 17, fl. 39; Idem, book 13, fl. 132 v.; Idem, book 1, fl. 116; Idem, book 33, fls. 75 v. – 76; ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 22, fls. 102 - 102 v.

61 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 16, fl. 121; Idem, book 33, fl. 60; Idem, book 7, fl. 111; Idem, book 26, fl. 109 v.; Idem, 7, fl. 28 v.; Idem, book 6, fl. 58; ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 3, fl. 48 v.; Idem, book 27, fl. 33; Idem, book 23, fl. 74 (Jufez, from Asilah – Morocco); Idem, book 2, fl. 120; Idem, book 23, fl. 113; Idem, book 15, fl. 22; Idem, book 13, fls. 89 - 89 v.; Idem, book 9, fl. 93

62 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 153; Idem, book 33, fl. 21; Idem, book 29, fl. 213; Idem, book 38, fl. 79; Idem, 32, fl. 68 v.; Idem, book 6, fls. 67 - 67 v.; ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 22, fls. 103 v.; Idem, book 3, fl. 84; Idem,book 23, fl. 23; Idem, book 13, fl. 18

63 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl . 217 V.; Idem, book 33, fl. 73; Idem, book 34, fl. 5; Idem, book 29, fl. 258 v.; Idem, book 33 fls. 140 - 140 v.; Idem, book 6, fl. 25; Idem, book 30, fls. 82 – 82 v.; Idem, book 7, fl. 86 v.: Idem, book 6, fl. 48; ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 1, fl. 10 v.

64 Mafamede, serf of Vasco Eanes de Corte Real - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 30, fl. 55 v.; Mafomede Zarroeo, serf of João Lopes – Idem, book 26, fl. 144 v. – or Feyate Ajulejo, serf of the king – Chancelaria de D. João II, book 2, fl. 7.

65 For Islamic onomastics in Medieval Portugal see: Barros, 2007, pp. 251-297.

66 In 1379, for example, a mention to two Muslim slaves, particularized that one was white and the other black – ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João I, book 5, fls. 33 v. – 34.

67 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl. 266 v.

68 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 19 v.; Published Azevedo, 1915, I, Doc. 2, pp. 299-300.

69 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 17, fl. 39.

70 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 15, fl. 18 v.

71 From the plural Azenug (sing. idzagen), a nomadic Berber people who inhabited the Western Sahara – Saunders, 1982, p. 5; Goldenberg, 2017, p. 106. Examples: Fátima azenega slave of a Muslim from Lisbon, Caçome Santolai – ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 38, fl. 61; Ali Azenegue, resident in the Moorish quarter of Lisbon - ANTT, Núcleo Antigo nº 318, fl. 53; Luís “who was azenegue”, murdered in the city of Setúbal, around 1464 - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 8, fl. 6.

72 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 17, fl. 39.

73 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 61 v.

74 Goldenberg, 2017, p. 106.

75 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. CXI, pp. 404-405.

76 Boom, 2011. To other reference to hostages see, for example: ANTT, Corpo Cronológico, Parte 1ª, maço 2, doc. 74; The passage from hostage to slave is attested by some sources. In a process from the Inquisition (October 1553 – March 1555) a witness, António de Abreu, declared that he was brought to the Portuguese kingdom, as a child, with a group of other youths, as hostages to an agreement between Portugal and the notables of El-Madina el-Gharbiya (Morocco). Failing to meet the agreed clauses, he ended up losing his freedom – Barros, 2017, p. 326

77 Barton, 2015, p. 41.

78 Ordenações Afonsinas, book V, tit. XXV, pp. 94-95.

79 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 3, fl. 84.

80 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 7, fl. 28 v.

81 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 21.

82 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 9, fl. 91.

83 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. CXI, pp. 404-405.

84 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 22, fl. 52 v.

85 Failure to comply with this rule led to the confiscation of newly freed by the king. In 1480, that was the case of the “women and men slaves” from Gomes Borges who were freed after some years (not specified) of service to their master. Nonetheless, as the contract was not approved by the King, they were again reduced to slavery and given as such to Fernão de Almeida, scrivener of the Royal Chancellery - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 32, fl. 125. In 1483, a royal squire from Santarém, who had agreed with his slave Mafamede, a service of 9 years in order to free him, was pardoned by the king in spite of having not asked the royal confirmation of the contract - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 27, fl. 33.

86 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 22, fls. 102 - 102 v.; published: Coelho, 1943, doc. CXL, p. 153 (the name of the Muslim is incorrectly transcribed as Inifez Alnuciez /Infez Allnuciez e Inifez).

87 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 29, fl. 213 (1470); Idem, book 30, fl. 166 (1471); Idem, book 17, fl. 39 (1471); Idem, book 29, fl. 217 v. (1472); Idem, book 33, fl. 73; Idem, book 7, fl. 111 (1476).

88 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 14, fl. 8 and fl. 61v. (1466); Idem, book 32, fls. 7 - 7 v (1480); Idem, book 26, fl. 109 v (1481); ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 3, fl. 48 v. (1482); Idem, book 23, fl. 74 (1484).

89 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 153 (1469).

90 See Barros, 2007, pp. 144-152.

91 These spaces are expressly invoked in the case of a “white slave” named Aixa, who had to live in the Mourarias from the kingdom after her manumission - ANTT, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 22, fls. 103v.

92 ANTT, Livro 2 de Odiana, fl. 254 v.

93 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 7, fl. 111.

94 Ordenações Afonsinas, book II, tit. CXIII, tit. CXIIII and tit. CXVIII.

95 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 11, fl. 34.

96 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 1, fl. 116; Idem, book 13, fl. 132 v.; Idem, book 13, fl. 65 v.; Idem, book 6 fl. 25; Idem, book 30, fl. 73 v.

97 This privilege was granted to the comunas of Loulé, in 1463 (ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 9, fls. 105v.-106), Santarém and Tavira, in 1466 (Idem, Ib., book 38, fl. 60; Idem, Ib., book 14, fl. 109 v.), Lisboa, in 1471 (Idem, Ib., book 21, fl. 73 v.), Elvas, in 1472 (confirmed in 1487 - Idem, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 21, fl. 121), Moura, in 1474 (Idem, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 160) and Beja, in 1487 (Idem, Chancelaria de D. João II, book 20, fl. 30 v.). Cf. Barros, 2007, p. 176.

98 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 38, fl. 61.

99 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 60.

100 Ordenações Afonsinas, book IV, tit. LI, pp. 184-185.

101 Ordenações Afonsinas, book II, tit. CVI, p. 42.

102 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 33, fl. 60.

103 ANTT, Livro 1 dos Reis, fl. 89.

104 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 24, fl. 39 v.

105 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 35, fl. 97 v.

106 ANTT, Chancelaria de D. Afonso V, book 11, fl. 66 v.

© Publicações do Cidehus, 2021

Licence OpenEdition Books

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search