So much for good-tempered and obedient slaves. Where the contrary qualities show themselves, Œzbeg barbarity and cruelty make themselves felt in all their force. It is enough to make one's hair stand on end to read the list of punishments used to compel a refractory slave to obedience. The master has legal right of life and death over his slave. It very seldom happens, however, that he actually kills him, as he thereby loses the whole of his purchase money; but the miseries which he inflicts on him are worse than death itself. Many are kept for years together on mere bread and water in the midst of the lonely deserts; others, a few days before their seven years have expired, are sold again--not, however, in the Khanats, where, their character being already known, they would be unsaleable. In such cases of imposition the victim is generally a Kirghiz, unversed in the tricks of the slave trade. Thus the Persian passes from the city into the northern desert, whence, even if emancipated, he seldom, if ever, returns home.
It is certainly striking that, out of the large number of slaves of Persian origin who are continually brought into Central Asia, only half of those who obtain their freedom go back to their native country. Such as do return are induced to do so either by the necessity of setting their family affairs in order, or by extraordinary home-sickness. He who has lived eighteen years in Turkestan will seldom change it for Iran. The slaves, as observed before, are for the most part originally poor; and when they have secured in Turkestan a certain means of gaining their livelihood, or have got together some property, they in few cases think of returning to their native land, where, on account of general habits of industry and activity, existence is much harder to support; where the necessaries of life are more expensive, and the luxury and splendour of the wealthy excite many ungratified desires in the breasts of the poor, which are not aroused in the midst of the barbarous simplicity of the Khanats. Still, it is to be observed that the emancipated slave can never get rid of the disgrace implied in the word _kul_ (slave), however great may be the wealth he may have accumulated, or however high the post to which he may be promoted. Although he may be living in the utmost splendour and magnificence, the kul can never hope to obtain the hand of a free Œzbeg, the poorest of whom would reject his proposals with scorn. I know an instance in which an Œzbeg refused his daughter to a freedman, although the latter's suit was backed by the command of the khan; he preferred rather to encounter the anger of his sovereign than to call one who had once been a slave his son-in-law. Even the khanezads[20] (children of slaves), who are not allowed to be sold, are treated in the same manner, and can only marry the daughters of other emancipated slaves, or sarts. Only in the fourth generation is the disgrace attached to the word _kul_ somewhat softened down, but by no means quite obliterated. In a country like Central Asia, in which courage is looked upon as the highest virtue, the slave is regarded as the _ne plus ultra_--a man who, for want of a contempt of death, allows himself to be put in chains; and it is this vice which is so difficult to be forgiven. This way of looking at the subject is further strengthened by the boundless feeling of aristocracy which distinguishes the Tartars, whether settled or nomad, in which not even the wildest Tories or the proudest marquis of the Faubourg St. Germain can surpass them--a feeling which is entertained not only against the foreign Iranian, but even the native Tadjiks, the eldest inhabitants of the land.