I agree with you that the Biblical rendition makes it clear that Hagar is the property of Sarah, but we must tread carefully when applying modern biases about slavery with every instance of it anciently, in particular when the individual situation is more accurately understood as servile.

God bless.

Forgive the intrusion, but technically, it is inaccurate to state that there is only one Hebrew term that means both “servant” and “slave”. The Greek word “doulos” (not Hebrew) means slave or bondage, but there is another Greek word (diakonos) which means hired servant rather than slave. It also means to “minister” as in to tend to another, as well as to be a subordinate administrator to a higher magistrate. There is also the Greek word oiket?s which refers to all those who fall under the authority of the same householder. The Hebrew word ‘abad can refer to slaves, but it also refers to doing work, serving, laborers, and subjects such as those under the rule of a King or law. Another Hebrew word-sakiyr refers to hirelings or paid laborers.

In short, it would be a mistake to substitute the word “slave” every time one reads the word “servant” in the New Testament.

I believe primarily the Sultans and Amirs (i.e., kings and princes). The wikipedia entry looks decent at first glance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk

You might also try to read up on the Turkish Janissary system and the Saqaliba in Al-Andalus (Islamic Spain).

Not to get too romantic though, a Mameluke ruler generally had a short bloody tenure and violent death. A good read that includes a chunk on Mameluke Egypt is Max Rodenbeck’s wonderful “Cairo: the City Victorious”.