Sudan’s conquest made slave trading an organized state function for Egypt

Evidence

In one petition, the members of the Society praised the khedive for statements he had made against the slave trade in 1867, but questioned the lack of movement toward abolition of the institution since that time. The members of the Society chose their words carefully in addressing a ruler whose goal of raising Egypt to the level of Europe were well-known. In crushing the trade in slaves, they informed him, “Your Highness would thus become the pioneer of liberty, and Egypt[,] being a land of freedom[,] would take rank among the most civilized nations of the world.” — Eve M. Troutt Powell, A Different Shade of Colonialism_…, 657 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

Related

• Egyptian expansion into East Africa collided with British abolitionist scrutiny (similarity 0.87)
• Slavery and control of Sudan were inextricably linked in Egyptian and British views. (similarity 0.85)
• The Sudan conquest made the slave trade an organized function of government. (similarity 0.85)
• Slavery’s legacy underpinned Egyptian nationalist discourse about the Sudan (similarity 0.85)
• Egyptian defenses of slavery glossed over the Sudanese slave trade’s harshness (similarity 0.85)
• Britain used anti-slavery claims to justify its empire over Egypt and Sudan (similarity 0.84)
• Slavery’s legacy is central to the Egyptian-Sudanese colonial relationship (similarity 0.84)
• Egypt hired British officials to placate London abolitionists (similarity 0.84)
• British antislavery ideology morally delegitimized Egypt’s own empire in the Sudan (similarity 0.84)
• Britain justified its empire by discrediting Egyptian authority over Sudan (similarity 0.83)
• Egypt’s 1820 conquest replaced merchant trade knowledge of Sudan with state fact-finding missions (similarity 0.83)
• British abolitionist pressure forced khedive Ismail to sign abolition convention (similarity 0.82)
• Sudanese leaders in 1919 launched an anti-Egyptian independence platform in print. (similarity 0.82)
• Britain dismissed Egypt’s empire ambitions to justify its own colonial rule. (similarity 0.82)
• British propaganda used the Mahdist famine to justify Sudanese reconquest. (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Egyptian nationalists treated slavery as Egypt’s internal matter with Sudan #expands (0.60)
• Egypt functioned simultaneously as colonized and colonizer of Sudan #complicates (0.50)
• Egyptian defenses of slavery glossed over the Sudanese slave trade’s harshness #expands (0.50)
• Slavery centrally shaped the Egypt-Sudan relationship yet stereotypes muted it. #expands (0.50)
• British antislavery pressure leveraged Egypt’s European ambitions to compel abolition. #complicates (0.50) — Eve M. Troutt Powell, A Different Shade of Colonialism_…, 657
• Antislavery ideology was used to dismiss Egypt’s empire and justify Britain’s own. #expands (0.40)
• Britain used anti-slavery claims to justify its empire over Egypt and Sudan #expands (0.40) — Eve M. Troutt Powell, A Different Shade of Colonialism_…, 700