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. [20] The sale of a khanezad is regarded as a disgraceful action, and one who commits such an act is branded as a thief and a robber. It will be understood that it is only the moral stigma of slavery which the freedman has to suffer from. In his civil rights he is as well protected as any one else. Thus, as the Oriental is even more a creature of habit than we are, I found it very easy to understand how the Persian soon finds himself completely at home in Turkestan, which country he once so despised and dreaded, and dwells contentedly in a foreign land, only occasionally solacing himself with a visit to his relations or to the shrine of some Shiite saint in Iran. Unfortunately, it is the material comfort and prosperity of the slave which the Central Asiatic, like other Mohammedans, alleges in his defence, when we express our abhorrence of the disgraceful traffic in human beings. As in Turkestan, so in Turkey we may often hear this argument:--"The sons and daughters of the wild Circassians were in their native land poor people, who in their free mountains could hardly get bread enough to eat; here with us they become rich government officials, pashas, nay, even princesses, whose powerful influence affects the policy of government." They further point out how kindly the slaves are treated in the houses of persons of distinction, where they are put on the same footing as the members of the family. But they forget that these cases are exceptional, and that such good fortune depends for the most part on the personal beauty of the favoured few. What becomes of the greater number, whose charms are not such as to gain the favour of their master? What shall we say of this majority, exposed as they are to the oppression and cruelty of a tyrannical master, and constantly employed in the hardest labour?