[Mike Darancette]

To be realistic I'll bet that A Christian Boy impressed into the Janissaries had a better chance of a good life than a farmer impressed into the army of Edward I.

[Destro]

That is not at all so! Most Janissaries did not live long or well. Janissaries lived a brutal barracks life. It was Turkish practice to make a Janissaries life during peacetime a living hell. This harsh discipline treatment was eased up during campaigns. The theory being that the Janissaries would look forward to war and be miserable in peace and thus be willing and enthusiastic about going to war for the Sultan.

[Destro]

THE CORPS OF THE JANIZARIES

But life in the barracks was hard and the discipline compared in severity with that of a cloister. Blind obedience to their superiors was inculcated in them, as well as a fanatical subservience to the Sultan, to whom they belonged in body and soul. They slept in lighted rooms under the watchful eyes of eunuchs who punished severely every noise or other impropriety on their part. All individuality and freedom was suppressed in the acemi oglan, and as a reaction to this, they sought relaxation in excesses against Christian and Jews. Particularly did they display a fanatical hatred of Christians, proof that Islamization had been thorough.

[Publius6961]

To be realistic I'll bet that A Christian Boy impressed into the Janissaries had a better chance of a good life than a farmer impressed into the army of Edward I.

I see that Muawiyah has succeeded in deflecting the discussion from the Muslim atrocities of today to a discussion of history.
At the risk of allowing him to continue doing so, I must say that the statement may be correct but truly puzzling.
In contemporary terms, if the statement has any inherent value, why did this not apply also to South Africa and Rhodesia?

Inquiring minds, etc.