Status distinctions and sartorial difference: Slavery, sexual ethics, and the social logic of veiling in Islamic law

This article explores how jurists articulated the distinction between free and enslaved Muslim women through sartorial norms in the formative and early post-formative periods of Islamic law. Drawing on works of fiqh (positive law), tafsir (Qur'an commentary) and hadith (Prophetic and non-Prophetic reports), I posit that this distinction attests to the tensions between "proprietary"and "theocentric"sexual ethics, as noted by Hina Azam. Specifically, I track the variant transmissions of a widely-cited report featuring the Caliph 'Umar (r. 13-23/634-44), and trace how jurists responded to the free-slave binary in their discussion of "modesty zones"('awrat) and veiling practices. Based on a detailed examination of fiqh sources to the early fifth Islamic century (with some attention to subsequent material), I argue that Islamic modesty norms are best understood in light of the proprietary/theocentric binary, and that the divergence between juristic expectations of free and enslaved women increased in the post-formative period.