This project is focused on slavery in the medieval Islamic world. The aim of the study is to understand in more depth the way in which race and color were incorporated into understandings of slavery by medieval Islamic writers, and also who was able to be enslaved from their perspective. A genre of slave buying manuals will be analyzed in order to gain a greater understanding of these concepts. Research focused primarily on three authors. These authors were Ibn Al-Akfani who lived most of his life in Cairo during the 14th century, Ibn Butlan who lived in the 11th century in Baghdad, and Al-Saqati who lived in the 13th century in Málaga. I argue that there are clearly ideas of race and racial constructions within the medieval Islamic context as evidenced by these texts, but that there is not enough evidence to support a connection between these ideas of race and ideas of color or enslaveability. Additionally, I argue that there is no connection between color and enslaveability during this period as reflected in these texts.

The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.