[philman_36]

The code of Hammurabi was as you said Babylonian, not Persian.
Yet it does give evidence that slavery was practiced in that area.

I am surprised why you trust an Islamist website for historical source.
I'm not "trusting" them, I'm merely passing on their own beliefs. But if anyone knows about slavery they should, don't you think?
Tell me what sources you would trust and I'll see what I can dig up.

[SolidWood]

You do know that the Muslims defeated and conquered the Persians? What's the "their own beliefs" supposed to mean? The Arab Muslims and even the current Iranian Mullahs fervently hate ancient Persian heritage. When they talk about pre-islamic Persia, they are talking about their enemy not about "themselves". The ancient Persians were Zoroastrian. Why would Arab Muslims identify with them?

But if anyone knows about slavery they should, don't you think?

Since they are the masters of slavery, I am sure they have the fewest credibility. I can't get into your logic. That's the same as asking a Cuban Communist to tell you about American healthcare.

Tell me what sources you would trust and I'll see what I can dig up.

Any scholastic, scientific proof. If you are keen on showing "they admit it" it would have to be from ancient Persian sources, or third ancient sources. Note, I am not denying there could have been slavery (paid or unpaid) in Persia. I only vehemently disagree with your methodology of proving it. Babylonian law doesn't apply to Persia, and a claim from an Islamist website doesn't equate an ancient Persian claim, as you insinuate.