Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: odds
The difference is that the Sassanid of Persia were not pressuring others to convert to Zoroastrianism, by direct or indirect means. Nor did they mind if a Zoroastrian by birth converted to another religion, as long as the convert stayed loyal to the Persian Empire.

Historically inaccurate. Persia was at war with the (Christian) Roman Empire for centuries. The Romans persecuted Zoroastrians in their empire and the Persians retaliated on the local Christians. Though there may be some question which side started it. In any case, it happened, despite the fact it has long disappeared down the memory hole for today's Christians, especially in the West.

http://www.oxuscom.com/persecution.htmPersians

The Persians also persecuted the Manicheans and probably other religions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism

BTW, I do not claim the Ottoman millet system is ideal or desirable, only that it approximates the multicultural idea, probably about as closely as any government can. Certainly a republican popular government cannot function on such a basis, only an autocratic system.

55 posted on 05/31/2011 6:27:31 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan
Your 1st link doesn't work.

Nonetheless, it is a well-known fact that Persia was at war with Roman Empire long before Roman Empire became "Christian". Christians were persecuted in the Roman Empire before Christianity was officially recognized by them (the rest is in the link I provided in post #54, including persecutions of Christians in the Sassanid era in Persia) -- Most bona fide historians & history books confirm these facts.

Your 2nd link (wikipedia) Manichaeism also says these:

"Although there is no proof Shapur I was a Manichaean, he tolerated the spread of Manicheanism and refrained from persecuting it in his [Sassanid] empire's boundaries." "With the assistance of the Persian Empire, Mani began missionary expeditions." "After failing to win the favor of the next generation of Persian royalty, and incurring the disapproval of the Zoroastrian clergy, Mani is reported to have died in prison awaiting execution by the Persian Emperor Bahram I"

The last wiki statement, about Bahram I, may well be true. Though, it an historical fact that Zoroastrianism was not made the official religion of Iran until the latter part of the Sassanid Empire, and after Christianity became officially accepted in the Roman Empire. And, unlike Islam, the objective of the Sassanid was neither to impose nor to convert others to Zoroastrianism.

I wasn't talking about the ideal or perfection. My point was that "Millet" system was not unique to Ottoman Empire. That the concept existed pre-Islam. Ottoman Empire simply borrowed it and adapted it to suit their own needs in the Islamic context.

Unsure what you mean by Certainly a republican popular government cannot function on such a basis, only an autocratic system.? I'd say multiculturalism has its 'challenges' whether under an autocratic or a democratic system. Then again, multiculturalism is not only about religion. Perhaps, it'd be best not to allow a multicultural society at all. Otherwise, someone can always claim persecution by someone else, in one form or another.

56 posted on 05/31/2011 8:06:06 AM PDT by odds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson