Which Persian empire was better to live in, the Parthian or Sassanid empire?
>>342884
>achaemenid 5life
>>342884
Sassanid
Parthians are basically Iranian Nomads going "Lol, what we do with this?"
>>342884
Sassanid was where Persian culture was thriving so that.
>>343203
The Parni are to Persians what the Scottish are to the English.
Just came here to tell you that the Parthians weren't Persians.
Embarrassing that the retards replying, OP included, didn't know :/
>>342884
To live in, I don't see how the life of a noble or commoner would vary much between the two empires. The Sassanians are more known for having a complex Bureaucratic system
>>342884
It depends a lot. Overall, it would be the Sassanian. But while the parthians didn't care much about that the Sassanians had some nasty episodes of religious persecution so it could be worst if you're a badly integrated minority. They also had philo-jew and philo-christian rulers, so it kinda varies.
But the parthians didn't care much about developing the country. The qanats were very important for agriculture and the everyday life of the lesser people, and Arsacids didn't pay them the attention they needed.
The Sassanids were more militant than the Arsacids, but the Sassanian war machine was (mostly) used against other states. The parthian petty kings saw way more infighting, and civil wars always make life worst than international ones. Also the Sassanians had a whole century of (almost) ininterrupted peace with the romans, something the Parthians didn't as far as I know.
>>344696
>>345868
While you're both right, you should already know that westeners use persian as a synonym of iranian. And of course you both know parthians were iranian as fuck.
>Parthian
>Persian
>>342884
Parthians were more secular and decentralized. They tolerated other faiths and a lot of Graeco-Persian syncretism occured. But if you were an orthodox Zoroastrian Azad, you'd probably be better off under Sassanids.
>>345868
In which case the USA isnt an American Empire, since those arent Americans, but English, Dutch, Irish and Germans.
>>348416
Decentralization is often not a good thing for the common folk, at least in the past and specially in a territory like Iran. Achaemenids and Sassanids were great builders and mantainers of infrastructure, while Arsacids neglected this. Considering the climate of Iran, hidraulic infraestructure is very important.
>>348466
What does that even mean?
>>348476
Means that Persia has become a geographical term, and all empires centered there are Persian empires.
>>348479
American is a cultural term you fat retard
>>348479
Most people making the complain is surely advocating for Iranian, a more precise and overall better term.
What was the name of that Armenian King that had an empire spanning from the Caspian sea to Judenland and called himself the king of kings?
I choose him.
Achaemenids>Sassanids>Arsacids
Since this thread will draw some who are knowledgable about Persia:
What is a really knowledgeable and comprehensive audio book about the history of Persia, particularly Parthians?
>>345868
Jesus fucking Christ, people come to this board to learn. You don't have to call them retarded because you knew something that they didn't. Stop being such a hostile fucking nerd. Your type is gonna be the downfall of this board.
>>349080
He has nothing else to be proud of but his knowledge so he holds it over people whenever possible. Any time someone learns something he feels more vulnerable.
>>348951
Tigranes.
>>348416
The Arsacid dynasty switched to Zoroastrianism at the mid-way point of their reign and started shoving off the Greek and Hellenistic crap once it began creating problems.
>>348479
Persia is a socio-political term at this point. Even the Sassanids who were Persians themselves referred to Iran as "Eranshar" as the name of their empire and nation.
![antiochus_iii_louvre5[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/0D4dglr.jpg "antiochus_iii_louvre5[1].jpg")
