I am not aware of any such references. Please provide them.
For now see the different explanations of People of the Book and Dhimma:
Cheers
from a fairly short search
also
You did omit the quote your unknown author comments:
Jabir ibn Abdallah al-Ansari fought under Muhammad and his successors in many battles, and died 697 AD. âAbd al-Razzaq al-Sanâani was a Persian scholar of hadith. So we have here a late 8th century scholar passing on an old warrior's practical comment - contradicting the Quran - about making the best use of slaves and contributors in mid 7th century Yathrib/Medina. Muhammad and his successors would not have succeeded, had they not heeded it. They taught differently, though.
The article you quote summarizes references from the Hanafi madhab founded in the later 8th century, and with its doctrine completed in the 11th century.
Your nameless, but learned reference thus addresses a legal problem with which Muslims where faced since the time of their conquests:
So your nameless scholar summarizes a dispute among Sunni madhabs. But all of these follow the teaching of the prophet and agree, that Arab polytheists had to either convert or be killed. See the Demolition of Dhul Khalasa mentioned here and - as a temporary non-violent resolution of the issue - the Sabians of Harran mentioned here, which ended thus.
Hence your reference does not prove:
Indeed, as those pagans Muhammad encountered were Arab pagans, it explicitly refutes it wrt his teachings. I deem it very unlikely, that Jabir ibn Abdallah al-Ansari even addressed Dhimmi, though âAbd al-Razzaq al-Sanâani uses the term 'people of jizya' when recording his words.
Your other references just recap the conflicting madhabs on non-Arab polytheists - like the Hindus mentioned here - and don't further address your claim. So I will skip them now.
For more discussion of early Islam and Arabia please open a new thread, not to hijack a thread about magic regios in cities any further.
Cheers
I'm not the one who hijaked the thread, I was in fact discussing the possibility of regios in cities and commenting that the relative Muslim tolerance would make it more likely that there would be magic regios in these cities. Yes I sited selectively, I wasn't going to repost the entire article. You have yourself make some rather specific statements which do not, so far as I can tell the time I have at present (but I will look further into it later) speak much as to what actually happened during this time and reflects only some perspectives, and honestly seem to have a tone similar to that of anti-muslim hate sites, but again I will check on that later when I have more time. What I do see is that Muslims have a historical record indicating some level of tolerance for pagans which is lacking in the Christianity of the time, and thus makes it more likely that Muslim cities would harbor magic regios, whatever the exact level of that tolerance might be, and that is on topic for the thread.
I see upon further review that all of your sources are Wikipedia, which is not considered to be a reliable or academic source on anything. Useful for quick reference on a wide range of materials, but not authoritative on anything. All you are proving is that the community of people editing Wikipedia pages generally agree with you, not what the actual history is.
@silveroak: Take your time to read completely the article you have referenced here. Then come back.
Cheers
Holy shit guys, can we just discuss which cities would be full of magical regios? I don't care for the nitpicking. This is an ideas thread, not an "accuracy" thread.
4 Likes
I did read the article, and do not believe it supports the position you assert. One more point I will take from it, however, is that the arguments of scholars referred to the theoretical, while individual rulers tended to do as they wished. There is certainly enough support for tolerance that if a muslim ruler wished to tolerate a pagan religion (especially a European pagan tradition) in an Muslim city in Iberia, they certainly could have. Which means that in game there is no reason such a community could not exist and lend support to magic auras and regios in such a city.
so why then did you feel the need to hijack the thread to argue with me?
Take a quick refresher on loaded questions and then tell me, whether you have stopped assaulting your co-workers! And now stop being childish!
Cheers
I'm not arguing, I swear! /s
1 Like
Half of me agrees with that.
The other half enjoys the dialectical swordplay quite a lot.
And yet another half thinks that ideas are everywhere. Next time you play a Tribunal include the debate about paganism between Quercus Argentum and Unus Fors. Will it end in a Wizards War? Will continue even when the Tribunal is over and all other magi are gone? Will any (or both) of the magi start influencing pagans in their area to support their claims?
All my other halves are quiet at the moment.
1 Like
New point to add to the orriginal topic- where magic auras contract under the influence of the divine they tend to form regios, so any number of cities (especially in Itally or Greece) that may have had pagan temples which were used for prolonged periods of time would likely form regios.
2 Likes
Under the current ArM description of the Realms, I'd expect those to be faerie regiones though. Not magical ones.
1 Like
Mithraea should rather be the origin of magical regiones for ArM: see TMRE p.118 The Legion of Mithras, especially The History of the Legion of Mithras and p.121 box The Truth About Mithraism.
2 Likes
While most pagan gods are faerie in the current version faerie auras are dependant on the faeries projecting them. Ritual use of a space on the other hand generates magic tethers (generally to a venerated item or such). So ritual use of a space to worship faeries can, in general principle, generate a magic aura. YSMV.