The Battle of Talas

[QUOTE=TJK]

No, this just prove that your knowlegde about Central Asia in
VIII centaury is somehow limited....

IMHO--Besides being blantantly ad hominem and thereby
doing nothing to advance the discussion, let me just ask
everyone here, if you were there--at that time--please raise
your hand. No one?

Truth is, and we all accept this, I hope, we are totally dependent
on distant, meagre, and suspect sources.

So, ain't no one here knows bugger all about that period.

Just thought I'd toss that little reminder out there to keep us on
track. And of course, if I pull that fallacy out of the bag in future,
you can rub my deserving nose in it.

"Truth is, and we all accept this, I hope, we are totally dependent
on distant, meagre, and suspect sources. "

 

I am, the sources been Tang Shu and Zi Zhi Tong Jian, as well as Dhahabi and Al Tabari(which doesn't even mention this conflict, speaking of unimportant). If anyone bothered reading Tang Shu and Zi Zhi Tong Jian you'll find that Turgis remained Tang vassals after Talas, and so did the Qarluqs and Tashkent. Even as late as 753 a.d., titles were granted to the rulers of the Qarluqs and Tashkent as Zi Zhi Tong Jian documents. You cannot create a theory out of a vacuum, when in fact no ancient texts mention any significant change to Tang power after Talas, in contrast clearly mentions Tang power well existed.
The fact is that this battle was way blown out of proportion by a person named L. Carrington Goodrich who is the first one that called it" one of the decisive battles of history," and all later ignrant claims ultimately derive from him.

this guy never read primary chinese sources, his claim is groundless and outdated. A careful reading of Tang Shu shows that there was no demographic shifts of Talas at all. And more to add that the entire garrison of Tarim was 24,000 given by the Zhi zhi Tong Jian's geographical section, so the Arab record of 100,000 Chinese force is certainly blwon exaggeration.