Tang dynasty battles with the caliphate

[Indos]

Nothing special, really, and I do make grammatical mistakes as well. A lot of it is due to the length of my posts and that I don't always bother to correct my mistakes.

In the old PDF, I made (you I believe as well) quite a few threads about Arab Indonesians and other Arab communities in South East Asia.

Even more, we had a Chinese friend who was an Arabist educated in Taiwan (I think it was Taiwan) or China. His knowledge was astounding and I remember learning a lot from his threads.

BTW there are many Saudi Arabians of Indonesian origin (Javanese and Sumatran mainly). Some 1.5 million of Indonesia or partial Indonesian heritage (Saudi Arabian citizens).

Indonesians in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Former minister of Hajj and Umrah was of Indonesian origin.

View attachment 211542

Muhammad Saleh Benten - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Surnarme Benten = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banten region in Java.

Very famous Hadith scholar:

Yasin al-Fadani - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Origins in Padang in Sumatra.

Famous cleric online:

Assim al-Hakeem - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

1.5 million followers on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/@assimalhakeem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandailing_people of this tribe/people

Many others. I don't know if they have mixed with locals or other minorities but those who came for Hajj, Umrah (past 1400 years), business/trade/economic reasons have been absorbed by locals and it is very difficult to tell them apart today. Easier with more recent migrations (2-3 generations ago). Same story with all the other minorities from Bosnia to Nigeria to China (Hui and Uyghur's).

Previously I talked about Anies Baswedan that has Arabic anchestry with you in old PDF, pretty much he is likely Indonesia next President. I still see Prabowo will keep in power until 2034 as most of Indonesian President after democratic rule can get full 10 years period.

We will likely see Arab Indonesian becomes Indonesian President in 2034 if not 2029 (much lower chance)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

One of the best Indonesian journalists is also Arab Indonesian

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[_Arabia_]

The biggest pathetic troll is you with Arab wet dreams .. 500 million useless Arabs

The Arabs finished in the 8th century .. stop dreaming and return the real world

Dreams is claiming Central Asian Turkic nomads that you have no kinship to (genetic) as an Anatolian and claiming Arab Caliphate (Abbasid) military victories (Battle of Talas which this thread is about) as some imaginary Anatolian/Turkish victory.

 

[MMM-E]

Who are these Arabs who came from the desert to defeat China ?

Only Turks and Mongols defeated Chinese armies numerous times and conquered vast parts of their territory

The Great Wall of China was built to stop these invasions


If the Karluk Turks hadn't switched sides and fought against China, Chinese would have crushed the Arabs like insects and established Chinese dominance all the way to India.

The Battle of Talas shattered China's political and military influence in Asia for a full 1.000 years.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Excatly. The portraits of Qing Dynasty emperors all depict them as stubborn and unruly. It was truly unfortunate that China was ruled by these barbarians for three hundred years, almost leading to the extinction of the nation and its people. Before the Qing Dynasty, Chinese people in portraits were generally depicted as respectable and good-looking. In Qing Dynasty portraits, however, Chinese people are mostly shown as ragged, malnourished and wretched.

Yeah, there is a case established and can be found online about the Manchurian that sold the secrets of DF-31 to US. His grandfather was a Hanjian or traitor in the Manchukuo that was the puppet state of invading Japan in 1930s and 1940s.

With the thriving AI technology that keeps getting improving, we can finally re-imagine our glorious ancestors in live action.

At least, it is by far more accurate than the fake history fabricated by those Buryat-Manchu barbarians.

https://www.toutiao.com/video/7642189886589829161/?from_scene=all&log_from=b2c45d16b8d3f8_1787284624385

 

[_Arabia_]

Are we discussing the origin of the word Mamluk or if Arabs actually fought in battles?

Berbers disagree. Even I was shocked by it. should maybe try speaking to one or two of them.

Because a lot of Arabs tend to claim them as Arab too.

In the Battle of Talas which was won by the Arab Abbasid Caliphate, 80% of the soldiers were Arab. So yes, an Arab military victory which every source and historian agrees with.

Which Berbers? They can disagree with modern-day DNA, linguistic ties, geographic proximity, 1400 + years of constant intermarriages and everything else for all I care.

Fact of the matter is that there is not a single Berber country in sight.

Never heard any Arab claim that Somalis are Arab however Somalis and Somalia were heavily influenced by Arabs like much of the Muslim world. There were Arab settlements in Somalia (Northern in particular).

Somalia, much like East Africa as a whole and Horn of Africa was heavily influenced by Arabs and Arabia.

All the Semitic and Afro-Asiatic speakers in Horn of Africa were that - Muslim and Christian alike.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[_Arabia_]

Who are these Arabs who came from the desert to defeat China ?

Only Turks and Mongols defeated Chinese armies numerous times and conquered vast parts of their territory

The Great Wall of China was built to stop these invasions


If the Karluk Turks hadn't switched sides and fought against China, Chinese would have crushed the Arabs like insects and established Chinese dominance all the way to India.

The Battle of Talas shattered China's political and military influence in Asia for a full 1.000 years.

Cretin, 90% of the Abbasid Caliphate army (an Arab dynasty) during the Battle of Talas were composed of Arabs. Karluks (who have no genetic kinship to modern-day Anatolia or anything to do with Turkiye the country or Turks of Anatolia) composed between 10.000-20.000. Meaning 10%.

The commanders were Arab too.

al-Saffah - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Which Turks conquered China? And what have Mongols to do with Turkiye again?

And have you looked at a world map? Arabs conquered the largest Muslim landmass ever conquered by any Muslim group. An area spanning from Portugal/Spain/France in the West to Central Asia/West China in the East and from Sicily to Sahel/Horn of Africa in the South.

The Arab/Muslim world is literally the living legacy of Arab military conquests.

Even the largest (demographically) Muslim nation on the planet (Indonesia) was mostly converted to Islam by Arab merchants, traders and Sufis and due to Arab settlements.

The reality is that the locals of Anatolia have been ruled by foreigners continuously for 1000's of years in a row. From Assyrians,, to Greeks, to Persians, to Arabs, to Armenians to Romans, to Mongols to Turkic peoples.

When was the last native Anatolian rule or dynasty?

Turkiye today is a complete blend and mixture of Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Circassians (recent arrivals), Bosniaks (recent arrivals), Albanians (recent arrivals), Assyrians etc.

The Turkic ancestry on average is less than 10%. I genuinely think that there might be (percentage wise) more genuine Turkic people in KSA from modern-day Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and elsewhere.

That is why every Turkish person online that takes a DNA test is shocked by its results.

 

[Anatolia]

In the Battle of Talas which was won by the Arab Abbasid Caliphate, 80% of the soldiers were Arab. So yes, an Arab military victory which every source and historian agrees with.

Which Berbers? They can disagree with modern-day DNA, linguistic ties, geographic proximity, 1400 + years of constant intermarriages and everything else for all I care.

Fact of the matter is that there is not a single Berber country in sight.

Never heard any Arab claim that Somalis are Arab however Somalis and Somalia were heavily influenced by Arabs like much of the Muslim world. There were Arab settlements in Somalia (Northern in particular).

Somalia, much like East Africa as a whole and Horn of Africa was heavily influenced by Arabs and Arabia.

All the Semitic and Afro-Asiatic speakers in Horn of Africa were that - Muslim and Christian alike.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This whole argument ignores how pre‑modern armies actually worked. Most so‑called “Arab” armies were never ethnically Arab to begin with.. they depended heavily on Berbers, Circassians, Turks, Persians, and other groups for military power. That’s exactly why many Arab empires struggled to last: the core ruling elite treated non‑Arab soldiers and administrators unequally, even though those same groups carried the state on their back.

And let’s be honest .. there’s a modern trend where some people online try to claim Somalis and other Africans as “Arab.” I’ve seen it all over YouTube and social media. It’s just another form of retroactive identity‑grabbing that doesn’t match how those communities see themselves.

Meanwhile, Turks don’t do this. Turks are close with all Turkic peoples — Central Asian, Anatolian, Caucasian — because the connection is cultural, linguistic, and historical. No one is trying to rewrite someone else’s ancestry.

North Africans are the perfect example: most reject any Arab ancestry outright. They accept cultural exchange, religion, and language influence, but they identify as Amazigh, Kabyle, Chaoui, Riffian, Tuareg.. not Arab. Google it my guy.

And the same pattern exists across the Middle East. Plenty of people identify as Assyrian, Greek, Anatolian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, Persian .. not Arab. These identities are older than Arabization and survived it.

So the point stands: history is more complex than these simplistic “Arab vs X” narratives. Identity in the region is layered, diverse, and shaped by many peoples .. not just one.

"Arabized" is not a thing anymore.

 

[_Arabia_]

This whole argument ignores how pre‑modern armies actually worked. Most so‑called “Arab” armies were never ethnically Arab to begin with.. they depended heavily on Berbers, Circassians, Turks, Persians, and other groups for military power. That’s exactly why many Arab empires struggled to last: the core ruling elite treated non‑Arab soldiers and administrators unequally, even though those same groups carried the state on their back.

And let’s be honest .. there’s a modern trend where some people online try to claim Somalis and other Africans as “Arab.” I’ve seen it all over YouTube and social media. It’s just another form of retroactive identity‑grabbing that doesn’t match how those communities see themselves.

Meanwhile, Turks don’t do this. Turks are close with all Turkic peoples — Central Asian, Anatolian, Caucasian — because the connection is cultural, linguistic, and historical. No one is trying to rewrite someone else’s ancestry.

North Africans are the perfect example: most reject any Arab ancestry outright. They accept cultural exchange, religion, and language influence, but they identify as Amazigh, Kabyle, Chaoui, Riffian, Tuareg.. not Arab. Google it my guy.

And the same pattern exists across the Middle East. Plenty of people identify as Assyrian, Greek, Anatolian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, Persian .. not Arab. These identities are older than Arabization and survived it.

So the point stands: history is more complex than these simplistic “Arab vs X” narratives. Identity in the region is layered, diverse, and shaped by many peoples .. not just one.

"Arabized" is not a thing anymore.

What a bunch of nonsense.

Arabs ruled the Caliphate from the very beginning in the 600's all the way to 1517.

95% of all the Muslim conquests were done by Arabs.

Those that did not occur through military means occurred peacefully (South East Asia) due to mainly Arab merchants, Sufis and others.

There were no Circassians (who are not Turkic people as you falsely claimed) anywhere in the earliest Arab Muslim conquests.

Those peoples that you mention were used mostly as mercenaries and Mamluks (slaves initially - but not the kind used in the Western world). Later all became Arabized and Muslim to various degrees.

Rest of your nonsense, is just that made up nonsense.

 

[MMM-E]

And not Arabs but Turkic Dynasties ruled all Arabs , Egypt , Anatolia , Iran and Indian subcontinent in the last 1000 years

Nearly one-third of the Chinese army at the Battle of Talas consisted of Karluk Turks


The Arabs were so cookies
The Deadly Chinese Crossbow: The Arabs used mechanical bows, unlike anything they had ever seen before, capable of piercing steel armor from very long distances. These weapons were very effective in slowing down Arab cavalry.

 

[MMM-E]

Cretin, 90% of the Abbasid Caliphate army (an Arab dynasty) during the Battle of Talas were composed of Arabs. Karluks (who have no genetic kinship to modern-day Anatolia or anything to do with Turkiye the country or Turks of Anatolia) composed between 10.000-20.000. Meaning 10%.

The commanders were Arab too.

And the first 4 days Arabs failed to defeat Chinese Forces

However, on the 5th day, the Karluk Turks, who had been fighting for China until then, switched sides. With the Turks attacking from the rear and the Arabs charging from the front

the Chinese army was caught between two fires. Chinese military technology completely collapsed in the face of this sudden pincer movement

even , Nearly 1/3 of the Chinese army at the Battle of Talas consisted of Karluk Turks

If the Turks hadn't switched sides, the Arabs wouldn't have won at all.

The Critical Force That Ended the War: The Karluk Turks

 

[Indos]

Yeah, they had done much to harm and regress Chinese civilization during the 300 years they ruled China. Even in Ming dynasty, China was still ahead of Europe in many areas. Then, the Manchus came, every thing stopped progressing or worse start degenerating. The Manchus of Qing were responsible for putting China in such backward state as it collided with the European powers.

Yeah I do see it is likely due to DNA. I mean Han Chinese has hundred of years shape their mind through education and can invent many things, so the offsprings gather more intelligent compared to people that for hundred years dont have such thing

The same thing also happen in Europe after the Germanic tribe conquere Roman Empire, but after some time Germanic tribe does evolve and become much better

Islam also has the same story though, where more vibrant Baghdad and Persian Islam are replaced by powerful Turk. But I dont blame Turk, they have made big positive impact for Muslim world as well

 

[_Arabia_]

The reality is that the locals of Anatolia have been ruled by foreigners continuously for 1000's of years in a row. From Assyrians,, to Greeks, to Persians, to Arabs, to Armenians to Romans, to Mongols to Turkic peoples.

When was the last native Anatolian rule or dynasty?

Turkiye today is a complete blend and mixture of Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Circassians (recent arrivals), Bosniaks (recent arrivals), Albanians (recent arrivals), Assyrians, Gypsies (Roma people - Turkiye have one of the largest communities of them worldwide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_people_in_Turkey) etc.

The Turkic ancestry on average is less than 10%. I genuinely think that there might be (percentage wise) more genuine Turkic people in KSA from modern-day Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and elsewhere.

That is why every Turkish person online that takes a DNA test is shocked by its results.

I don't understand this absurd fetish that SOME Turkish people (Anatolians) have of claiming Turkic peoples and dynasties (often even Mongol since most of them were of paternal Mongol ancestry like the Mughals, Golden Horde etc.) when they have close to no kinship to those people and look nothing alike?

Average Turkish person looks much more similar to next door Arabs, Kurds, Greeks etc. than he does to Central Asian Turkic peoples. Most non-Turks would agree.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I have nothing against Turkiye or Turks, know many personally, and I have distant Turkish ancestry on my father's side due to intermarriages but this behavior is really, really weird.

There are millions of Turkish people of Arab origin as well. Third largest ethnic group in the country and predate the Turkic arrivals by millennia.

Arabs in Turkey - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now such deluded people are claiming Arab military victories (Abbasid Caliphate) as "their own". Absurd.

The funniest thing is that the actual Turks (Central Asians) ridicule such people openly. Seen it online on numerous occasions.

 

[retaxis]

Well in a comedic way

the turks betrayed the chinese for the arabs
later arabs betray ottoman turks for westerners.

guess everything comes around in a circle at the end

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

The reality is that the locals of Anatolia have been ruled by foreigners continuously for 1000's of years in a row. From Assyrians,, to Greeks, to Persians, to Arabs, to Armenians to Romans, to Mongols to Turkic peoples.

When was the last native Anatolian rule or dynasty?

Turkiye today is a complete blend and mixture of Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Circassians (recent arrivals), Bosniaks (recent arrivals), Albanians (recent arrivals), Assyrians etc.

The Turkic ancestry on average is less than 10%. I genuinely think that there might be (percentage wise) more genuine Turkic people in KSA from modern-day Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and elsewhere.

That is why every Turkish person online that takes a DNA test is shocked by its results.

I don't understand this absurd fetish that SOME Turkish people (Anatolians) have of claiming Turkic peoples and dynasties (often even Mongol since most of them were of paternal Mongol ancestry like the Mughals, Golden Horde etc.) when they have close to no kinship to those people and look nothing alike?

Average Turkish person looks much more similar to next door Arabs, Kurds, Greeks etc. than he does to Central Asian Turkic peoples. Most non-Turks would agree.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I have nothing against Turkiye or Turks, know many personally, and I have distant Turkish ancestry on my father's side due to intermarriages but this behavior is really, really weird.

There are millions of Turkish people of Arab origin as well. Third largest ethnic group in the country and predate the Turkic arrivals by millennia.

Now such deluded people are claiming Arab military victories (Abbasid Caliphate) as "their own". Absurd.

The funniest thing is that the actual Turks (Central Asians) ridicule such people openly. Seen it online on numerous occasions.

The Salar people from China were the original descendants of the Gokturks.

They didn't move westward and intermarry with the Middle Easterners and Europeans, and that's why they have retained their original Turkic appearance.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Anatolia]

The reality is that the locals of Anatolia have been ruled by foreigners continuously for 1000's of years in a row. From Assyrians,, to Greeks, to Persians, to Arabs, to Armenians to Romans, to Mongols to Turkic peoples.

When was the last native Anatolian rule or dynasty?

Turkiye today is a complete blend and mixture of Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Kurds, Circassians (recent arrivals), Bosniaks (recent arrivals), Albanians (recent arrivals), Assyrians etc.

The Turkic ancestry on average is less than 10%. I genuinely think that there might be (percentage wise) more genuine Turkic people in KSA from modern-day Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and elsewhere.

That is why every Turkish person online that takes a DNA test is shocked by its results.

I don't understand this absurd fetish that SOME Turkish people (Anatolians) have of claiming Turkic peoples and dynasties (often even Mongol since most of them were of paternal Mongol ancestry like the Mughals, Golden Horde etc.) when they have close to no kinship to those people and look nothing alike?

Average Turkish person looks much more similar to next door Arabs, Kurds, Greeks etc. than he does to Central Asian Turkic peoples. Most non-Turks would agree.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I have nothing against Turkiye or Turks, know many personally, and I have distant Turkish ancestry on my father's side due to intermarriages but this behavior is really, really weird.

There are millions of Turkish people of Arab origin as well. Third largest ethnic group in the country and predate the Turkic arrivals by millennia.

Arabs in Turkey - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now such deluded people are claiming Arab military victories (Abbasid Caliphate) as "their own". Absurd.

The funniest thing is that the actual Turks (Central Asians) ridicule such people openly. Seen it online on numerous occasions.

Yeah, nobody denies that Turks of Anatolia are mixed ...obviously. The region was the core of the Eastern Roman world for a thousand years, plus Balkan migrations, plus local Anatolian continuity. So yes, modern Turks carry Balkan, Greek, Anatolian, Caucasian, and Central Asian layers. That’s normal for a place with that history.

But Arabs? No .. that’s just not supported by genetics, history, or even basic phenotype. Turks didn’t mix with Arabs in any meaningful way. Even in the video you shared, do any of those people look Arab to you? Turks are generally Caucasian‑complexioned, and Arabs have a different tone and different regional ancestry. They’re not interchangeable, and pretending they are doesn’t make the argument stronger.

And this “10% Turkic blood” talking point is always used in a weird way. Because despite that number, all those “pure” Central Asian Turks still see Anatolian Turks as Turks. They wave the same flags, speak the same language family, share the same cultural identity, and recognize the same historical continuity. Identity isn’t a math equation.

Also, you’re getting very defensive while ignoring the actual point... most of these so‑called “Arab” dynasties weren’t ethnically Arab in practice. Their armies were overwhelmingly Berber, Circassian, Turkic, Persian, and other groups. The ruling elite depended on non‑Arab manpower for centuries. That’s not an insult .. it’s just how their states functioned.

So yes, Turks are mixed .. but mostly with Balkan, Greek, Anatolian, Caucasian populations.And no, Turks are not “Arab‑looking,” “Arab‑descended,” or part of some pan‑Arab identity.And yes, many historical Arab dynasties relied heavily on non‑Arab soldiers and administrators.

That’s the reality, not the oversimplified narrative you’re pushing.