Tang sinicize Central Asia, Mongolia, North Korea

To solve the third problem, it will be necessary to climb into the Middle East. To fight with nomads on a permanent basis, not on their lands + on the steppes is suicide. Typically, the Chinese most often defeated strong nomadic empires with the help of intrigues or lured them to places that were not convenient for nomads. Because, well, it's pretty hard to fight against the "Hit and Run" tactics when your archers + horses are much worse.
you can make the caliphate collapse and splinter way sooner even better not make it exist, also the tang pushed to transoxiana with a system of vassals tang expansion to the Oxus river isn't abs at all
The vassals so long as they keep being loyal and with out a caliphate it's much easier would adopt more Chinese culture I don't think the karluks or the Sogdians will become han Chinese but would be more like the otl western Liao and be influenced by Chinese culture
 
Last edited:
you can make the caliphate collapse and splinter way sooner even better not make it exist, also the tang pushed to transoxiana with a system of vassals tang expansion to the Oxus river isn't abs at all
The vassals so long as they keep being loyal and with out a caliphate it's much easier would adopt more Chinese culture I don't think the karluks or the Sogdians will become han Chinese but would be more like the otl western Liao and be influenced by Chinese culture
And then, 50 years later, a new strong Muslim empire returns, with which you will have to fight on the edge of the world and you do not need to add a super strong influence of Chinese culture. Tibet, which is much closer in contrast to Central Asia, around the same time became culturally closer to India.
 
And then, 50 years later, a new strong Muslim empire returns, with which you will have to fight on the edge of the world and you do not need to add a super strong influence of Chinese culture. Tibet, which is much closer in contrast to Central Asia, around the same time became culturally closer to India.
Because Tibet wasn't vandalized by the tang ? While parts of central Asia were? As for a Muslim empire that depends assuming the Abbasids don't come out on top and the Umayyads continue their path towards destruction maybe this occurs after all the event that killed tang influence over central Asia was the an lushan rebellion not the battle of talas
 
Because Tibet wasn't vandalized by the tang ?
Indian countries also did not climb into Tibet.
Because Tibet wasn't vandalized by the tang ? While parts of central Asia were? As for a Muslim empire that depends assuming the Abbasids don't come out on top and the Umayyads continue their path towards destruction maybe this occurs after all the event that killed tang influence over central Asia was the an lushan rebellion not the battle of talas
Fair enough, but here we are talking about long time intervals.
 

octoberman

Banned
And then, 50 years later, a new strong Muslim empire returns, with which you will have to fight on the edge of the world and you do not need to add a super strong influence of Chinese culture. Tibet, which is much closer in contrast to Central Asia, around the same time became culturally closer to India.
Muslim conquest of Central Asia is no more inevitable than a Chinese one and Central Asia is on edge even for the Muslim world
 
Muslim conquest of Central Asia is no more inevitable than a Chinese one and Central Asia is on edge even for the Muslim world
It's still a major branch of the "Great Silk Road" + the nomads themselves could become a strong Muslim empire using the example of the Seljuks + Islam would simply spread through trade like in India or the Malay region.
 

octoberman

Banned
It's still a major branch of the "Great Silk Road" + the nomads themselves could become a strong Muslim empire using the example of the Seljuks + Islam would simply spread through trade like in India or the Malay region.
No it didn't. Islam spread in central asia and India through conquest from outside and in Malay through conquest by local convert
 
Uh, no, they invaded the territories by military invasion, but further spread was ensured by trade and the fact that the Arabs were culturally cool. In Central Asia, the Arabs managed to reach the Ferghana Valley and did not go any further, even though they defeated the Tang at the Battle of Talas.
 
Err no. Her illegal seizure of power caused multiple rebellions. Externally, the Turks completely broke away and armies sent to subdue the empire’s enemies met major reverses due to Wu Zetian being only willing to entrust the army to her nephews. The main reason why she wasn’t condemned had to do with the fact that all the subsequent Tang emperors were her descendants.
Wu Zetian's rule brought a degree of stability to the Tang Dynasty during a time of significant turmoil. When she seized power, the Tang Dynasty was facing internal strife, court factionalism, and regional rebellions. By consolidating power and eliminating potential threats, Wu Zetian managed to centralize authority and maintain a level of control over the empire. Her administration implemented reforms that aimed to improve the administration, the examination system, and the legal code, contributing to more efficient governance. Additionally, her policies focused on supporting agriculture, trade, and infrastructure, which helped stimulate economic growth. While her methods were often ruthless and controversial, it doesn't change the fact that her ability to maintain order and promote economic development temporarily stabilized the Tang Dynasty during a period of uncertainty.
 
Wu Zetian's rule brought a degree of stability to the Tang Dynasty during a time of significant turmoil. When she seized power, the Tang Dynasty was facing internal strife, court factionalism, and regional rebellions. By consolidating power and eliminating potential threats, Wu Zetian managed to centralize authority and maintain a level of control over the empire. Her administration implemented reforms that aimed to improve the administration, the examination system, and the legal code, contributing to more efficient governance. Additionally, her policies focused on supporting agriculture, trade, and infrastructure, which helped stimulate economic growth. While her methods were often ruthless and controversial, it doesn't change the fact that her ability to maintain order and promote economic development temporarily stabilized the Tang Dynasty during a period of uncertainty.
That’s false. The internal turmoils largely happened during HER tenure. There were no serious turmoils during the reign of both of her husbands. The rebellions were specifically aimed at HER illegal seizure of power and usurpation of the throne. Much of the court factionalism arose out of those who decided to toe her line and those who opposed it. In her later years, she deliberately provoked more chaos by suggesting that her nephews succeed her over the sons by her husband due to her desire to be remembered as a founder emperor of a dynasty instead of just another usurper. Regarding her economic ‘improvements’, her reign saw the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing system due to corruption by aristocrats and officials promoted by her that has underpinned Tang economic and military success.
 
That’s false. The internal turmoils largely happened during HER tenure. There were no serious turmoils during the reign of both of her husbands. The rebellions were specifically aimed at HER illegal seizure of power and usurpation of the throne. Much of the court factionalism arose out of those who decided to toe her line and those who opposed it. In her later years, she deliberately provoked more chaos by suggesting that her nephews succeed her over the sons by her husband due to her desire to be remembered as a founder emperor of a dynasty instead of just another usurper. Regarding her economic ‘improvements’, her reign saw the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing system due to corruption by aristocrats and officials promoted by her that has underpinned Tang economic and military success.
While it is true that Wu Zetian's rule was marked by significant challenges, the idea that her husbands' reigns were devoid of turmoil overlooks historical complexities. Both Emperor Taizong and Emperor Gaozong, Wu Zetian's husbands, faced internal conflicts and political struggles during their reigns, although these challenges may have been less pronounced compared to Wu Zetian's time in power.

Emperor Taizong's reign, characterized by military expansion and administrative reforms, also experienced conflicts and factionalism within the court. While his reign is often lauded for its successes, it's important to acknowledge that governance complexities and disputes did exist. Similarly, during Emperor Gaozong's reign, the rivalry between powerful officials and the influence of various factions played a large role in dynastic and court instability much of which came to effect in the years directly prior to Wu's rise in power.

Furthermore, attributing all rebellions and factionalism during Wu Zetian's rule solely to her rise to power oversimplifies the historical context. While her controversial ascension did contribute to discontent among some segments of society, other factors like regional instability, economic challenges, and competition for power were also significant drivers of unrest. It's crucial to recognize that political complexities in historical contexts are rarely the result of a single individual's actions, but rather a combination of factors.

The argument that Wu Zetian deliberately provoked chaos in her later years to secure her legacy as a founder emperor also requires scrutiny. While her intentions may have been driven by a desire for a particular legacy, her actions must be understood within the broader framework of maintaining her authority and navigating the intricate power dynamics of the time. Such actions may have been influenced by the complex web of political considerations rather than a simple desire for historical recognition.

Lastly, the notion that her reign led to the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing systems due to corruption promoted by her overlooks the multifaceted causes behind policy changes. While Wu Zetian's administration did face corruption issues, attributing the demise of these systems solely to her actions discounts other economic, social, and political factors that could have contributed to their decline.
 
@Miyako Your points answer nothing substantial other than saying it’s complicated to hand-waive whatever opposition or problem she ran into, even if she played an active hand in causing much of it.
While it is true that Wu Zetian's rule was marked by significant challenges, the idea that her husbands' reigns were devoid of turmoil overlooks historical complexities. Both Emperor Taizong and Emperor Gaozong, Wu Zetian's husbands, faced internal conflicts and political struggles during their reigns, although these challenges may have been less pronounced compared to Wu Zetian's time in power.

Emperor Taizong's reign, characterized by military expansion and administrative reforms, also experienced conflicts and factionalism within the court. While his reign is often lauded for its successes, it's important to acknowledge that governance complexities and disputes did exist. Similarly, during Emperor Gaozong's reign, the rivalry between powerful officials and the influence of various factions played a large role in dynastic and court instability much of which came to effect in the years directly prior to Wu's rise in power.
What serious internal conflicts did Taizong and Gaozong actually run into? There were a few attempted coups that were prematurely discovered and eliminated. That’s more or less it. At the end of the day, they were able to pass the throne to their chosen heirs in a peaceful manner. Wu Zetian‘s power-grab and usurpation of the throne actively provoked rebellions and created much instability. Wu Zetian herself couldn’t even stay on the throne, and that is an automatic fail no matter how you looked at it. Navigating various factions is always part of the job of being emperor. You don’t get to say that you are not incompetent if you failed to do it since it’s ‘complicated’ because many have done it and succeeded.
Furthermore, attributing all rebellions and factionalism during Wu Zetian's rule solely to her rise to power oversimplifies the historical context. While her controversial ascension did contribute to discontent among some segments of society, other factors like regional instability, economic challenges, and competition for power were also significant drivers of unrest. It's crucial to recognize that political complexities in historical contexts are rarely the result of a single individual's actions, but rather a combination of factors.
Most of the more large scale rebellions were conducted by members of the imperial family whom Wu Zetian was actively eliminating and whose throne she usurped. They weren’t rebelling because of economic challenges or regional instability, but because Wu Zetian was actively gunning for their lives. You can say that rebellions in the newly conquered regions were rebelling because of regional instability but then again, the people Wu Zetian appointed to suppress those rebellions were mainly her incompetent nephews due to her fear of the military slipping out of control. Said nephews largely failed in their enterprise. Again, her inability to find trustworthy and competent commanders is her fault. She also dug herself into the position where she can’t trust anyone due to her usurpation of the throne.By the time she was booted out of office, the Gokturks whom her two husbands had suppressed were once again independent.
The argument that Wu Zetian deliberately provoked chaos in her later years to secure her legacy as a founder emperor also requires scrutiny. While her intentions may have been driven by a desire for a particular legacy, her actions must be understood within the broader framework of maintaining her authority and navigating the intricate power dynamics of the time. Such actions may have been influenced by the complex web of political considerations rather than a simple desire for historical recognition.
If she never bothered to usurped the throne or just used her sons as puppet emperors, she wouldn’t need to be in such a compromised position in the first place. Many women have ruled successfully through their sons. Wu Zetian’s two sons in particular were weak willed leaders who would have been easy figureheads to rule through.
Lastly, the notion that her reign led to the destruction of the Equal Fields and Fubing systems due to corruption promoted by her overlooks the multifaceted causes behind policy changes. While Wu Zetian's administration did face corruption issues, attributing the demise of these systems solely to her actions discounts other economic, social, and political factors that could have contributed to their decline.
And what has she actually done to address them? Her reign was dominated by the need to bribe ‘new men’ and other favourites with land that underpinned the Equal Fields and thus the Fubing system.
 
Last edited:

octoberman

Banned
Uh, no, they invaded the territories by military invasion, but further spread was ensured by trade and the fact that the Arabs were culturally cool.
What culturally cool ? Arabs suppressed other cultures while imitating most of their own culture from Iran
In Central Asia, the Arabs managed to reach the Ferghana Valley and did not go any further, even though they defeated the Tang at the Battle of Talas.
So ? Central Asia beyond Ferghana Valley did not convert to Islam until centuries after Talas and only in 900s under Kara- Khanids.
 

octoberman

Banned
Wu Zetian herself couldn’t even stay on the throne, and that is an automatic fail no matter how you looked at it. Navigating various factions is always part of the job of being emperor. You don’t get to say that you are not incompetent if you failed to do it since it’s ‘complicated’ because many have done it and succeeded.
Ironically she got deposed in the same manner she usurped the throne. She rose to power because her advises became orders to her Emperor husband himself and she fell from power because her lovers' advise became orders to herself the Empress which diminished the power of higher-ups in administration and military to that by getting rid of her
 
Ironically she got deposed in the same manner she usurped the throne. She rose to power because her advises became orders to her Emperor husband himself and she fell from power because her lovers' advise became orders to herself the Empress which diminished the power of higher-ups in administration and military to that by getting rid of her
I think people by then were just apprehensive that the Tang restoration was imminent with her declining health and decided to ingratiate themselves with the new emperor. It didn't quite work out though given most of the coup leaders were later purged.
 
Last edited:
What culturally cool ? Arabs suppressed other cultures while imitating most of their own culture from Iran
"The Islamic Golden Age was a period of scientific, economic and cultural flourishing in the history of Islam, traditionally dated from the 8th century"
Do I need to explain what it is on a serious one?
So ? Central Asia beyond Ferghana Valley did not convert to Islam until centuries after Talas and only in 900s under Kara- Khanids.
That's exactly the argument in my favor, no? The Kara-Khanids adopted Islam at the state level because the majority of the population already believed in Islam.
 
Top