And the Arab’s were not? I would say that Tala’s decided the fate of C Asia for good. More to the point, without Tala’s or maybe with a different battle result, Tang might have gone further? Don’t underestimate the political effects, many back home were convinced that they were overstretched, but the a different result might have ,mde it politically unfeasible to advocate a withdrawal.
1453 was more impirtant for the use of cannon, they had been used for a century, but this was the clear indication that they would dominate war now. People look at Urbans super gun, what they forget is that the Ottomans brought 60 plus cannon to the siege and were able to throw shot at the walls like water. It was the first major use of properly managed artillery.
I would say that the battle did not have that impact - the loss of central asia was attributable, not to the battle, but to the An Lushan rebellion a few years later. The battle merely marked the high-water mark of T’ang expansion - an expansion that would, no matter the results, have ceased in any event.
T’ang China was a civilization that was not ‘exportable’ to central Asia (even though many of its ruling class were, in fact, Central Asians). Central Asia would always have been a colonial outpost, had China won that battle - in short, a source of expense, paid because of its indirect benefits (support of trade, ability to monitor steppe nomads). Like any such expense, it would be cut the instant the central Chinese government got into financial or political difficulties (which happened frequently). The most significant such event began in 755 (the battle of Talas occurred in 751) - the An Lushan rebellion.
In contrast, Islam made the Islamic civilization ‘exportable’ to Central Asia. It was the spread of Islam that was really decisive, not the results of the battle - even if the Chinese had won, they would invariably have left sooner or later - their expansion was an effort that did not pay for itself directly.
Look, for example, at what actually happened after the Battle of Talas. It wasn’t the results of that battle the turfed the Chinese out of central asia - after the battle, the Chinese in fact retained their central asian holdings (and the Arabs dod not advance any further against them). Rather, it was the Rebellion of An Lushan that ruined their central asian holdings:
In short, it was not the Battle of Talas that was the causitive factor, but the rebellion of An Lushan. For this reason, the battle cannot be listed as a “decisive battle”, as it does not in fact have the decisive effect commonly attributed to it.
Well, for that matter, the Ottomans were famous for hiring European gun-founders to make their siege artillery, so it was equally clear that they would not have a monopoly …
I think this is exaggerating England’s power. I assume your mainly talking of The Spanish Armada here. The Armada was as much a weather event as it was a battle. Indeed for the next century most English land & naval battles against foreign powers ended up with England on the losing side. A bloody nose on numerous occasions at the hands of the Spanish and Dutch attest to this relative weakness of England. Yes, England was an expanding power, but it was nowhere close to being an equal one.