717 CE Turgis alliance

[badhabum]

The turgis or Tujué are covered by the Goturk list,

Reading a book on Tibet at that period, I found out tha in 717 CE, a combined Turgis, Tibetan and Arab army under turgis command laid sieges in the Tarim Bassin and was finaly beaten in battle by the Tangs,

We now the arabs were led by a Al-yaskuri and they managed to flee back to muslim territory, the tibetans were also beaten but the Tang remaine don the defensive so the strong Turgis confederation remained for many more years,

But it's impossible te recreate that army that was led by the Goturks as they have no arab or tibetan allies. It is also impossible to strat from a Tibetant list as in 717 CE they have no external allies,

Is there any plan to change this to allow a combined Goturk/Tibetan/Umayyad army ?

Also after continuyng readung the book, it seems that the tibetan/Turgis alliance lasted till around 739 CE

Source : The Tibetant Empire in Central Asia by Christopher I. Beckwith

[lionheartrjc]

I'll look into this. 

Richard

[nikgaukroger]

Not sure where Gokturks come into the 717 CE alliance as that is with the Türgesh whose list is allowed an Early Tibetan ally - but does not have an Arab one.

Suspect it could also be interesting to have a dig around as to what the Arab armies of the time in the east were comprised of. I suspect the current list may be weak on that and that they could well be a lot less "Arab" - pretty sure they didn't have any of the elite Syrian Jund troops for example (i.e. so Superior Arab types).

[badhabum]

The sodgian list has a "umayyad arab ally" and the Umayyad and early Abbasid has an early tibetan ally. So why not a turkish/arab/tibetan mix ?

The Goturks who seem to be the Turgis if I read correctly have none of them .

From my reading teh Turgis ramained ally to the tibetans till around 738/39 CE but to say that the armies always cooperated is something different but allowed for Sodgians and Arabas.

717 CE the Turgis ( under Turgis generalship) a combined army went to besieged 2 cities . the combined army was composed of Arabs, Turgis and Tibetans following Beckwith ! The army was defeated .

[nikgaukroger]

The Goturks who seem to be the Turgis if I read correctly have none of them .

You haven't read correctly I'm afraid - the Türgiş that Beckwith refers to are the Turgesh of the MeG lists.

You have, however, rightly pointed out that there should be a 3 way alliance allowed for 717 CE including Arabs.

In fact, I suspect that as you are reading Beckwith it would be useful to list all the various alliances mentioned in his book where armies cooperated on the battlefield as it would not surprise me if there are gaps in the lists. It gets very messy in the C9th in that area as the Tang start to collapse with various Turkic groups in alliance (of varying sorts) with the other powers. Could be some interesting stuff.

I may well have another look at the Arab armies in the area; as mentioned I suspect the current lists may be a bit weak in that respect and also possibly having allies missing and/or wrong. But just at the moment I'm amusing myself by looking at whether the Roman armies in Britain should be represented by the Foederate Roman from 383 CE rather than the Imperial Roman list - heady and important stuff I know     

[badhabum]

So it seems that between around 716 CE and till around 730 CE, under the leadership of "Su-Lu" the Turgesh would be allies or at least coorperate closely with the Tibetans. It is not easy to say "yes, on a regular basis there were allied contingents " but there was cooperation. So another ally for the Tibetans ? ti be noted the Tibetans may be allied to the Turgesh, but the Turgesh may not be allied to the Tibetans. I think both options could be interesting as the real situation seems pretty difficult to establish. Who did sent contingents to whom ?

About the 717 CE coalition Beckwith ( pg 88 ) only states that Chinese sources confirm arabic sources on the fact that a Turgis led allied army of tibetans, turgis and arabs laid sieges in Tang territory and were beaten by external armies. The arab army, under leading of Al-Yaskuri managed to flee to islamic territory. The composition of that force is unknown. The source cited is Baladhuri 426, Ya'qûbî, ii:302   but I could not find more info to help.

But interesting is the possibility of a 3 nations army only in 717 CE    the problem is creating the list and define what arabs to take ? what was available and where they "arabs" or local auxilliaries ? for gamesake I would go for arabs as it makes the list interesting and colourfull to play .

About all other alliances between tibetans and local powers, it is a real mess as it changed too often to make a workable list so I would keep the tiobetant list as it is . KISS principle

[badhabum]

Ok back to it :

Beckwith book was published in 1987 . To my knowledge it is the only book on the history of the Tibetan Empire in Central Asia. Beckwith could analyse some "recent works" which I could not find and he had the advantage of reading original historical textes . So I hope he is mostly right.

Pg 88 of his book is about the TURGIS alliance and mention an alliance in 717 ( august ). He tells us that Chinese and Arabic sources, both mention an assault by a "turgis led allied army of Tibetans, Arabs and Turgi " which led siege to Aksu and Ur-Turfan.

The Tand did sent an army composed of ethnic turks that drove off the allies.

The footnote (22) mention also as source TCTC 211:6728 or Ssu-ma Kuang, Tzu Chih t'ung chien, 10 vols, peking 1956, repr Taïpeï 1979 ( sorry I do not read Chinese and could not find any translation )

The information adds the footnote is also contained in a memorial to the throne by T'ang Chia-hui

We know that after defeat, the arabs did flee back to their own territory.

We also know that " at the same time"A Tibetan army was severely defeated ( so A different army or the allied contingent is not know )

A 2016 paper published by Wiley Blackwell on the Tukulor empire very briefly mention the 717 alliance with Tibet but does not mention the arabs. The campaign is very briefly described as they led siege and were defeated

The following link just stipulates that in 717 a combined army as described in this post and led by Suluk was indeed defeated in 717 ( but the source is Beckwith )

https://www.wikizero.org/wiki/en/Timeline_of_the_T%C3%BCrgesh

Work on that historical period and subject are very very uncommon and arab / Chinese sources are a complete mystery to me

Now up to you

[lionheartrjc]

I find Beckwith a hard read, not least because the commonly used names of all the main participants have changed since it was written.

The Turgesh will get an option in 718 CE to take Tibetan and Arab allies.

Technically I think the opponent were Western Turks operating under the instructions of the Tang - so no Chinese were present.
It was a victory for the Western Turks.

Richard

[badhabum]

I find Beckwith a hard read, not least because the commonly used names of all the main participants have changed since it was written.

The Turgesh will get an option in 718 CE to take Tibetan and Arab allies.

Technically I think the opponent were Western Turks operating under the instructions of the Tang - so no Chinese were present.
It was a victory for the Western Turks.

Richard

Yes the opponent was western Turks that at least is pretty clear