[98] The frequent references in the Chinese annals to the association of Se-kin-tʾi, king of Kish, with the Türgesh raise an interesting problem. There can be no doubt that he is the same prince as Al-Ishkand, ruler of Nasaf, in the Arabic records. The name is Iranian and personal, not dynastic. (See Justi’s Iranisches Namenbuch.) Al-Ishkand is first mentioned in the account of the Battle of the Pass, (_T_ab. 1542. 8) where he appears in command of a cavalry force on the side of the Khāqān, though Kish and Nasaf were both in the hands of the Arabs (1545. 1). The forces which he commanded were therefore not the ordinary local troops. During _H_ārith’s siege of Tirmidh he received reinforcements from Al-Ishkand, but no statement is made on the composition of his forces. He is mentioned again as accompanying the Khāqān and the _S_ughdians in the attack on Asad before the “Battle of the Baggage” (1597. 17-18,) where the reading ‘I_s_pahbadh of Nasā’ is probably an error in the tradition. Again there can be no question here of local troops from Nasaf or Kish. In the Chinese records Se-kin-tʾi appears as the commander of an independent force, not merely a detachment of Turks or levies from Shāsh or Farghāna. The most reasonable conclusion is that Al-Ishkand was the commander of the corps of _S_ughdian refugees. This would explain the title “King of the Warriors” by which he is sometimes mentioned in the Chinese records (Chav. Doc. 147 n. 1 and 313). The actual term (Chākar) from which the title was derived does not appear in the Arabic histories in this connection, but it is perhaps possible that a variant of the name (derived from _razm_) is to be read in _T_ab. 1614. 2 for the meaningless “razābin al-Kissī.” In 1609. 15 a force of “Bābīya” is mentioned along with the _S_ughdians, and the name, though unrecognisable, probably refers to some forces connected with _S_ughd. Wellhausen’s conclusion that the _S_ughdians and “Bābīya” formed part of the personal following of _H_ārith b. Surayj seems to force the connection in the text too far (_h_amala ʾl-_h_ārithu waman maʿahu min ahliʾs-sughdi wal-bābīyati). On the other hand, since al-Ishkand appears as the ally of _H_ārith, we may conclude that some understanding existed between the latter and the _S_ughdians (and therefore the Turks) at the time of his revolt. It is probable that the _S_ughdian corps assisted in the recovery of Samarqand from the Arabs.