Origin of the Khazars
If the generally accepted etymology of certain familiar words in European languages is correct, the name "Khazar" has a wider circulation than it seems at first glance. The word "hussar" (hussar) was originally 1 applied to the irregular Hungarian cavalry, and, as we shall see, the connection between the Khazars and the Magyars, the founders of the Hungarian state, is a historically established fact. german word Ketzer(heretic) also comes from the name of the Khazars. Meanwhile, the origin and exact meaning of the word "Khazar" itself remains unclear. It is usually claimed that this is a gerund from the Turkish verb stem qaz- wander or nomad, so the Khazar is a "nomad" 2, and we can conditionally agree with this. Slavic languages have different words for Khazars with the vowel "o" in the first syllable, and this has led to other word formations from Russian braid(Weltmann, 1858), and from the base koz in many Slavic words for "goats" (Tzenoff, 1935) 3 . This is not true, since the original word is not Slavic. There is no reason to assume that the Khazars are "those who wore braids" or "shepherds of goats." It is noteworthy that Jews also usually write this word with the vowel "o/u" and pronounce K?z?ri (hence Buxtorf's Cosri), the plural is K?z?r?m. However, we have Arabic Khazar(unlikely its origin from akhzar, an adjective denoting a kind of damage to the eye - with small eyes, cross-eyed); Greek Khazaroi (Khazareis), Latin Chazari and Gazari, and also the form without vowels in the Hebrew document known as the Khazar correspondence, which is no doubt pronounced Kazar (Khazar).
As already mentioned, the Khazar = nomad explanation is most likely to be accepted. Nevertheless, Pelliot pointed out the difficulties associated with this 4 (Turkish qazmak always used in the sense of "gouge out, knock out" and not "wander", etc.) and refers to the suggestion of J. Denis 5 that the word can be explained as *Quz-er, *Quz-?r, *Quzar or *Qozar, from quz- "the slope of the mountain facing north", plus eri, er in the sense of "people of the north." In favor of Denis's suggestion, the following can be said: a) a satisfactory explanation of the vowel "o / u" in some forms of the word has not yet been given; b) in the ancient Armenian and Georgian languages, the Khazar khakan is constantly called the "king of the north", and Khazaria - "the land of the north" - this may be a translation of the local name. But then it is difficult to explain the forms from the Khazar correspondence, presumably Kazar, Kazari, and the Cambridge Document, also written in Hebrew, also contains Qazar.
So, our first question is: when did the Khazars appear and what is the name of this people? There was much controversy regarding the connections of the Khazars with the Huns, on the one hand, and the Western Turks, on the other. At one time, the opinion prevailed that the Khazars emerged from the Western Turkic Empire. Early references to the Khazars arose around the same time that references to the Western Turks ceased. They say that in 627 the Khazars joined forces with the Greek emperor Heraclius against the Persians, and they also helped him during the siege of Tiflis. It remains an open question whether the Khazars were under the rule of the Western Turks at that time. The chronicler Theophanes (d. c. 818) presents them as "Turks from the east, who were called Khazars" 6 . At the same time, the Western Türks were referred to by Greek authors simply as Türks, without additional definitions.
Syrian sources mention the Khazars even before 627. Both Michael the Syrian 7 and Abu-l-Faraj ibn Harun (Bar-Ebrey) 8 write how, obviously, under the Greek emperor Mauritius (582-602), three brothers from "inner Scythia" moved west with 50,000 people, and , when they approached the Greek borders, one of the brothers, Bulgarios (Bulgaris, Bar Hebraius), crossed the Don and settled on the territory of the empire. Others occupied "the country of the Alans, called Barsalia". They and the former inhabitants of the country took the name of the Khazars - in honor of the eldest of the brothers, whose name was Kazarig. If—it seems possible—the story goes back to the time of John of Ephesus 9 (d. c. 586), it is contemporary to the event in question. It clearly states that the Khazars arrived in the Caucasus from Central Asia at the end of the 6th century.
In the Greek author Theophylact Simokatta (c. 620) we read an almost modern account of events among the Western Turks, which can hardly be unrelated to the Syrian history just mentioned 10 . Referring to the Turkic embassy to Mauritius, Simokatta describes the events of recent years, when the Turks defeated the White Huns (Ephthalites), Avars and Uighurs, who lived “on Tila; The Turks called it the Black River” 11 . These Uighurs, writes Feofilakt, were led by two leaders - Var and Hunni. They are also referred to as varhonites 12 . Some part of the Uighurs managed to hide from the Turks, later they appeared to the west, where they were mistaken for the Avars, whose name was already known here. The latter is confirmed by another Greek author, according to which Justinian received representatives of the Pseudo-Avars, that is, the Uighurs, and this was in 558 13 . After that, they began to plunder and devastate the lands of Eastern and Central Europe. If Uyghur descent is correctly established, the word ogre (ogre) in folklore may date from this early period.
Theophylact also claims that there was another wave of refugees from Asia to Europe, which included the Tarniakh, Kotzagir and Zabender tribes. They, like their predecessors, were descendants of Var and Hunni and proved their family ties by joining the so-called Avars, in fact the Uighurs, under the rule of the latter's khaqan. It is hard not to notice that this is a different version of the story told by Michael of Syria and Abul-Faraj ibn Harun. Kotzagirs is undoubtedly a Bulgar group 14, and Zabender is probably Semender, an important Khazar city, which means it corresponds to Kazariq in the Syriac version. It seems that initially Semender got its name from the tribe that occupied it 15 . Thus, we have confirmation that the Khazars arrived in Eastern Europe under Mauritius, and before that they maintained contact with the Western Turks.
But besides this, there is an opinion that the Khazars were already on the outskirts of Europe before the rise of the Turks (c. 550). According to this opinion, the Khazars are related to the Huns. When Priscus, the ambassador at the court of Attila in 448, speaking of the people subordinate to the Huns and living in Pontic Scythia, called him akatsir 16, they were ak-Khazars - white Khazars. The historian Jordanes, who wrote around 552, mentioned the Akatsir as a warlike tribe that did not engage in agriculture, but lived on cattle breeding and hunting 17 . Given the difference among some Turkic peoples between the leading clans - "white" and the rest - "black", when we read from the Arab geographer Istakhri that the Khazars are of two types, some are called Kara-Khazars (black Khazars), and others are white 18, it can be assumed that the latter are Ak-Khazars (White Khazars). The identification of the Akatsir with the Ak-Khazars was rejected by Zeiss 19 and Markvart 20 as linguistically impossible. Markvart argued that historically, the Akatsir, as a subordinate race, rather correspond to the black Khazars. Alternative identification - akatsir = agachers. But it is not too different from others, if, of course, Zaki Validi is right in his opinion that there was a close connection between the Agachers and the Khazars 21 .
There are one or two facts in favor of the former view, which has not received an exhaustive explanation. If the Khazars have nothing to do with the Akatsirs and appeared as a side branch of the Western Turks at the end of the 6th century, how could they be mentioned in a Syriac compilation dated 569 22 attributed to Zechariah Rhetor? The form kazar/kazir, which is found here in the list of peoples living in the vicinity of the Caucasus, obviously refers to the Khazars. This is consistent with their existence in the region a century earlier. We also have evidence from the so-called Geographer from Ravenna (7th century?) that the Agazirs (Akatsirs) of Jordan are the Khazars 23 .
However, the Khazars are nowhere presented simply as the Huns. The question arises: if they were subjugated by the Huns shortly before 448, as Priscus claims, what period of time did they exist before that? Here one should take into account the views of Zaki Validi, which are formulated exclusively on the basis of Eastern sources and are independent of the considerations that have just been mentioned. The author believes that he found traces of the same prehistory of the Turks not only in Muslim, but also in Chinese sources of the Wei dynasty (366-558) 24 . In his presentation, the Khazars played a leading role and were even an indigenous people in their country 25 . Zaki Validi quotes a story from Gardizi, according to which the eponymous ancestor of the Kirghiz, having killed a Roman officer, fled to the court of the Khazar Khakan, and later moved east until he settled on the Yenisei. But since it is believed that the early Kirghiz lived in Eastern Europe and were south of the Urals before the beginning of the Christian era, Zaki Validi attributed the appropriate date to this episode and does not want to admit that the mention of the Khazars so early is an anachronism 26 . This is one of a number of claims to the antiquity of the Khazars. The main Muslim sources cited by Zaki Validi are relatively late. Gardisi wrote around 1050, and an anonymous history Mujmal al-Taw?r?kh w-al-Qisas 27 - appeared even later (although they undoubtedly go back to ibn al-Muqaffa in the 8th century and through him to pre-Islamic Persian sources). And his Chinese sources do not explicitly mention the Khazars. Nevertheless, the opinion that the Khazars existed even before the Huns finds some confirmation in another region. In the "Armenian History" of Moses Khorensky - Movses Khorenatsi (5th century) there is a mention of the Khazars between 197 and 217 years 28 . The peoples of the north, Khazirs and Basils, agreed to break through the Chor pass in the east of the Caucasus, "led by their king Vnasep Surkhap" 29 . They crossed the river Kur and were met by the Armenian Valarsh with a large army, which defeated them and put them to flight. After some time, the northern peoples, already on their side of the Caucasus, again suffered a heavy defeat. In the second battle Walars was killed. He was replaced by his son, and under the new king, the Armenians again crossed the Caucasus, defeated and subjugated the Khazir (Khazar) and the Basils. Every hundredth was taken hostage, and a monument was erected with an inscription in Greek letters, which showed that these peoples were now under the jurisdiction of Rome.
This story seems to be based on actual facts, and the Khazir refers to the Khazars. However, according to the generally accepted opinion, the Armenian history is erroneously attributed to Movses Khorenatsi, who wrote in the 5th century. It is believed that it should be attributed to the IX century, or, in extreme cases, to the VIII century, but not earlier than 30 . This, of course, gives a different character to the history of the Khazar raid. In this case, it is not unconditional evidence of the existence of the Khazars during the time of Movses Khorenatsi, but is consistent with other Armenian and Georgian histories, which, although more or less clearly point to the Khazars in the first centuries of the Christian era and even earlier, we do not present here. Of course, they are interesting in themselves, however, due to inaccuracies and lack of evidence, they cannot be considered reliable.
Muslim authors give us a significant amount of material that can shed light on the date of the appearance of the Khazars. As already noted, some of them are taken from Pahlavi sources compiled before the Arab conquest of Persia. What Arab and Persian authors report about the Khazars deserves careful study, as it contains authentic information from earlier times. Not surprisingly, stories like these, written when the Khazar state north of the Caucasus range was flourishing, distinguish them from the Turks encountered by the first generations of Muslims in Central Asia. But passages like the following, where the Khazars are placed side by side with the leading representatives of modern humanity, are nevertheless remarkable. In a discussion between the famous ibn al-Muqaffa and his friends, the question was raised which nation is the smartest. It is characteristic of the low cultural development of that time, or at least of the Arab views on the matter (ibn al-Muqaffa d. c. 759), that the Turks and Khazars were placed after the Persians, Greeks, Hindus and Negroes. Obviously, in this respect the Turks and Khazars were notorious. However, they are given completely different characteristics. "Türks are skinny dogs, Khazar grazing cattle" 32 . Although the judgment is unfavorable, we get the impression of the Khazars as a separate and important racial group. To what extent this is true is not clear. Assumptions were put forward linking the Khazars with the Circassian type - they are pale-skinned, dark-haired and blue-eyed, and through the basils (or barsils), which have already been mentioned, with the so-called "royal Scythians" of Herodotus 33 . All this, of course, is not entirely accurate. Apart from the passage that mentions the black Khazars, where it is said that they are swarthy like Hindus, and their “doubles” are light and beautiful 34 , the only available description of the Khazars in Arabic sources is the following, supposedly belonging to ibn Said al-Maghribi: “Khazars live in the north of the inhabited lands, closer to the 7th climate, under the constellation Plow. Their land is cold and damp. Therefore, their faces are white, their eyes are blue, their hair is more red and curly, they are large in body, and cold in temper. This people is savage." This is reminiscent of the traditional description of the northerners and in any case does not confirm that the Khazars belong to the "Circassian" type. According to the etymology of Khalil ibn Ahmad 36 , the Khazars could be narrow-eyed, like the Mongols. Obviously, nothing can be said with certainty in this matter. It is possible that some Khazars were light-skinned with dark hair and blue eyes, but there is no evidence that this type prevailed from antiquity or was widespread in Khazaria in historical times.
A similar dispute regarding the merits of different races has come down to us from the era before Muhammad, where the debaters were the Arab Numan ibn al-Mundir of al-Hira and Khosrow Anushirvan. The Persian expresses the opinion that the Greeks, Hindus and Chinese are superior to the Arabs, despite the low standard of living, the Turks and Khazars, who at least have an organization and are subordinate to the king. Here the Khazars are again compared with the great nation of the East 37 . This is in tune with the stories that the ambassadors of the Chinese, the Turks and the Khazars were constantly present at the gates of Khosrov 38, and that he had three golden thrones in his palace, which were never removed and on which no one sat. They were intended for the kings of Byzantium, China and the Khazars 39 .
In general, the materials of Arab and Persian authors about the Khazars in early times can be divided into three groups, concentrated around the names: 1) one or another Jewish patriarch; 2) Alexander the Great; 3) some Sasanian kings, mainly Anushirvan and his successors.
A typical narrative relating to the first group is given by Yakubi in his "History" 40 . After the confusion of languages in Babylon, the descendants of Noah came to Peleg, the son of Eber, and asked to divide the land between them. He allocated to the descendants of Japheth China, Hind, Sind, the country of the Turks and the country of the Khazars, as well as Tibet, the country of the Bulgars, Daylam and the country neighboring Khorasan. In another passage, Yacoubi recounts subsequent events. After Peleg divided the land, the descendants of Ibn Tubal, son of Japheth, headed northeast. One group, the descendants of Fogarma, who moved farthest to the north, was scattered across different countries and became different kingdoms, among them the kingdoms of the Bulgars, Alans, Khazars and Armenians 41 .
Also, according to Tabari 42, seven sons were born to Japheth: Homer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech and Firas (biblical names) 43 . The Turks and Khazars descended from the latter. Perhaps in this case there is a connection with the Türgesh, the surviving Western Turks who were defeated by the Arabs in 119/737 (if the year is given as a fraction, the first digit is the Hijri year. – Note. per.) 44 , and ceased to exist as a ruling group in the same century. It is curious that Tabari names among the descendants of Magog Majudzh and Yadzhudzh, adding that they lived to the east of the Turks and Khazars. This information renders unconvincing Zaki Validi's attempt to identify Gog and Magog by Arabic authors as Norwegians 45 . The name Meshekh is considered by him as a single number from the classical Massagets 46 . A. Bashmakov emphasizes the connection of the “meshekhs” with the Khazars in order to create a theory that the Khazars are not Turks from inner Asia at all, but a Japhet or Alarodian group from the south of the Caucasus 47 . Obviously, there is no stereotypical form of the legendary kinship of the Khazars with Japheth. Taj al-Arus claims that, according to some authors, they are the descendants of Meshech, the son of Japheth, and according to others, both the Khazars and the Saklabs descended from Tubal. Further we read about Balanjar ibn Japhet in ibn al-Faqih 48 and Abu al-Fida 49 . He was the founder of the city of Belenjer (Balanjar). The use of the word suggests that this is equivalent to giving Balanjar a separate racial identity. In historical times, Balanjar was a well-known Khazar center, which Masudi even calls their capital 50 .
It hardly makes sense to continue listing stories about Japheth. Their Jewish origin is absolutely obvious, and Poliak drew attention to one version of the division of the land, in which the Hebrew words for "north" and "south" appear in an Arabic text 51 . The Iranian cycle of legends has a similar tradition, according to which the hero Afridun divided the land between three sons, whose names were Tuj, Selm and Iraj. Here the Khazars, together with the Turks and the Chinese, find themselves on the part of the land allocated to Tudzh, the eldest son 52 .
Some stories connect the Khazars with Abraham. The story about the meeting in Khorasan between the sons of Keturah and the Khazars, which mentions the khaqan, is quoted by Poliak from ibn Said and al-Tabari 53 . The tradition is also present in the Meshed manuscript of ibn al-Faqih, apparently as part of the story of Tamim ibn Bahr's journey to the Uighurs, but goes back to Hisham al-Kalbi (Kalbi) 54 . Zaki Validi is inclined to pay special attention to it, considering it as evidence of the presence of the Khazars in this region in the early period 55 . Al-Jahiz also refers to the legend about the sons of Abraham and Keturah, but does not mention the Khazars 56 . Al-Dimashki argues that, according to one tradition, the Turks were the children of Abraham from Keturah, whose father belonged to the Arab family (al-Arab al Ariba). The descendants of another son of Abraham, the Sogdians and Kirghiz, are also said to have lived beyond the Oxus. Dimashki himself was not inclined to give preference to these genealogies 57 .
A typical story about Alexander, belonging to the second group, is the story of how the conqueror, having come from Egypt to North Africa (Kairouan) and having met Kandaka - a kind of Queen of Sheba for Solomon - went north to the "Land of Darkness". He returned, founded two cities on the border with the Greeks and proposed to go east again. His viziers pointed out the difficulty of overcoming the "Green Sea", the waters of which are fetid. But, despite the fears of the viziers and the obstacles, he crossed the Greek territory and arrived in the land of the Saklabi, who submitted to him. He went further, reached the Khazars, who also submitted, then continued his way through the country of the Turks and the desert between the Turks and China, etc. 58
Considering what has been said, when faced with a statement linking Alexander with the Khazars, which is not obviously absurd - like Wahb ibn al-Munnabih that the conqueror found the Khazars in Merv and Herat 59 , we cannot ignore it. Tabari notes that the meeting place between Alexander and the Persian ruler was in Khorasan, near the Khazar border, where a great battle took place 60 . If this assumption is accepted, and even if considered an anachronism, it is still important evidence of the expansion of Khazar activity at some time east of the Caspian Sea. But many stories about Alexander are so far from factual that it is difficult to draw any unambiguous conclusions. This definitely refers to Nizami's Iskander-name, where the Khazars are usually united with the Russians as enemies of the conqueror in the north 61 . The mention of Russians is an obvious anachronism. This idea certainly prompted the poet, who wrote in the 12th century, that he knew about the historical raids of the Russians down the Volga and across the Caspian 62 . He was familiar with local circumstances in the Caucasus region 63 . It is clear that Nizami gave his own twist to the story of Alexander, and in a different direction 64 . The battles of the conqueror with the Russians had not been mentioned before by any author. So the question of the truth of the tradition is not raised.
So far, we have not learned much about the antiquity of the Khazars from Arabic and Persian sources. It remains to be seen whether the sources of the third group, excerpts from the works of Muslim writers, linking the Khazars with various Persian kings, primarily Khosrov Anushirvan, will shed more light on this problem and on the Khazars in general.
We have a story about a large expedition against the Turks in the time of Kay Khosrov under the command of four commanders, one of whom, as it is said in the text, advanced on the enemy in the country of the Khazars. But this time (Key Khosrov = Cyrus) was long before Alexander, when the mention of the Turks is an obvious inaccuracy. The story found in Tabari 65 and also in ibn al-Balkhi 66 is definitely a later creation.
A hitherto unknown legend about the Khazar court is present in a Persian text kept in the Leiden University Library 67 . The author, a certain Mohammed ibn-Ali al-Katib al Samarkandi, lived in the 12th century and dedicated his work to one of the Karakhanids. She was known to Haji Khalifa 68 . Barthold calls this work historical 69 - a historical work written in Transoxiana under the Karakhanids, he argues - but it is rather literature from the Mirror for Princes series. The passage in question begins in the complex high-sounding style characteristic of many Persian authors. “Khakan, the king of the Khazars, was the ruler, whose eagle of majesty caught simurgh happiness. The falcon of his wisdom that adorned the kingdom and nourished the state caught peacocks, which was the pinnacle of world domination” 70 . After describing the habits of the kings, the author writes that "once a khaqan gave a feast and sat alone with his pleasant companions." One of the sons of Dahhak came to him (that is, obviously, an Arab, because al-Dahhak is a typical Bedouin marauder from old Iranian legends). He politely greeted the khakan and was invited to have a drink with him. When they began to drink, the musicians began to play, and the conversation turned to music. The Arab prince was asked two questions in a row, to which he answered: “What do you understand by listening to music?” and “Why does the listener sometimes get carried away and forget about everything when listening?”. Having received the answers and, probably, pleased with the honesty and understanding of the guest, the khakan asked the third question: “Why did luck (prosperity) turn away from you [that is, from the Arabs], when the kings of the earth threw a blanket of humility on your shoulders and heavenly stars illuminated the dust on your doorsteps ? Dahhak's son replied that bad management was to blame. The episode ends with the moralization of the author. Obviously, this is a moralizing story in an oriental manner, and not a historical work at all. Dahhak, as already noted, is a legendary character. His son's reasoning about listening to music reflects the musical theory of the time. In general, the story was invented or adapted by the author of the XII century as a warning to his patron 71 .
We are interested in how Samarkandi portrays the Khazars. In other sources, both Persian and Arabic, as we have seen, the pre-Islamic Khazar Khakan is a great king, whose position - the head of the most important part of humanity - elevates him to the rank of the rulers of the Sassanids and Chinese emperors. Of all the more or less apocryphal references to the ancient greatness of the Khakan of the Khazars, none presents him as clearly as the above passage. Here he is a pagan, or at least a non-Muslim, who does justice to wine and music. He is surrounded by a retinue - in contrast to the Khakans of later times, who, as we know, lived more or less secluded. The Arab prince treats him with respect. In addition, he is well informed, polite and talks about human affairs with simple wisdom. Unfortunately, it is impossible to say how true all this is.
Something more definite is stated in Masudi's narrative - the incident, according to him, took place in the 7th century at the court of Shirvah. According to the story of Masudi 72, during a horse ride, the king asked one of his retinue if he remembered the well-known trick that his ancestor Ardashir tried on the king of the Khazars. To flatter the king and amuse him, the courtier pretended not to know this story, pretended to be carried away by the king's story, and even allowed his horse to fall into the canal. Thus, we understand that the Khazars existed during the time of Ardashir (226-240). Although Arab historians briefly mention the activity of Ardashir in the Khazar direction 73 , and even describe the capture of Sul (Derbent), an important point in the east of the Caucasus, it is very difficult to understand what kind of trick Masudi had in mind. We are not aware of incidents that could be described in this way, however, as well as facts that clearly indicate the connection of Ardashir with the Khazars. Certainly, what Masudi tells about cannot be considered evidence of their existence in the 3rd century. Why, if the circumstances are well known and authentic, are they not described in Karmanak, a work on the history of Ardashir, which was translated by Nöldeke? 74 The most plausible explanation is that Masudi refers to some other Persian sovereign.
There is a short anachronistic mention of the Khazars who opposed Shapur, the son of Ardashir, in the armies of Emperor Julian 75 . Thereafter, Muslim sources mention them very little - or not at all - until much later. According to Tabari 76, the Persian Firuz (457-484) erected a stone structure in the vicinity of Sula 77 to protect the country from northern peoples. And if you believe the Greek Priscus, Peroz (Firuz), tired of a long war, offered peace and kinship to the king of the Kidarites Kunkhas. He agreed, but he did not get his sister Peroz as his wife, as he was promised, but an ignoble woman, which he soon learned about from her. Wanting to avenge this deceit, Kunkhas turned to Peroz with a request to send him good military leaders to lead the troops in the fight against the neighbors. When the last three hundred arrived, he ordered some of them to be killed, and some to be mutilated and sent back to Iran with a notice that this was revenge for deceit 78 . There is no reason to doubt that the facts, including the brutal denouement, are basically as Priscus describes them. After all, he was almost a contemporary of events. Perhaps this is the trick that the Persian tried on the northern ruler? It is possible that it was Masudi who wrote about her?
Before proceeding, it is necessary to consider the question: Who are the Kidarites? It is generally believed that Priscus had in mind the Hephthalites, or White Huns, at whose hands Peroz subsequently died. Bury noted that the Kidarites were most likely the Huns who settled on the trans-Caspian land and threatened the Darial Gorge 79 . Priscus mentions that the Persians in 465 held the fortress of Yuroipaah 80, apparently on the eastern tip of the Caucasus Mountains, from the Kidarites, and wanted the help of the Romans. In another place, he writes that when the Saragurs attacked the Persians in 468, they first went to the Caspian Gates, but found a Persian garrison there and set off by another road 81 . A little later, in 472, the Persian embassy in Constantinople announced victory over the Kidarites and taking the city of Balaam by storm. The name seems to be the product of a copyist's invention 82 .
In connection with everything said above, the question arises: maybe the Kidarites in the 5th century were the Khazars? The assumption of a relationship between Kidarites and Ephthalites does not exclude this. After all, a relationship is assumed between the Hephthalites and the Khazars. It is claimed that the institution of polyandry was characteristic of the Khazars - or at least its existence is confirmed. The Hephthalites also have 83 . But if Priscus's text is not significantly garbled, the Kidarites are certainly different from the Acacirs (Acathirs) he also mentions. If the Kidarites are Khazars, then there are definitely no Akatsirs.
But back to the story. Kubad (488–531), like his father Peroz, was busy defending Derbent. It is often mentioned that he built a brick defensive fortification in the Caucasus region 84 . He sent one of his commanders against the Khazars, who at that time occupied Arran and Dzhurzan (Dzhurdzhan) 85 in the south of the ridge. Most of these territories were taken from them. Qubad built cities in Arran that later became important - Baylakan, Berdaa, Kabala. This is written by al-Baladhuri, who is considered an authoritative early author (d. 892). “The Khazars are those who conquered the lands of Armenia. Above them was the king khakan. His representative ruled Arran, Jurzan, Busfurrajan and Sisijan. These provinces were called the Four Armenias. Qubad (Kavad) returned them to Iran, and they passed to his son Khosroy Anushirvan up to Bab-allan (Dar-yal), including 360 cities. The Persian king conquered Bab-al-abwab (Derbent), Tabarsaran and Belenjer. He built the city of Kalikala, as well as many others, and settled them with Persians. However, "the Khazars again took possession of everything that the Persians had taken from them and held in their hands until the Romans drove them out and installed a king over the Four Armenias" 86 . The first part of the passage clearly points to the time of Kavad. We are told that a certain deputy of the Khazar Khakan ruled over part of Armenia until he was defeated by the Persians. At first glance, there is no reason to doubt the historical nature of the message, especially since it is confirmed by other authors. As for the position (title) or the name of this deputy, both should be Turkic, like the names and titles of another Khazar nomenklatura known to us. The second part of the passage refers to the situation on the Khazar border in a later period, shortly before the arrival of the Arabs. Thus, we have information about the first established appearance of the Khazars, who raided or migrated south of the Caucasus. Date - no later than 531 (death of Kavad). Moreover, we learn about the existence of the Khazar Khakanate (Kaganate) and even a double reign at this very time.
All this is very difficult. And it's not just that the Khazar khakan and his representative are not named directly in the existing sources until much later. The existence of a khakan among the Turkic peoples is usually understood as a sign of their sovereignty and independence. When the Khazars next appear, it is already part of the Western Turkic confederation. In addition, if we consider Yakubi's information to be true, the Khazars, their khakan and his representative already existed when the Western Turkic Empire did not yet exist, and even before the initial Turkic federation arose (552). And if the Khazars could well have existed in the west before that time, it seems almost obvious that their appearance as an impressive force was associated with the decline of the Western Turks. The rule of the Western Turkic Khagans (Khakans) continued until 657 or 659, when they were defeated by the Chinese 87 . After that, one should have expected the emergence of the Khazar Khaganate 88 . More recent research has confirmed Yakubi's surprising claims. The context of Yaqubi's message is the genealogy of the northern peoples, the source of which is not specified 89 , but which is consistent with the genealogy given by Hisham al-Kalbi 90 . It can be assumed that this is the source of Yakubi, especially since in other places Hisham al-Kalbi mentions the Khaqan of the Khazars 91 . This gives us much more reliable dates for the existence of a double reign among the Khazars. Al-Kalbi's main source was his father, who died in 146/763. He himself lived until 204/819 92 . A date three centuries earlier is almost certainly too early. However, it can hardly be considered an accident that the Khazars began to be mentioned during the reign of Kubad-Kavad and Anushirvan (531-579). The growing number of precise indications of this, perhaps, proves that they have indeed already entered the historical scene 93 .
Tabari 94 reports that Anushirvan divided the empire into four large provinces - satrapies, one of which was Azerbaijan and its neighboring "country of the Khazars". He entered into an alliance with a people called the Suls, who lived in the eastern part of the Caucasus in the neighborhood of the "passage of Sul" (Derbent), defeated the Banjar 95 , Balanjar and other peoples who could be Khazars 96 (if so, they were different from others), when they invaded Armenia, and the survivors of them, numbering 10 thousand, settled in Azerbaijan. He built Bab-al-abwab - that's how Derbent was called in Arab times, a fortress and a city in order to hold the northern peoples. This goal he regularly served in subsequent centuries.
The figure of Anushirvan has always attracted storytellers. At Kudama 97 and Yakut 98 we find the following story. Anushirvan feared the hostility of the Khazars and wrote a letter to their king offering peace and alliance. To do this, he asked for a Khazar princess as his wife and offered his daughter in exchange. Khazar agreed. Anushirvan received a bride at the appointed time. But the girl he sent to the Khazars was not of royal blood. Some time later, the two rulers met at a place called Barshalia, where they indulged in entertainment for several days. Then Anushirvan ordered that part of the Khazar camp be set on fire, and when the king complained, he declared that he knew nothing. After that, he ordered his camp to be set on fire and the next day he came to the Khazars in anger, declaring that they did not justify his trust. He concluded by saying that although there may be friendship between him and his brother, there can never be peace between the armies, and therefore it is best to build a wall between them. The Khazar king agreed and left the Persians to fortify Derbent. Later, he learned that Anushirvan cheated him with marriage and built the wall without hindrance. The king was furious, but there was nothing he could do.
It seems likely that this story - or something very similar - is the very trick that Masudi is referring to. This is clearly not a historical narrative. The incident reported by the Greek Prisk, allegedly taking place during the reign of Firuz, is the basis of the first part of the story 99 . He is attributed to Anushirvan, since he married the daughter of the kagan of the Western Turks, Sinjibu (Istami) 100 . The fact that Anushirvan was responsible for the construction of the Derbent wall - part of the defensive fortifications of the Caucasus - is not in doubt, but the circumstances given in the second part of the story are fiction. The difference between the legend and the historical record is shown by another quotation from Tabari 101. “The strongest, bravest and most powerful of the Turks was Khakan Sinjibu, and he had the most troops; it was he who killed Vazr, the king of the Hephthalites, not in the least afraid of their numbers and strength 102 . Having killed the king and all his army, he seized their wealth in the form of booty and took possession of their country. Sinjibu subjugated the banjar, balanjar and Khazars 103 (?), and they showed him their humility and let him know that the Iranian shahs continue to pay them money for not attacking their country. Then Sinjibu set out at the head of a large army, approached the border regions of Sul, and sent a threatening and arrogant message to Khosrow Anushirvan demanding money, which he had previously paid to the three peoples mentioned above. And if Khosrow does not hasten to send him what he needs, then he will invade his country and attack him. But Khosrow Anushirvan paid no heed to his threats, because he erected fortifications at the gates of Sul.
In addition, Khosrov knew that, on his orders, the borders of Armenia were guarded by a detachment of 5,000 soldiers, horse and foot. Khakan Sinjibu learned that Khosrov had fortified the border of Sul and went home along with those who were with him. This narrative certainly has signs of authenticity not found in Kudam et al. On the basis of it, it can be argued that some groups that were later part of the Khazar Empire, and possibly the Khazars themselves, were under the leadership of the Western Turks against the Persians. It was in the period determined by the defeat of the Hephthalites, that is, about 567 104, and the death of Sinjibu in 575 or 576 105 . Then the Western Turkic forces were sent by the son of Sinjibu to join the Utigurs, who besieged the Crimean kingdom of Bosporus (the city of Panticapaeum, modern Kerch) 106 . It is clear that during this period the Western Turks operated north of the Caucasus. But the meeting of Anushirvan and the king of the Khazars or the Turks in Barshalia, as stated in the story of Kudam, is not confirmed.
Other stories are told about Anushirvan. When the Derbent wall was built, a throne was installed on the ledge of the mountain, sitting on which one could look at the sea. When Anushirvan was one day sitting on it, a monster appeared before him, endowed with speech, who addressed the king. He said that he saw how this border was closed seven times and opened the same number of times. But Anushirvan is destined to close it forever. It is also claimed that after the completion of the wall, Anushirvan made inquiries about the Caspian. He learned that the Khazar city of Al-Bayda was four months away and decided to visit it. He was not persuaded by those who claimed that in the northern part of the Caspian Sea there was a whirlpool called the Lion's Mouth, through which no ship could pass. Anushirvan set sail and soon reached the whirlpool. There he was on the verge of death, but miraculously escaped and achieved his goal. Then he returned safely back 107 . All these stories are just hints to the actual story that Anushirvan fortified the Derbent pass.
Anushirvan was succeeded by his son Ormizd (579–590). Ormizd fought against Khakan Sinjib during his father's life 108 , and later, having become the king of Persia, he was forced to meet with a large coalition in which the leadership belonged to the Turks, and included Greeks and Khazars 109 . Hormizd wrote a letter to the Greek emperor, offering him in exchange for peace the return of the cities captured by his father, and the offer was accepted. Further, he sent his generals against the ruler of the Khazars (Sahib al-Khazar), who were expelled from Persian territory. Now Ormizd could come to grips with the Turks. This narrative is mostly interesting in the relations between the Khazars and the Turks. Apparently, the Khazars obeyed the orders of the Turks and were part of the Western Turkic Empire. In any case, there is no reason to believe that at this time they enjoyed independence. The attack on Persia took place in the eleventh year of the reign of Hormizd, that is, about 589.
It was from the time of the reign of Ormizd that references to the Khazars began to appear in other sources, primarily among the Syrian authors Michael the Syrian and Zechariah the Rhetor 110 . Let's see what the Greek Procopius tells about the inhabitants of the lands of the North Caucasus in his time - in the first half of the 6th century. According to Procopius, the Alans and Abkhazians, who were Christians and great friends of the Romans, lived in this region together with the Zikhs (Circassians), and further on lived the Huns-Sabirs, mentioned together with other Hunnic nations. During the reign of Emperor Anastasius (491-518), the Hun Ambazuk owned the Caspian Gates (Derbent), and after his death they passed to Kavad. Procopius claims that numerous Sabirs lived near the Caucasus and were divided into several different groups 111 . Apparently, he knew nothing about the Khazars as such.
The term "Sabirs" is new for us. But Procopius is not the first and not the only author who mentions the Sabirs. According to Priscus 112, they appeared on the borders of Europe in the 5th century (before 465), ousted from their lands in the east by the Avars. In the next century, Jordan refers to them as one of the two major branches of the Huns 113 . Procopius' claims are confirmed by Theophanes, according to which they passed through the Caspian gates around 514 and invaded Cappadocia and Galatia 114 .
Then the Sabirs were enemies of the Persians on the northeastern border for a long period before the appearance of the Western Turks and even later. After the second half of the 6th century, they are not mentioned in the sources as a national group, and it probably seems important that around 576 some or, perhaps, their remnants were resettled by the Greeks south of Kura 115 . Presumably at this time, the Khazars asserted leadership over the tribes living north of the Caucasus. If there are some doubts about the early references to the Khazars living in these places, subsequently they are not and cannot be. Masudi (X century) calls the Khazars Turkic Sabirs 116 . Probably the same is meant by Mahmud al-Kashgari (II century) 117 . Initially, the two groups were different 118 . That they were later identified is perhaps best explained by the hypothesis that the Khazars subjugated and eclipsed the Sabirs. In any case, an important change took place among the tribes in the North Caucasus. It took place at the end of the VI or at the beginning of the VII century. Not only the Sabirs, but also other tribes ceased to be mentioned in the sources under their old names (Saragurs, Utigurs, Samandar, Balanjar, etc.). This cannot be an accident. Undoubtedly, this is due to the increasing pressure of the Khazars.
About the events that led to their contact with the Greek emperor Heraclius, we are relatively well informed thanks to a variety of sources - Greek, Armenian and Georgian. In 627, Heraclius was in Tiflis on one of the expeditions against Persia, which he undertook to divert the attention of the Persians from his country. Here he was met by the Khazars, commanded by Zibel, the second person after the Khakan. To do this, they passed the Caspian Gates. Gibbon described the meeting between Heraclius and the Khazars 119 . Siebel introduced his son to Heraclius, sent 40,000 people to the imperial service and left for his own country. And Heraclius went with the Khazar army further, to Persian territory. When winter came and the Persians attacked new allies, the Khazars parted ways with Heraclius - perhaps they did not like the Greek method of warfare. Heraclius continued to advance with the imperial troops, but when he was three days from Ctesiphon, the Persian capital, a mutiny broke out that hastened the death of Khosrow. His son hastened to negotiate with Heraclius, who in 628 turned back 120 .
The Armenian version of the development of events is somewhat different 121 . In 625, the Khazars invaded Armenia and, having collected huge booty, returned through Derbent. The following year, the Khazar king decided to repeat the success. An order was given to all under his authority - "tribes and peoples, inhabitants of mountains and plains, living under roofs and in the open, having shaved heads or long hair" - to be ready to march on a signal. When the time came, the Khazars set in motion. They took and destroyed the fortress of Tzur (Derbent), for the construction of which the Persian kings spared neither time nor effort, and moved south, killing the inhabitants and robbing the wealth of the country. After a while they approached Tiflis. There, as already mentioned, they met with Heraclius. The two armies, acting in concert, laid siege to Tiflis, which was about to surrender when strong reinforcements arrived at the defenders. The Allies decided to withdraw, agreeing to join forces again the following year. After that, around 626, the emperor sent one of his advisers to negotiate with the Khazars. To negotiate the final terms, 1,000 Khazar cavalry visited Constantinople. These negotiations, if, of course, the information is authentic, obviously should have taken place before the meeting in Tiflis. In the next year, 627, the "king of the north" sent the promised army under the command of his brother's son Shad. The Khazars plundered Arran and Azerbaijan.
In 628, according to the same story, the Khazars invaded Arran, took Berdaa and turned west towards Tiflis. They were commanded by Jebu (or Yabgu) - khakan. They besieged the Georgian city, and soon the Greeks with Heraclius, who had just won a victory in Persia, approached them. But the inhabitants of the city resisted, and both armies eventually withdrew. After some time, Jebu-Khakan and his son Shad still took Tiflis. When the city fell, the two generals were brought before Jeb, who showed them disgusting cruelty. They were blinded, subjected to terrible torture, and then their bodies were exposed on the walls of the city. The source also reports that the “king of the north” took tribute from gold and silver smelters, iron ore miners, and fishermen on the Kur River. And in 629-630, the Khazar king prepared a big invasion, sending forward 3,000 cavalry under the command of a certain Chorpan-tarkhan. Ten thousand Persians were defeated, and the Khazars spread throughout Armenia, Georgia and Arran.
This text is an introductory piece.The people who once lived in present-day Southern Russia. Their origin is not known with certainty. Konstantin Porphyrogenitus considers them Turks and translates the Khazar name of the city of Sarkel - white hotel. Bayer and Lerberg also take them for Turks, but the word Sarkel is translated differently: the first is a white city, the second is a yellow city. The author of an article in "Beytr ä ge zur Kenntniss Russlands" (I, 410) recognizes them as Hungarians; Fren refers them to the Finnish tribe; Klaprot and Budygin consider them Voguls, the Arab writer Ibn-el-Efir - Georgians, the geographer Shemeud-din-Dimeshki - Armenians, etc.
There is an interesting letter from the Jew Hisdai (see Art. Jews), the treasurer of an Arab sovereign in Spain, to the Khazar Khagan and the answer of the Khagan: the Khagan considers Kh. to be the descendants of Forgoma, from whom the Georgians and Armenians originate. The authenticity of this letter, however, is doubtful. Reliable information about the Khazars begins no earlier than the 2nd century A.D., when they occupied the lands north of the Caucasus Mountains.
Then they begin a struggle with Armenia, for the most part victorious, and stretches until the 4th century. With the invasion of the Huns, the Khazars are hidden from the eyes of history until the VI century. At this time, they occupy a large area: in the east they border on the nomadic tribes of the Turkic tribe, in the north - with the Finns, in the west - with the Bulgarians; in the south, their possessions reach the Araks. Freed from the Huns, the Khazars begin to intensify and threaten the neighboring peoples: in the VI century. The Persian king Kabad built a large rampart in the north of Shirvan, and his son Khozroy built a wall to protect against the 10th century. The Khazars occupied the territory of the Bulgarians, taking advantage of the strife among them after the death of King Krovat. Since this century, X.'s relations with Byzantium begin.
The Khazar tribes posed a great danger to the latter: Byzantium had to give them gifts and even become related to them, against which Konstantin Porphyrogenitus takes up arms, advising to fight the Khazars with the help of other barbarians - Alans and Guzes. Emperor Heraclius managed to win over the Khazars in his fight against the Persians. Nestor calls the Khazars white Ugrians.
The Khazar tribes on the Tauride Peninsula, in the former possessions of the Bulgarians, found refuge with Justinian II, who married the sister of the Khazar Khagan. In 638, Caliph Omar conquered Persia and destroyed the neighboring lands. H.'s attempt to oppose the aggressive movement of the Arabs ended in failure: their capital Selinder was taken; only the defeat of the Arabs on the banks of the Bolangira River saved the country of the Khazars from complete devastation. In the 8th century Kh. waged an 80-year war with the caliphate, but had to (although their attacks on the lands of the caliphate were later encountered) asked the Arabs in 737 for peace, which was given to them under the condition of accepting Islam.
Unsuccessful wars in the south were rewarded to some extent with successes in the north: around 894, the Khazars, in alliance with the Guz, defeated the Pechenegs and Hungarians who lived north of the Tauride Peninsula; even earlier, they subjugated the Dnieper Slavs and took from them "white from the smoke."
Thus, in the ninth century their possessions stretched from the northern part of the Caucasus to the lands of the northerners and Radimichi, that is, to the banks of the Desna, Seim, Sula and Sozh rivers. In the X century. their possessions were still expanded, but death was already close. The Russian state grew stronger and gathered together the scattered Slavic tribes. Already Oleg faced the Khazar Khaganate, subjugating some Khazar tributaries. In 966 (or 969) Svyatoslav Igorevich moved to Khozaria and won a complete victory in a decisive battle. Khazaria fell. The remnant of the Khazar people for some time still held out between the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus Mountains, but then mixed with their neighbors.
In the Russian chronicles, the last indication of Khazar was preserved under 1079, but the name Khozaryan is found in the XIV and even XV centuries. when listing various servants of the Moscow princes. The Khazars, like the Bulgarians, were a semi-sedentary people. In winter, according to the description of Ibn Dast, they lived in cities, and with the onset of spring they moved to the steppes. Their main city after the defeat of Selinder was Itil, which stood near the place where Astrakhan is now. The population of Khazaria was diverse and diverse. The head of state himself, the kagan, accepted Judaism in the 18th century, according to Fotslan and Massudi, together with his governor and the "porphyry-born" boyars; the rest of the population professed part Judaism, part Islam, part Christianity; there were also pagans.
There is a tradition (see "Acta Sanctorum", II, 12-15), accepted by Bestuzhev-Ryumin, that X. asked Emperor Michael for a preacher and that the latter sent St. Kirill. The Khazars had a very original character of government and court. Arab writers of the 10th century. they say that although the main power belonged to the kagan, it was not he who ruled, but his deputy infantry (beg?); kagan, in all likelihood, had only religious significance. When the new governor came to the kagan, the latter threw a silk noose around his neck and asked the half-suffocated "infantry" how many years he was thinking of ruling. If he did not die by the time appointed by him, then he was put to death.
The kagan lived completely closed in his palace, with 25 wives and 60 concubines, surrounded by a court of "porphyry" and significant guards. He was shown to the people every 4 months. Access to it was open to "infantry" and some other dignitaries. After the death of the kagan, they tried to hide the place of his burial. The army of the Khazars was numerous and consisted of a permanent detachment and a militia. The "infantry" commanded over him. For the court, the Khazars had 9 (according to Ibn Fotslan) or 7 (according to Gaukal and Massudi) husbands: two judged according to Jewish law, two - according to Mohammedan, two - according to the Gospel, one was appointed for Slavs, Russ and other pagans. Trade in the Khazar Khaganate was transit: they received goods from Russia and Bulgaria and sent them across the Caspian Sea; expensive goods came to them from Greece, from the southern shores of the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. The storage place for goods was Khazeran - one of the parts of Itil. State revenues were made up of tolls, tithes from goods brought in by land and water, and taxes sent in kind. The Khazars did not have their own coins.
Literature. Fren, "Veteres memoriae Chazarorum" ("Mem. de l" Acad. Sciences", VIII, 1822); Thunmann, "Unters. über die Geschichte der ostl. Europ. Vö lker" (translated by Pogodin, Vestn. Evropy, 1823); Evers, "Krit. Vorarbeiten" (translated by Pogodin, "Northern arch.", 1838); Khvolson, "News about the Khazars, Burtases, Magyars, Slavs and Russians - Ibn-Dasta" (St. Petersburg, 1869); Sum, "Ist. once. about the Khazars" ("Read. in" General. ist. ", year 2, book 3); V. V. Grigoriev, "Review of the political history of Khazaria" ("Son of the Father" and "Northern archive", 1835, 17); "On the form of government in X." ("J. M. N. Pr.", 3 books); D. Yazykov, "Experience in the history of the Khazars" ("Proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences", I); B. A. Dorn, "News about the Khazaria east. ist. Tabori" ("Zh. M. N. Pr.", 1844, book 7); "Historical Collection" by Valuev and "Readings in the General History", year 2, 6 (letter from Khisdai and the response of the kagan in translations by K. Kossovich and Hartenstein). For more detailed instructions, see D. Yazykov.
Neighboring peoples wrote a lot about the Khazars, but they themselves left practically no information about themselves. How unexpectedly the Khazars appeared on the historical stage, just as suddenly they left it.
God knows where
For the first time about the Khazars in the 5th century, the Armenian historian Moses Khorensky wrote that “the crowds of Khazars and Basils, united, crossed the Kura and scattered on this side.” The mention of the Kura River, apparently, says that the Khazars came to Transcaucasia from the territory of Iran. The Arab chronicler Yakubi confirms this, noting that “the Khazars again took possession of everything that the Persians had taken from them and kept in their hands until the Romans drove them out and installed a king over four Armenias.”
Until the 7th century, the Khazars behaved rather modestly, being part of various nomadic empires - for the longest time in the Turkic Khaganate. But by the middle of the century, they had grown stronger and bolder enough to create their own state - the Khazar Khaganate, which was destined to exist for more than three centuries.
ghost state
The Byzantine and Arabic chronicles describe in all colors the greatness of Itil, the beauty of Semender and the power of Belenjer. True, one gets the feeling that the chroniclers reflected only the rumor about the Khazar Khaganate. So, the anonymous author, as if retelling a legend, answers the Byzantine dignitary that there is such a country called "al-Khazar", which is separated from Constantinople by 15 days of travel, "but between them and us there are many peoples, and the name of their king is Joseph."
Attempts by archaeologists to establish what the mysterious “Khazaria” was actively began to be undertaken in the 20-30s of the XX century. But all to no avail. The Khazar fortress Sarkel (Belaya Vezha) turned out to be the easiest to find, since its location was known relatively accurately. Professor Mikhail Artamonov managed to excavate Sarkel, but he could not find traces of the Khazars. “The archaeological culture of the Khazars itself remains still unknown,” the professor stated sadly and suggested continuing the search in the lower reaches of the Volga.
Russian Atlantis
Continuing Artamonov's research, Lev Gumilyov conducts his search for "Khazaria" on the unflooded islets of the Volga delta, but the list of finds attributed to the Khazar culture is small. Moreover, he never managed to find the legendary Itil.
Then Gumilyov changes his strategy and conducts underwater reconnaissance near the part of the Derbent wall, which goes into the Caspian. What he discovered strikes him: where the sea is now splashing, people lived and needed drinking water! Even the medieval Italian geographer Marina Sanuto noted that "the Caspian Sea arrives from year to year, and many good cities are already flooded."
Gumilyov concludes that the Khazar state should be sought under the thickness of sea water and sediments of the Volga delta. However, the attack was not only from the side of the sea: a drought was approaching Khazaria from land, which completed what the Caspian had begun.
Scattering
What nature failed to do was carried out by the Russian-Varangian squads, which finally destroyed the once powerful Khazar Khaganate and dispersed its multinational composition around the world. Some of the refugees after the victorious campaign of Svyatoslav in 964 were met in Georgia by the Arab traveler Ibn Haukal.
Modern researcher Stepan Golovin notes a very wide geography of Khazar settlement. In his opinion, “the Khazars of the delta mixed with the Mongols, and the Jews partly hid in the mountains of Dagestan, partly moved back to Persia. Alans Christians survived in the mountains of Ossetia, while the Turkic Christian Khazars, in search of fellow believers, moved to the Don.
Some studies show that Christian Khazars, having merged with the Don co-religionists, subsequently began to be called "roamers", and later Cossacks. However, more credible are the conclusions according to which the bulk of the Khazars became part of the Volga Bulgaria.
The Arab geographer of the 10th century Istakhri claims that "the language of the Bulgars is similar to the language of the Khazars". These close ethnic groups are united by the fact that they were the first to create their own states on the ruins of the Turkic Khaganate, which were headed by Turkic dynasties. But fate decreed that at first the Khazars subjugated the Bulgars to their influence, and then they themselves joined the new state.
Unexpected descendants
At the moment, there are many versions about the peoples-descendants of the Khazars. According to some, these are Eastern European Jews, others call the Crimean Karaites. But the difficulty is that we do not know what the Khazar language was: a few runic inscriptions have not yet been deciphered.
Writer Arthur Koestler supports the idea that the Khazar Jews, having moved to Eastern Europe after the fall of the Khaganate, became the core of the world Jewish diaspora. In his opinion, this confirms the fact that the descendants of the “Thirteenth Tribe” (as the writer called the Khazar Jews), being of non-Semitic origin, ethnically and culturally have little in common with the modern Jews of Israel.
Publicist Alexander Polyukh, in an attempt to identify the Khazar descendants, took a completely unusual path. It is based on scientific conclusions, according to which the blood type corresponds to the way of life of the people and determines the ethnic group. Thus, Russians and Belarusians, like most Europeans, in his opinion, more than 90% have blood type I (O), and ethnic Ukrainians are 40% carriers of group III (B).
Polyukh writes that group III (B) is a sign of peoples who led a nomadic lifestyle (where he also includes the Khazars), in which it approaches 100% of the population.
Further, the writer reinforces his conclusions with new archaeological finds of Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Valentin Yanin, who confirms that Kyiv at the time of its capture by the Novgorodians (IX century) was not a Slavic city, which is also evidenced by "birch bark letters".
Also, according to Polyukh, the conquest of Kyiv and the defeat of the Khazars, carried out by Oleg, suspiciously coincide in terms of timing. Here he makes a sensational conclusion: Kyiv is the possible capital of the Khazar Khaganate, and ethnic Ukrainians are the direct descendants of the Khazars.
Latest finds
However, sensational conclusions may be premature. In the early 2000s, 40 kilometers south of Astrakhan, Russian archaeologists discovered “Khazar traces” during excavations of the medieval city of Saksin. A series of radiocarbon analyzes dates the cultural layer to the 9th century, the heyday of the Khazar Khaganate. As soon as the settlement was outlined, its area was determined - two square kilometers. What major city besides Itil was built by the Khazars in the Volga Delta?
Of course, it is too early to rush to conclusions, however, already now the pillars of Khazarology M. Artamonov and G. Fedorov-Davydov are almost sure that the capital of the Khazar Khaganate has been found. As for the Khazars, most likely they simply dissolved in the ethnic culture of neighboring peoples without leaving direct descendants behind them.
Brad what. I “turned over” so much material in search of material evidence of the existence of Khazaria, and made sure that reliable information about the Khazar writing simply does not exist.
In the morning, over a cup of coffee, I come across an unsolved crossword puzzle that my wife “tormented” last night, and in the most prominent place comes across the question “Prophetic avenger of the Khazars”, of four letters. "Oleg" - inscribed in the cells by his wife's hand. I haven't forgotten the curriculum yet. And then I remember my vision, and how it was scalded with boiling water. Sign, however. Need to think. And here is what my thoughts led to.
What do we know about Khazaria? Even if we briefly skim through the well-known facts, there are already very serious doubts about the existence of the Khazar Khaganate in the form that was mentioned in the textbooks. Everything, absolutely everything that is known to the average statistical citizen on this issue is based on one paragraph from the textbook, and the map of “ancient Khazaria” imprinted in the memory, which someone completely arbitrarily painted over on a modern map in one color.
Today, this version of the presence of the Khaganate on the territory of modern Russia is actively exaggerated by those who are sure that the Jews want to “chop off” her ancestral lands from Russia under the guise of restitution. In general, the fears are justified. They “chopped off” Palestine only on the grounds that some kind of their Jehovah promised them this land as their property, and no one except the Jews themselves knew about this promise.
In addition, what is actually happening now is fully consistent with these plans. Even if there are no plans, but a sane person does not doubt the Jewish expansion. It is forbidden to talk about it in the “independent” Russian media, but you can’t get away from the facts. Plans for the construction of "New Khazaria" are being implemented before our eyes.
But today we have a different task. It is necessary to understand how, in general, information about the Khazar Khaganate appeared in world history. We will not touch Pushkin, he died recently, and he hardly knew the truth about how everything really happened. What sources do we have? Again, everything rests on The Tale of Bygone Years, or rather, on its Radzivilov list, which today only the President of the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation believes, probably, and even then I doubt it.
The Cambridge Document, or otherwise Schechter's letter (after the name of the discoverer. Who would doubt it! The Kirghiz could not find a document of such importance.) - a manuscript in Hebrew. Contains a fragment of a letter from an unnamed Jew, a subject of the Khazar king Joseph, to an unnamed gentleman from a Mediterranean country. One of the two (along with the letter of Tsar Joseph) written monuments of Khazar origin.
The author at the time of writing was in Constantinople (Let's remember this important point!). The addressee of the letter with a high degree of probability is the Cordoba dignitary Hasdai ibn Shaprut, who collected information about Khazaria. The time of writing can be dated to around 949.
The letter contains unique information on the history and religion of the Khazars, the resettlement of Jews in Khazaria, the activities of the last three Khazar kings: Benjamin, Aaron and Joseph. Of particular interest is the story of the contemporary Russian-Khazar-Byzantine war in the Black Sea region, where the Russian leader is named H-l-g-w, which conveys the exact Scandinavian form of the name Oleg.
Is the mention of Prophetic Oleg in Shekhter's letter accidental? Of course no. The one who falsified this “document” was definitely familiar with the work of A.S. Pushkin, and so that no one would doubt that the letter was genuine, he could not resist the temptation to mention Oleg in it. Probably, on the eve of the First World War, it looked quite convincing, but not today.
There is one more "convincing" document... Consisting already... From one phrase in "ancient Khazar":
Allegedly, this is a Khazar official - the censor signed the Kyiv letter. The inscription was translated as "I READ THIS". And can this be taken seriously?
So… What else do we have besides the works of historians of the 19th and 20th centuries? Aha! Probably, as in the cases of ancient civilization, Sumerian or Egyptian, did coins, brooches, jugs and rings with inscriptions in the Khazar language remain on the territory of ancient Khazaria? Dudki! All finds of archaeologists in this region have pronounced signs of belonging to the Scythian and Sarmatian culture. This suggests that not only the Jews have never been here, but the Polovtsy and the Pechenegs were not Turks, but the same Slavs as the settled inhabitants around them.
See what scam I found on Wikipedia. In the article about Khazaria there is a link to a certain treasure, with Khazar treasures:
The discoverer of this masterpiece, as one would expect, is again not Ivanov. Click on the link to find out what Comrade Finkelstein found there. And for some reason we get to the English-language article on Wikipedia. Okay, let's not be lazy, click on the translation of the page, and we get ....
This is what the Jews themselves call chutzpah. Proving the existence of the Khazar material culture in the Kuban, they refer to the Bulgarian Tsar! Unprecedented audacity!
Okay… What else do we have Khazar? Without a doubt, in the wake of the Ukrainian events, everyone became widely aware of a small bauble, which was previously known only to specialists, mainly in the field of customs law. This is tamga.
People do not understand what a tamga is in general, and they think that this is such Hebrew Khazar money. In some ways they are right, since the word "money" itself is derived from "tamga". What is tamga?
Tamga is a seal that the publican put on bags of goods, from which the carriage duty was paid, so that at the next outpost, the merchant would not be charged a second customs duty - tamga. Thus, tamga, these are not coins, and not these pendants with tridents, but actually paid customs duty, no matter in what currency, they often paid in kind as a percentage of the transported goods. You are carrying ten jugs of oil, you gave one at the customs, for the remaining nine you received the seal “tamga”.
From the word "tamga" the word "customs" arose (a place where tamzhat - they collect tamga). And in Ukrainian, Belarusian, Polish and some other languages, another name was fixed - "mytnya" (mitnya, mitnitsa), after the name of the tax collectors - tax collectors.
But it is logical that the seal of the publican changed periodically, in order to avoid fakes. Merchants at all times were cunning, and they could stick left seals on customs goods as much as they wanted. And if so, then the types of tamga - the seal was visible - invisible. But modern professors explain this issue in their own way, so as to pull the facts by the ears, so that everyone believes in the existence of the Khazars, and explain such diversity by the fact that each “Khazarin” had his own tribal tamga ... Oh, not even funny.
I don’t know who was the first to launch the “duck” about the fact that in the figure above the Khazar tamga-denga. I only know that such tablets with a trident were previously called "boxes", and served as a mandate, visa, and safe-conduct. Marco Polo writes about this in his book On the Diversity of the World.
Here again it is necessary to explain. Brothers, this is the father and uncle of Marco Polo, Marco himself was still a boy while traveling through Great Tartaria.
So. The table is not a table at all, but a drawer. Travelers came to the great Khan of Tartaria (today he would be called the President of Russia), and he gave them a personal box, a plate with his personal seal - a diving falcon. This is NOT a tamga. This is a charm confirming that foreigners travel with his personal permission, and the bearers of this enjoy immunity. By presenting the little girl to the khans and princes (in our opinion, governors and heads of regions) of the provinces through which the path of the Venets (Apennine Slavs), they are also Venetians, lay, travelers could count on every possible help. Protection, assistance, and even the provision of provisions and pit horses.
The boards also differed in the metal from which they were minted. Gold ones gave maximum powers, silver ones gave the owner less rights, and iron ones, many service people had. More recently, archaeologists in Yaroslavl discovered a wooden box that allegedly belonged to Alexander Nevsky himself. So much for the controversy about the "Mongol-Tatar yoke." The fact that the President gives the governor powers in the field by a certificate is not now considered a yoke. And the fact that Nevsky went to the Great Khan for a dschitsa (label) is called by historians almost a betrayal of the prince!
But the fact that Kyiv Prince Vladimir minted coins with the seal of the Great Khan, most likely indicates that he received permission to mint his own Kyiv coins from the Great Khan of Tartaria himself. Who was there before Genghis then? And Ivan himself! Son of Iapetus, grandson of Noah.
Although by blood he was, most likely, a Jew. The son of a Jewish housekeeper Malushka (Malka, Malanya) could not be Russian; among Jews, kinship is transmitted through the mother. His portrait is more than eloquent.
The surnames Malakhov, Malkov, Malkin, and their derivatives, were worn only by Jews in Russia.
And he took the "Christian" faith again from ... Constantinople. Remember, at the beginning of the note, I drew attention to the fact that the "Cambridge" document was written in Constantinople? Now I again draw attention to the fact that Prince Oleg, who went down in history as the first fighter against the Khazar ghouls, and even accepted death from them, nailed his shield to the gates of Tsaregrad. Now the question is: - why did he soak the Khazars, and hung a shield for the Byzantines?
Well, further. There is no Khazar language, no household items, no tools, no weapons, no documents, maybe there are maps somewhere? And this is a big problem. Cartography in the period to which the existence of Khazaria is attributed (650-969) was in its infancy. I have a map, presumably of the eighth century, and it has a lot of curious details, but there is no hint of Khazaria.
This is a fragment of the map of Claudius, to see it in its entirety, click on the picture.
The islands in Azov are long gone. The Riphean mountains have turned into Northern ridges, and they are not observed at all on the territory of Ukraine. Volga is quite recognizable. And the rivers Kuban and Don are indicated quite accurately. Two other rivers nearby are also quite identifiable, only now they have become very shallow, and are called Mius and Kagalnik. Ta-Dam!! Kagalnik. So there was a Kaganate!
Who says it didn't? Prince Vladimir, among other titles, was also Kagan! But this does not mean at all that at the end of the tenth century the kagans were Jewish kings. In the Bible, the Jews just have kings, or am I wrong?
Aha! Say what about the Jewish surnames Kogan, Koganovich, Cohen and Hogan? And the answer is right in front of your eyes. Kogan is written with an "O" and Kagan with an "A". and It is not the result of a linguistic transformation. Because from Persian, “Khazar” (هَزَارْ, hâzâr) means “thousand”, and “Kagan”, most likely, also has a Persian (Farsi) etymology.The words "caesar" and "king", according to A. Rona-Tash, appeared just from the word hazar. Why not? And Kogan, this is the surname of the Ashkenazi - German and Polish Jews, and it means ... Lyubimov. In Ukrainian, after all, even now “love” is “kokhannya”.
The theater director Yuri Lyubimov, after all, is also from Ashkenazim, and his parents probably became beloved when they received Soviet passports. At that time, all kohans (kohan) became beloved, and zukermans became sugar.
Ask why I was looking for the etymology of "Khazaria" in Farsi? So very simple. The Khazar tribes to this day live in the north of Iran, i.e. in Persia, and this is what they look like:
And you want to say that they are Jews? No, the guys are democrats... Of course, there were Khazars, and they have not disappeared anywhere. As they were a small nation, so they remained. And no Jewish empire called the "Khazar Khaganate" on the territory occupied by modern Russia has ever existed. This is confidently confirmed by DNA genealogy studies. If a Jew ruled Sarmatia for more than three hundred years, then how did it happen that there were no traces of Jewish chromosomes left in the blood of the modern primordial inhabitants of the Kuban and the North Caucasus? There can be no such thing. We have neither Mongolian traces nor Jewish ones. Consequently, the "Jewish Kaganate" is the same fiction as the "Mongol yoke".
The Khazars could live in the Kuban, and their princes could be called kagans, but they were not Jews, but the same Slavs, only their language was Persian, or Arabic, like the Pechenegs and Polovtsy. And they could periodically rob the settlements of the northern Slavs, but no one paid tribute to them for sure. And Vladimir added the position of Kagan to his titles, most likely because he became the ruler of the Khazars. This is a common practice of monarchs, with each new subject of the federation a new title was added.
Here Ivan the Terrible, went on a business trip to Pleskavia and Novgorod, and immediately became, in addition to his previous specialties, also the Prince of Pskov and the Prince of Novgorod. So is Vladimir. Isn't it okay?
In general, we are getting a retreat on all fronts. No language. No writing, no artifacts, no maps, nothing. Not a single clue giving a reasonable reason to assume the existence of a Jewish empire in the Kuban and the northern Caucasus. Maybe legends about the famous Khazar Kagans, or military leaders, have been preserved? There is. Kagan Bulan, allegedly the founder of the Khazar empire, but we know about him from the fake Radzivilov list.
And what other Presidents of Khazaria have we heard about? Hanukkah and Pesach were supposedly also Khazar leaders. Well, I don't know what to say. Purim is just not enough. And besides them, Joseph and Aaron are commemorated. But where did they rule? In Constantinople. Those. in Tsaregrad. In Byzantium. Again, all roads lead to Istanbul. By chance? No, I think. The true Jewish state was precisely Byzantium. And the true Jewish culture, this is Christianity with all the attributes now attributed to Byzantium. Well, it was necessary to fill in something missing in the history of 1000 years?
Jews have been unsuccessfully looking for traces of their culture in Palestine and the Kuban for 150 years, and they cannot find anything. Why? Yes, because they themselves were bred as suckers. They told tales about “ancient Judea”, inspired them that their culture was special, unlike anything else, but in fact, Jerusalem is Byzantium. And Jesus is the prophet Isa, he is Yusha, who came from the east, and began to teach the mind to the mind, mired in debauchery of the Jews.
And they fled not from Egypt, but from the Bosporus to Europe. Fled from the Ottomans. That is why Arab and Jewish genes are so intertwined in Asia Minor. This is where it all comes together.
And Fomenko's version that Jerusalem is Constantinople, and Jesus was crucified on the shore of the Bosporus Strait, is fully confirmed.
Yes, and the tomb of Jesus to this day exists in the suburbs of Istanbul, on Beykos Hill, which in the Bible bears the name of Golgotha.
17th century painting "Resting residents of Constantinople at the tomb of St. Jesus". In the future, the ruins of the Yoros fortress. This is the real Jerusalem.
And this is how Beikos and Jerusalem look today. View from the grave of Isa Khazarin (Yushi Khazar).
The Latin version of the 15th century Bible contains references to the fact that Jesus was executed on the Bosphorus in the area where the biblical Jerusalem was located:
Obadiah 1:20 et transmigratio exercitus huius filiorum Israhel omnia Chananeorum usque ad Saraptham et transmigratio Hierusalem quae in Bosforoest possidebit civitates austri…”
In the Ostroh Bible, however, a description of the weather of the area in which Jerusalem was allegedly located was preserved, and it has nothing to do with the desert climate of today's Jerusalem. It talks about cold, rainy-snowy weather! Under Empress Catherine, this was removed and they wrote that it was just very cold. And then this paragraph was removed altogether.
This is what Jesus' tomb looks like today:
On the sign at the entrance is the inscription: Нz. YUSA (khazreti - holy Yusha), and next to it are tablets with quotations from the Koran. For the uninitiated, it is worth explaining that in Islam Yusha - Isa (Jesus) is very revered as the one who suffered for the faith. His name is mentioned in the Holy Book of Muslims over 100 times!
The well-known old Russian text "The Journey of Abbot Daniel" contains a description of the gospel Jerusalem.
In a modern Russian translation, a fragment of this text sounds like this:
"The crucifixion of the Lord is located on the east side ON A STONE. It was high, ABOVE THE COPY. THE STONE WAS ROUND, LIKE A SMALL SLIDE.
AND IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT STONE, AT THE VERY TOP, A WELL IS CARVED AROUND AN ELBOW DEEP, AND THE WIDTH IS LESS THAN A SPAN IN THE CIRCLE (in the perimeter). THE CROSS OF THE LORD WAS PLACED HERE.
In the ground, under that stone, lies the head of the primordial Adam ... And that stone spread over Adam's head ... AND THERE IS THIS CLEVICE ON THAT STONE AND UNTIL THE PRESENT DAY ... THE CRUCIFICATION OF THE LORD AND THAT HOLY STONE ARE FUROUNDED AROUND WITH A WALL ... OF DOORS SAME (IN THE WALL) TWO".
This description by Daniel of the place of the crucifixion of Christ perfectly corresponds to what we see today on Mount Beykos on the outskirts of Istanbul. Namely, - a round stone like a small hill with a hole at the very top, in the center. Crack in this stone.
And now attention! In Turkish, "Holy Yusha" sounds like "Khazreti Yusha" (Hazreti Yusa). KHAZRETI is the same…NAZOREE? The Slavic letter H and the Latin H are written the same way, but they are read differently: one as H, and the other as X. So "H" and "X" could pass into each other, and the word NAZOREH could turn out to be HAZOREI or HAZRETI.
Those. Yusha (Jesus) was not any "Nazarene", he was not from Nazareth, but from Khazaria. Then everything fits. After all, the Bible says so amusingly that the Magi saw a star in the EAST, and followed it, found a baby, brought him gifts, etc. But in the same place in the Bible it is said that the Magi with gifts came from the EAST. Trrrroo! Stop Dawn! They saw a star in the EAST and went to the EAST, but they came again from the EAST. What is it like?
Ay! Christians, who will tell you where the wise men came from and where? Everything falls into place if in Tsaregrad they saw a star that lit up in the east, and so it was, this is a supernova explosion, the Crab Nebula, which happened in the first half of the 12th century. And then, after 33 years, Yusha came from the east. Which differed from the Byzantines in that he chopped the truth of the uterus.
He went into Christian churches, and drove out the priests selling candles and Cahors. And from the doors of the temples he drove usurers sitting on banks (folding chairs), who gave money at interest. Bankers sitting on the banks, this is the original Jewish business, isn't it?
"In the summer of 5500, the eternal king, the Lord our God Jesus Christ, was born in the flesh on December 25th. Then the circle of the Sun was 13, the Moon was 10, the index of the 15th, on a weekly day at the 7th hour of the day"(Palea, sheet 275, turnover).
“The third kingdom of Tiberius Caesar. In the summer of 5515, after Augustus, the Caesars took over the kingdom of Tivirius son of the Caulians, and reigned in Rome for 23 years. At the same time, the great coward was quick and ruined, 13 hailstones even to the ground shattered. In the 15th year of Christ FROM IVANNE IN JORDAN RETS, 30 years of age of his month of January on the 6th day at the 7th hour of the day of the indiction 15th circle to the Sun 3 of the nameless finger. And from that time I chose a disciple for myself 12, and began to work miracles, and after baptism, be on earth 3 years until my holy passion. With this Tiviria, there was also the SAved PASSION AND RESURRECTION of our Lord Jesus Christ. Years in the 18th year of the kingdom [a] of Tiviriev, our Lord Jesus Christ suffered salvation for the sake of man in the summer of March 5530 on the 30th day, on Friday at the 6th hour of the day, indiction 3, the circle of the Sun 7, the Moon 14, and Easter was a Jew "(Paley, sheet 256, turnover, sheet 257).
And then, when the Muslims found out about what the Jews had done with their beloved prophet Isa, they went to Jerusalem - Constantinople by war, and everyone who participated was taken away in earnest, as they can. But most of the bankers managed to collect 40 tons of gold, and fled to Spain - Iberia, and to the Rhine. The former became Sephardim, the latter Ashkenazi. Now you understand the roots of mutual hatred between Jews and Arabs, which is smoldering at the genetic level?
Probably, this is not all that I wanted to say about the Khazars. Yes, definitely not all. But this is not a scientific work, not a dissertation, only thoughts. To put an end to the case, which can only be stopped, but not completed, I will express a couple more considerations.
It seems to me that modern Cossacks are also Khazars. No wonder they were called "barracks" by the people! And the northern goose - goose also got its name from the Khazars. And the hussars, these are also Cossacks - the Khazars. Mobile, sharp, tough, born warriors who were the first to tame horses.
And no moneylenders.
P.S. Unbelievable, but it is a fact. As soon as I posted a note, I immediately, "accidentally" came across a picture with a font that I instantly recognized! Rune-hieroglyphs from a newspaper with a photo of Erdogan in my extrafilm!
Do you know what this "doodle" is?
This is a Mongolian letter! That's what it is!
Khazars Arab. خزر ( Khazar); Greek Χαζαροι
(Khazar); Heb. כוזרים ( Kuzarim); other Russian goats; lat. Gazari, Cosri) are a Turkic-speaking people. Became known in the Eastern Ciscaucasia (plain Dagestan) shortly after the Hun invasion. It was formed as a result of the interaction of three ethnic components: the local Iranian-speaking population, as well as the alien Ugric and Turkic tribes.
The name is a self-name, its etymology is not completely clear. It has been suggested that it ascends:
- to the Persian word "Khazar" - a thousand (A.P. Novoseltsev).
- to the title of Caesar (A. Polyak, A. Rona-Tash),
- to the Turkic verb with the meaning "oppress", "oppress" (L. Bazin)
- to the Chechen ideomatic expression "khaz are" - literally "a territory with a favorable climate."
The Khazars were called the Black Sea, less often the Sea of Azov (at that time, the positions of the Khazars in the Crimea were very strong). Also, the name of the Khazars in the Middle Eastern languages \u200b\u200bis called the Caspian Sea - see. On land, the name "Khazaria" remained for the longest time behind the Crimea (in Byzantine and Italian sources until the 16th century).
According to some researchers ( B. N. Zakhoder), the Khazar ethnos had a dualistic basis, uniting two main tribes - white and black Khazars (Kalis-Khazars and Kara-Khazars). Proponents of another point of view (M. I. Artamonov, A. P. Novoseltsev) consider this division not ethnic, but social and point to a more complex organization. Akatsirs, Bersils, Savirs, Balanjars, etc. were in close connection with the Khazar tribal union. Later they were partially assimilated. Bersils were closest to the Khazars, in a pair with which they are often mentioned in the initial period of history, and the country of Bersilia appears in the sources as the starting point from which the Khazar expansion in Europe begins, which, however, did not prevent the Khazars from expelling the Barsils from their native lands.
Regarding the origin of the Khazars and their ancestral home, the following hypotheses have been put forward:
- The Khazars are descendants of the Hun tribe Akatsir, known in Europe since the 5th century (A.V. Gadlo, O. Pritsak).
- The Khazars are of Uighur origin, from the Central Asian people of Ko-sa, mentioned in Chinese sources. (D. Dunlop).
- The Khazars are descendants of the Hephthalites who migrated to the Caucasus from Khorasan (Eastern Iran) (D. Ludwig).
- The Khazars are descended from a tribal union formed by the Oghurs, Savirs and, at the final stage, the Altai Turks. (P. Golden, M. I. Artamonov, A. P. Novoseltsev).
The latter point of view (in various variations) occupies a dominant position in Russian science
In medieval genealogical legends, the Khazars were erected to the son of Noah Togarma. In Jewish literature, they were sometimes referred to as the descendants of the tribe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
The Khazars are a Turkic-speaking people who appeared in Eastern Europe after the Hun invasion (IV century) and roamed the Western Caspian steppe. The Byzantines know them in the 7th century. under the name of the Eastern Turks. In this century, they are established on the shores of Pontus (Black Sea), in the VIII century. - take possession of most of Taurida (Crimea) and the Northern Black Sea region and form the state of the Khazar Khaganate (mid-7th - late 10th centuries. See) headed by the kagan. The capital is Semender (on the territory of modern Dagestan), from the beginning of the VIII century - the city of Itil (in the Volga delta). The mixture of tribes that made up the Khazar Khaganate corresponded to a mixture of religions: pagan, Mohammedan, Christian, Jewish.
The economic basis for the existence of the Khazar Khaganate was trade with the peoples of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Transcaucasia, etc. In the 2nd half of the first millennium AD. in the vast Euro-African-Asian region, a situation has arisen that has radically changed both the geography of international trade and its significance. The impetus for this was the emergence in Arabia in the 7th century of a new religion called Islam and the Arab expansion that followed.
After the death of Muhammad in 632 the Arabs invaded Mesopotamia and Palestine, inflicting a series of heavy defeats on Byzantium and Persia, took Damascus (635), expelled the Byzantines from Alexandria (642), occupied Chalcedon in 667, already directly threatening Byzantium, in the same year invaded Sicily, three years later they conquered North Africa, and in 711 they invaded South Spain. At the same time, the Arabs waged war in Central Asia, which they conquered by 715.
Finally, in 733, after the battle of the northern expedition with Charles Martell, they were stopped almost in the center of the Frankish state near the city of Poitiers. Around the same time, the Arabs were rebuffed by the Khazars in southern Eastern Europe.
Thus, this fierce war interrupted trade communications that connected Europe with the Near, Middle and Far East and traditionally passed through the Mediterranean. As a result of the Arab expansion, the center of gravity of the economic life of the Frankish Empire shifted from the southern regions to the coast of the North Sea. From the 8th century, the Franco-Frisian cities began minting their own coins, while experiencing an acute need for silver, which was associated with a general decline in mining in the era of the Great Migration of Peoples and was aggravated by the capture of the Iberian Peninsula by the Arabs, from where Europe received the bulk of gold and silver.
Neither war nor ideological disagreements abolished the objective need for economic ties between the West and the East, which was interested in obtaining iron and furs, grain, etc. In the region of Central Asia, the fighting of the Arabs against the "infidels" ended relatively quickly, which contributed to the formation of a stable trade exchange between it and Europe, the emergence in Eastern Europe of new ways of large-scale transit trade, bypassing the war-torn Mediterranean. By the end of the 8th century, a system of transcontinental communications with trading centers and intermediate points took shape in Eastern Europe, connecting Europe with the Caucasus and Central Asia and further to the east.
In the period under review, relations between Russia and the Khazars were determined by trade rivalry. The Khazar Khaganate controlled the beginning of the "silver road" up to the Middle Volga, while the rest of it, which went to the Baltic, was under the rule of Russia. By the middle of the 9th century, the city of Bulgar, which became the capital, grew into the largest trading center on the Middle Volga.
The foreign policy of Russia for a long time was characterized by the desire to bypass Khazaria in geographical terms, i.e. in an attempt to find an alternative to the Volga trade route, on which a significant part of the trade profits was lost in the form of a duty to the Khazars. Archaeological data suggest that at least from the middle of the 8th century to the first third of the 9th century, Arab silver arrived northward, bypassing the Lower Volga along the Seversky Donets to the watershed in the territory of the present Belgorod region. From here, through the Seim and Svapa rivers, a passage opened to the Oka, along it to the areas under the rule of Russia, and along the Desna to the Upper Dnieper and the Western Dvina. It was on these routes that treasures with the earliest Arab coins were found, dating from the period from 786-833. In all likelihood, the transportation of silver was carried out from the transshipment base in the Black Sea region, although not the most convenient, but unguarded route through the Khazar lands. In any case, it seems that the Tmutarakan principality on Taman existed long before its first mention in the annals.
In the 830s, Byzantine engineers built the Khazar brick fortress Sarkel (Belaya Vezha), which was located, according to V.I. /X). The fact that the main city was later located here seems to confirm this assumption. The fortress of Sarkel blocked the "smuggling" trade route, which later lost its significance in connection with the start of development in 964-969 of the large Rammelsberg silver mines in the Harz.
In the 9th century, the southeastern Slavic tribes paid tribute to the Khazars. After the capture of Kyiv in 882 and the formation of the Old Russian state, the center of which he became, the Khazars were successively forced out of the lands of the northerners and Radimichi.
A detailed bibliography of the Khazar question is available at:.
There were such tolerant-tolerant ...
Khazars, a nomadic Turkic tribe that first appeared in the territory north of the Caucasus in the early 4th century. In the 7th century The Khazars conquered the Azov Bulgarians. By the 9th c. they created a strong, prosperous state, stretching from the Crimea to the middle reaches of the Volga, and in the west to the Dnieper River. The Khazars built important cities in terms of trade and were engaged in trade with Russia and the Byzantine Empire. The ruler of the Khazars, called the kagan, was at the same time the spiritual leader of his subjects. Tolerant of other faiths, the khagans provided shelter to thousands of Jews from Asia Minor and the Byzantine Empire, as well as Muslims and Christians. These three religious groups competed with each other to convert the Khazars, who professed their traditional religion. In the middle of the 8th c. The kagan and his entourage converted to Islam, but at the beginning of the 9th c. Khagan Bulan declared Judaism the state religion and changed his name to Obadiah. Nevertheless, the Khazar Khaganate continued to adhere to the principle of religious tolerance. It was finally defeated in 965 by the combined efforts of Russia and Byzantium. The last remnants of the Khazars in the Crimea were exterminated by the Byzantines and Russian squads in 1016.
Materials of the encyclopedia "The World Around Us" are used
Not perished, but dispersed
The Khazars were Turko-Tatars by origin. Remaining semi-nomads, they still had large cities for that time and conducted extensive trade with all their neighbors. Trade in "manpower", i.e. slaves was their main specialty. To replenish supplies, the Khazars often had to raid Slavic tribes and steal captives for sale. In the seventh and eighth centuries of our era, Judaism, through the rabbis of Constantinople, began to penetrate into Khazaria, first into the upper classes of the population, and then spread among the people. It is interesting to note that Russian epics sometimes mention the "Great Zhidovin", with whom the Russian heroes had battles in the "Wild Field". It goes without saying that this "Zhidovin" was not a Palestinian Semitic Jew, but a dashing Khazar horseman who plundered Slavic villages.
Driven to despair, the Slavs, under the command of the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and with the financial help of Byzantium, which the Khazars also caused a lot of trouble, did in 965. "deep raid" on Khazaria, burned and plundered the main cities - Itil, Belaya Vezha and Semender, and returned home with rich booty.
It is impossible to assume that, contrary to the law and customs of those times, the Slavs did not repay their Khazar tormentors with the same coin and did not steal as many Khazar captives after the raid as they could be caught and captured. If dragging black slaves from Africa to the plantations of America was a difficult task, then overtaking the crowds of Khazar successors, putting them on their own carts and horses, through the steppes of South Russia was the simplest and most easily accomplished task. It must be assumed that the “loan” made from Byzantium by Svyatoslav was also paid in the same coin, i.e. Khazar slaves thrown into the market in huge numbers after a brilliant raid.
More than 80 percent of all Jews living in the world belong to the so-called "Ashkenazim", a group of Eastern Jews who differ in many ways from their Western group - "Sephardim" not only in customs but also in appearance.
As some Russian historians have long assumed, most of the "Eastern" Jews are not Semites, but Turko-Tatars, descendants of those Khazars who were first defeated by Svyatoslav, and then finished off by Genghis Khan and fled to Eastern Europe under the onslaught of his hordes.
Even in Israel itself, there are now small groups of people who are convinced of the veracity of this story. Since without exception all prominent figures of Judaism and Zionism belong to the number of "Eastern" Jews, then, for obvious reasons, this historical truth is not very popular among them.
But, to their great chagrin, the writer Arthur Koestler, very famous in the circles of the European intelligentsia, himself an Eastern Jew, has recently published his new book entitled The Thirteenth Knee, in which he clearly and convincingly proves that he himself and all his relatives Jews - "Ashkenazim" cannot be Semites in any way, but are direct descendants of the Khazars. As Koestler rightly asserts, such a strong and viable tribe as the Khazars could not disappear from the face of the earth completely without a trace. As nomads, they simply moved west under the onslaught of the Mongols and settled in central Europe, increasing the number of their relatives, who were forcibly taken away by Svyatoslav. Known in Poland and Ukraine as "Yids", these settlers from the lower reaches of the Volga were precisely those "Kids" that our epics mention.
As often happens, the neophytes, having accepted the new faith, began to perform all its rites with even greater zeal than the Jews themselves of Semitic origin did, adding to these rites their own, Khazar customs. It is difficult to assume, of course, that the Eastern Jews do not have an admixture of Semitic blood. Many Semitic Jews lived in Khazaria, and part of the Western Jews, fleeing the Crusaders, moved to Eastern Europe and took turns with their co-religionists, the Khazars. But the Turkic-Tatar blood remained dominant among the so-called "Ashkenazim" Jews.
Without suspecting it himself, of course, Koestler, with his historical research, opened a corner of the veil that had so far hidden from the eyes of the uninitiated some strange “customs” of the Khazar rulers of the Kremlin.
So, on page 54 of his book there is the following phrase: “Arab and modern historians agree that the Khazar system of government was of a dual nature: Kagan was a representative of religious power, and Bek was civil”
(epic from the Collection of Folk Songs)