The Thirteenth Tribe, THE KHAZAR EMPIRE AND ITS HERITAGE, by: Arthur Koestler, Rise and
Fall of the Khazars
Protocolz Menu
|
The Thirteenth
Tribe
THE KHAZAR EMPIRE AND ITS HERITAGE
Arthur Koestler
|
Note: This
author and his wife were found dead in their home. Despite
strong evidence to the contrary, it was ruled a double suicide.
A motive for their murder is apparent. It is further apparent
that someone took this book seriously.
|
Part I.
Rise and Fall of the Khazars
"In Khazaria, sheep, honey, and Jews exist in large
quantities." Muqaddasi, Descriptio Imperii Moslemici
(tenth century).
I.
RISE
1
ABOUT the time when Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the
West, the eastern confines of Europe between the Caucasus and
the Volga were ruled by a Jewish state, known as the Khazar
Empire. At the peak of its power, from the seventh to the tenth
centuries AD, it played a significant part in shaping the destinies
of mediaeval, and consequently of modern, Europe. The Byzantine
Emperor and historian, Constantine Porphyrogenitus (913-959),
must have been well aware of this when he recorded in his treatise
on court protocol .1 that letters addressed to the Pope in Rome,
and similarly those to the Emperor of the West, had a gold seal
worth two solidi attached to them, whereas messages to the King
of the Khazars displayed a seal worth three solidi. This was
not flattery, but Realpolitik. "In the period with
which we are concerned," wrote Bury, "it is probable that the
Khan of the Khazars was of little less importance in view of
the imperial foreign policy than Charles the Great and his successors."
.2 The country of the Khazars, a people of Turkish stock, occupied
a strategic key position at the vital gateway between the Black
Sea and the Caspian, where the great eastern powers of the period
confronted each other. It acted as a buffer protecting Byzantium
against invasions by the lusty barbarian tribesmen of the northern
steppes - Bulgars, Magyars, Pechenegs, etc. - and, later, the
Vikings and the Russians. But equally, or even more important
both from the point of view of Byzantine diplomacy and of European
history, is the fact that the Khazar armies effectively blocked
the Arab avalanche in its most devastating early stages, and
thus prevented the Muslim conquest of Eastern Europe. Professor
Dunlop of Columbia University, a leading authority on the history
of the Khazars, has given a concise summary of this decisive
yet virtually unknown episode:
-
The Khazar country ... lay across the natural line of advance
of the Arabs. Within a few years of the death of Muhammad
(AD 632) the armies of the Caliphate, sweeping northward
through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before
them, reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus.
This barrier once passed, the road lay open to the lands
of eastern Europe. As it was, on the line of the Caucasus
the Arabs met the forces of an organized military power
which effectively prevented them from extending their conquests
in this direction. The wars of the Arabs and the Khazars,
which lasted more than a hundred years, though little known,
have thus considerable historical importance. The Franks
of Charles Martel on the field of Tours turned the tide
of Arab invasion. At about the same time the threat to Europe
in the east was hardly less acute. ... The victorious Muslims
were met and held by the forces of the Khazar kingdom. ...
It can ... scarcely be doubted that but for the existence
of the Khazars in the region north of the Caucasus, Byzantium,
the bulwark of European civilization in the east, would
have found itself outflanked by the Arabs, and the history
of Christendom and Islam might well have been very different
from what we know.3
It is perhaps not surprising, given these circumstances, that
in 732 - after a resounding Khazar victory over the Arabs -
the future Emperor Constantine V married a Khazar princess.
In due time their son became the Emperor Leo IV, known as Leo
the Khazar. .Ironically, the last battle in the war, AD 737,
ended in a Khazar defeat. But by that time the impetus of the
Muslim Holy War was spent, the Caliphate was rocked by internal
dissensions, and the Arab invaders retraced their steps across
the Caucasus without having gained a permanent foothold in the
north, whereas the Khazars became more powerful than they had
previously been. .A few years later, probably AD 740, the King,
his court and the military ruling class embraced the Jewish
faith, and Judaism became the state religion of the Khazars.
No doubt their contemporaries were as astonished by this decision
as modern scholars were when they came across the evidence in
the Arab, Byzantine, Russian and Hebrew sources. One of the
most recent comments is to be found in a work by the Hungarian
Marxist historian, Dr Antal Bartha. His book on The Magyar
Society in the Eighth and Ninth Centuries4 has several
chapters on the Khazars, as during most of that period the Hungarians
were ruled by them. Yet their conversion to Judaism is discussed
in a single paragraph, with obvious embarrassment. It reads:
-
Our investigations cannot go into problems pertaining to
the history of ideas, but we must call the reader's attention
to the matter of the Khazar kingdom's state religion. It
was the Jewish faith which became the official religion
of the ruling strata of society. Needless to say, the acceptance
of the Jewish faith as the state religion of an ethnically
non-Jewish people could be the subject of interesting speculations.
We shall, however, confine ourselves to the remark that
this official conversion - in defiance of Christian proselytizing
by Byzantium, the Muslim influence from the East, and in
spite of the political pressure of these two powers - to
a religion which had no support from any political power,
but was persecuted by nearly all - has come as a surprise
to all historians concerned with the Khazars, and cannot
be considered as accidental, but must be regarded as a sign
of the independent policy pursued by that kingdom.
Which leaves us only slightly more bewildered than before.
Yet whereas the sources differ in minor detail, the major facts
are beyond dispute. .What is in dispute is the fate of the Jewish
Khazars after the destruction of their empire, in the twelfth
or thirteenth century. On this problem the sources are scant,
but various late mediaeval Khazar settlements are mentioned
in the Crimea, in the Ukraine, in Hungary, Poland and Lithuania.
The general picture that emerges from these fragmentary pieces
of information is that of a migration of Khazar tribes and communities
into those regions of Eastern Europe - mainly Russia and Poland
- where, at the dawn of the Modern Age, the greatest concentrations
of Jews were found. This has lead several historians to conjecture
that a substantial part, and perhaps the majority of eastern
Jews - and hence of world Jewry - might be of Khazar, and not
of Semitic Origin. .The far-reaching implications of this hypothesis
may explain the great caution exercised by historians in approaching
this subject - if they do not avoid it altogether. Thus in the
1973 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica the article
"Khazars" is signed by Dunlop, but there is a separate section
dealing with "Khazar Jews after the Fall of the Kingdom", signed
by the editors, and written with the obvious intent to avoid
upsetting believers in the dogma of the Chosen Race:
-
The Turkish-speaking Karaites [a fundamentalist Jewish
sect] of the Crimea, Poland, and elsewhere have affirmed
a connection with the Khazars, which is perhaps confirmed
by evidence from folklore and anthropology as well as language.
There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence attesting
to the continued presence in Europe of descendants of the
Khazars.
How important, in quantitative terms, is that "presence" of
the Caucasian sons of Japheth in the tents of Shem? One of the
most radical propounders of the hypothesis concerning the Khazar
origins of Jewry is the Professor of Mediaeval Jewish History
at Tel Aviv University, A. N. Poliak. His book Khazaria
(in Hebrew) was published in 1944 in Tel Aviv, and a second
edition in 1951.5 In his introduction he writes that the facts
demand -
-
a new approach, both to the problem of the relations between
the Khazar Jewry and other Jewish communities, and to the
question of how far we can go in regarding this [Khazar]
Jewry as the nucleus of the large Jewish settlement in Eastern
Europe. ... The descendants of this settlement - those who
stayed where they were, those who emigrated to the United
States and to other countries, and those who went to Israel
- constitute now the large majority of world Jewry.
This was written before the full extent of the holocaust was
known, but that does not alter the fact that the large majority
of surviving Jews in the world is of Eastern European - and
thus perhaps mainly of Khazar - origin. If so, this would mean
that their ancestors came not from the Jordan but from the Volga,
not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once believed to be the
cradle of the Aryan race; and that genetically they are more
closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes than to
the seed of Ab raham, Isaac and Jacob. Should this turn out
to be the case, then the term "anti-Semitism" would become void
of meaning, based on a misapprehension shared by both the killers
and their victims. The story of the Khazar Empire, as it slowly
emerges from the past, begins to look like the most cruel hoax
which history has ever perpetrated.
2
"Attila was, after all, merely the king of a kingdom
of tents. His state passed away - whereas the despised city
of Constantinople remained a power. The tents vanished, the
towns remained. The Hun state was a whirlwind. ...".Thus Cassel,6
a nineteenth-century orientalist, implying that the Khazars
shared, for similar reasons, a similar fate. Yet the Hun presence
on the European scene lasted a mere eighty years,*[From circa
372, when the Huns first started to move westward from the steppes
north of the Caspian, to the death of Attila in 453.] whereas
the kingdom of the Khazars held its own for the best part of
four centuries. They too lived chiefly in tents, but they also
had large urban settlements, and were in the process of transformation
from a tribe of nomadic warriors into a nation of farmers, cattle-breeders,
fishermen, vine-growers, traders and skilled craftsmen. Soviet
archaeologists have unearthed evidence for a relatively advanced
civilization which was altogether different from the "Hun whirlwind".
They found the traces of villages extending over several miles,7
with houses connected by galleries to huge cattlesheds, sheep-pens
and stables (these measured 3-31/2 x 10-14 metres and were supported
by columns.8 Some remaining ox-ploughs showed remarkable craftsmanship;
so did the preserved artefacts - buckles, clasps, ornamental
saddle plates..Of particular interest were the foundations,
sunk into the ground, of houses built in a circular shape.9
According to the Soviet archaeologists, these were found all
over the territories inhabited by the Khazars, and were of an
earlier date than their "normal", rectangular buildings. Obviously
the round-houses symbolize the transition from portable, dome-
shaped tents to permanent dwellings, from the nomadic to a settled,
or rather semi-settled, existence. For the contemporary Arab
sources tell us that the Khazars only stayed in their towns
- including even their capital, Itil - during the winter; come
spring, they packed their tents, left their houses and sallied
forth with their sheep or cattle into the steppes, or camped
in their cornfields or vineyards..The excavations also showed
that the kingdom was, during its later period, surrounded by
an elaborate chain of fortifications, dating from the eighth
and ninth centuries, which protected its northern frontiers
facing the open steppes. These fortresses formed a rough semi-circular
arc from the Crimea (which the Khazars ruled for a time) across
the lower reaches of the Donetz and the Don to the Volga; while
towards the south they were protected by the Caucasus, to the
west by the Black Sea, and to the east by the "Khazar Sea",
the Caspian.* ["To this day, the Muslims, recalling the Arab
terror of the Khazar raids, still call the Caspian, a sea as
shifting as the nomads, and washing to their steppe-land parts,
Bahr-ul-Khazar - "the Khazar Sea"." (W. E. 0. Allen,
A History of the Georgian People, London 1952).] However,
the northern chain of fortifications marked merely an inner
ring, protecting the stable core of the Khazar country; the
actual boundaries of their rule over the tribes of the north
fluctuated according to the fortunes of war. At the peak of
their power they controlled or exacted tribute from some thirty
different nations and tribes inhabiting the vast territories
between the Caucasus, the Aral Sea, the Ural Mountains, the
town of Kiev and the Ukrainian steppes. The people under Khazar
suzerainty included the Bulgars, Burtas, Ghuzz, Magyars (Hungarians),
the Gothic and Greek colonies of the Crimea, and the Slavonic
tribes in the north-western woodlands. Beyond these extended
dominions, Khazar armies also raided Georgia and Armenia and
penetrated into the Arab Caliphate as far as Mosul. In the words
of the Soviet archaeologist M. I. Artamonov:10
-
Until the ninth century, the Khazars had no rivals to their
supremacy in the regions north of the Black Sea and the
adjoining steppe and forest regions of the Dnieper. The
Khazars were the supreme masters of the southern half of
Eastern Europe for a century and a hall, and presented a
mighty bulwark, blocking the Ural-Caspian gateway from Asia
into Europe. During this whole period, they held back the
onslaught of the nomadic tribes from the East.
Taking a bird's-eye view of the history of the great nomadic
empires of the East, the Khazar kingdom occupies an intermediary
position in time, size, and degree of civilization between the
Hun and Avar Empires which preceded, and the Mongol Empire that
succeeded it.
3
But who were these remarkable people - remarkable as much by
their power and achievements as by their conversion to a religion
of outcasts? The descriptions that have come down to us originate
in hostile sources, and cannot be taken at face value. "As to
the Khazars," an Arab chronicler 11 writes, "they are to the
north of the inhabited earth towards the 7th clime, having over
their heads the constellation of the Plough. Their land is cold
and wet.
Accordingly their complexions are white, their eyes blue, their
hair flowing and predominantly reddish, their bodies large and
their natures cold. Their general aspect is wild." .After a
century of warfare, the Arab writer obviously had no great sympathy
for the Khazars. Nor had the Georgian or Armenian scribes, whose
countries, of a much older culture, had been repeatedly devastated
by Khazar horsemen. A Georgian chronicle, echoing an ancient
tradition, identifies them with the hosts of Gog and Magog -
"wild men with hideous faces and the manners of wild beasts,
eaters of blood".12 An Armenian writer refers to "the horrible
multitude of Khazars with insolent, broad, lashless faces and
long falling hair, like women".13 Lastly, the Arab geographer
Istakhri, one of the main Arab sources, has this to say:14 "The
Khazars do not resemble the Turks. They are black-haired, and
are of two kinds, one called the Kara-Khazars, [Black Khazars]
who are swarthy verging on deep black as if they were a kind
of Indian, and a white kind [Ak-Khazars], who are strikingly
handsome.".This is more flattering, but only adds to the confusion.
For it was customary among Turkish peoples to refer to the ruling
classes or clans as "white", to the lower strata as "black".
Thus there is no reason to believe that the "White Bulgars"
were whiter than the "Black Bulgars", or that the "White Huns"
(the Ephtalites) who invaded India and Persia in the fifth and
sixth centuries were of fairer skin than the other Hun tribes
which invaded Europe. Istakhri's black-skinned Khazars - as
much else in his and his colleagues' writings - were based on
hearsay and legend; and we are none the wiser regarding the
Khazars' physical appearance, or their ethnic Origins..The last
question can only be answered in a vague and general way. But
it is equally frustrating to inquire into the origins of the
Huns, Alans, Avars, Bulgars, Magyars, Bashkirs, Burtas, Sabirs,
Uigurs, Saragurs, Onogurs, Utigurs, Kutrigurs, Tarniaks, Kotragars,
Khabars, Zabenders, Pechenegs, Ghuzz, Kumans, Kipchaks, and
dozens of other tribes or people who at one time or another
in the lifetime of the Khazar kingdom passed through the turnstiles
of those migratory playgrounds. Even the Huns, of whom we know
much more, are of uncertain origin; their name is apparently
derived from the Chinese Hiung-nu, which designates
warlike nomads in general, while other nations applied the name
Hun in a similarly indiscriminate way to nomadic hordes of all
kinds, including the "White Huns" mentioned above, the Sabirs,
Magyars and Khazars.*[It is amusing to note that while the British
in World War I used the term "Hun" in the same pejorative sense,
in my native Hungary schoolchildren were taught to look up to
"our glorious Hun forefathers" with patriotic pride An exclusive
rowing club in Budapest was called "Hunnia", and Attila is still
a popular first name.] .In the first century AD, the Chinese
drove these disagreeable Hun neighbours westward, and thus started
one of those periodic avalanches which swept for many centuries
from Asia towards the West. From the fifth century onward, many
of these westward-bound tribes were called by the generic name
of "Turks". The term is also supposed to be of Chinese origin
(apparently derived from the name of a hill) and was subsequently
used to refer to all tribes who spoke languages with certain
common characteristics - the "Turkic" language group. Thus the
term Turk, in the sense in which it was used by mediaeval writers
- and often also by modern ethnologists - refers primarily to
language and not to race. In this sense the Huns and Khazars
were "Turkic" people.*[But not the Magyars, whose language belongs
to the Finno-Ugrian language group.] The Khazar language was
supposedly a Chuvash dialect of Turkish, which still survives
in the Autonomous Chuvash Soviet Republic, between the Volga
and the Sura. The Chuvash people are actually believed to be
descendants of the Bulgars, who spoke a dialect similar to the
Khazars. But all these connections are rather tenuous, based
on the more or less speculative deductions of oriental philologists.
All we can say with safety is that the Khazars were a "Turkic"
tribe, who erupted from the Asian steppes, probably in the fifth
century of our era..The origin of the name Khazar, and the modern
derivations to which it gave rise, has also been the subject
of much ingenious speculation. Most likely the word is derived
from the Turkish root gaz, "to wander", and simply
means "nomad". Of greater interest to the non-specialist are
some alleged modern derivations from it: among them the Russian
Cossack and the Hungarian Huszar - both signifying martial horsemen;*[Huszar
is probably derived via the Serbo-Croat from Greek references
to Khazars.] and also the German Ketzer - heretic,
i.e., Jew. If these derivations are correct, they would show
that the Khazars had a considerable impact on the imagination
of a variety of peoples in the Middle Ages.
4
Some Persian and Arab chronicles provide an attractive combination
of legend and gossip column. They may start with the Creation
and end with stop-press titbits. Thus Yakubi, a ninth-century
Arab historian, traces the origin of the Khazars back to Japheth,
third son of Noah. The Japheth motive recurs frequently in the
literature, while other legends connect them with Abraham or
Alexander the Great. .One of the earliest factual references
to the Khazars occurs in a Syriac chronicle by "Zacharia Rhetor",*[It
was actually written by an anonymous compiler and named after
an earlier Greek historian whose work is summarized in the compilation.]
dating from the middle of the sixth century. It mentions the
Khazars in a list of people who inhabit the region of the Caucasus.
Other sources indicate that they were already much in evidence
a century earlier, and intimately connected with the Huns. In
AD 448, the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II sent an embassy
to Attila which included a famed rhetorician by name of Priscus.
He kept a minute account not only of the diplomatic negotiations,
but also of the court intrigues and goings-on in Attila's sumptuous
banqueting hall - he was in fact the perfect gossip columnist,
and is still one of the main sources of information about Hun
customs and habits. But Priscus also has anecdotes to tell about
a people subject to the Huns whom he calls Akatzirs - that is,
very likely, the Ak-Khazars, or "White" Khazars (as distinct
from the "Black" Kara-Khazars).**[The "Akatzirs" are also mentioned
as a nation of warriors by Jordanes, the great Goth historian,
a century later, and the so- called "Geographer of Ravenna"
expressly identifies them with the Khazars. This is accepted
by most modern authorities. (A notable exception was Marquart,
but see Dunlop's refutation of his views, op. cit., pp. 7f.)
Cassel, for instance, points out that Priscus's pronunciation
and spelling follows the Armenian and Georgian: Khazir.] The
Byzantine Emperor, Priscus tells us, tried to win this warrior
race over to his side, but the greedy Khazar chieftain, named
Karidach, considered the bribe offered to him inadequate, and
sided with the Huns. Attila defeated Karidach's rival chieftains,
installed him as the sole ruler of the Akatzirs, and invited
him to visit his court. Karidach thanked him profusely for the
invitation, and went on to say that "it would be too hard on
a mortal man to look into the face of a god. For, as one cannot
stare into the sun's disc, even less could one look into the
face of the greatest god without suffering injury." Attila must
have been pleased, for he confirmed Karidach in his rule..Priscus's
chronicle confirms that the Khazars appeared on the European
scene about the middle of the fifth century as a people under
Hunnish sovereignty, and may be regarded, together with the
Magyars and other tribes, as a later offspring of Attila's horde.
5
The collapse of the Hun Empire after Attila's death left a
power-vacuum in Eastern Europe, through which once more, wave
after wave of nomadic hordes swept from east to west, prominent
among them the Uigurs and Avars. The Khazars during most of
this period seemed to be happily occupied with raiding the rich
trans-Caucasian regions of Georgia and Armenia, and collecting
precious plunder. During the second half of the sixth century
they became the dominant force among the tribes north of the
Caucasus. A number of these tribes - the Sabirs, Saragurs, Samandars,
Balanjars, etc. - are from this date onward no longer mentioned
by name in the sources: they had been subdued or absorbed by
the Khazars. The toughest resistance, apparently, was offered
by the powerful Bulgars. But they too were crushingly defeated
(circa 641), and as a result the nation split into
two: some of them migrated westward to the Danube, into the
region of modern Bulgaria, others north-eastward to the middle
Volga, the latter remaining under Khazar suzerainty. We shall
frequently encounter both Danube Bulgars and Volga Bulgars in
the course of this narrative. .But before becoming a sovereign
state, the Khazars still had to serve their apprenticeship under
another short-lived power, the so-called West Turkish Empire,
or Turkut kingdom. It was a confederation of tribes, held together
by a ruler: the Kagan or Khagan*[Or Kaqan or Khaqan or Chagan,
etc. Orientalists have strong Idiosyncrasies about spelling
(see Appendix I). I shall stick to Kagan as the least offensive
to Western eyes. The h in Khazar, however, is general usage.]
- a title which the Khazar rulers too were subsequently to adopt.
This first Turkish state - if one may call it that - lasted
for a century (circa 550-650) and then fell apart, leaving hardly
any trace. However, it was only after the establishment of this
kingdom that the name "Turk" was used to apply to a specific
nation, as distinct from other Turkic-speaking peoples like
the Khazars and Bulgars.*[This, however, did not prevent the
name "Turk" still being applied indiscriminately to any nomadic
tribe of the steppes as a euphemism for Barbarian, or a synonym
for "Hun". It led to much confusion in the interpretation of
ancient sources.] .The Khazars had been under Hun tutelage,
then under Turkish tutelage. After the eclipse of the Turks
in the middle of the seventh century it was their turn to rule
the "Kingdom of the North", as the Persians and Byzantines came
to call it. According to one tradition,15 the great Persian
King Khusraw (Chosroes) Anushirwan (the Blessed) had three golden
guest-thrones in his palace, reserved for the Emperors of Byzantium,
China and of the Khazars. No state visits from these potentates
materialized, and the golden thrones - if they existed - must
have served a purely symbolic purpose. But whether fact or legend,
the story fits in well with Emperor Constantine's official account
of the triple gold seal assigned by the Imperial Chancery to
the ruler of the Khazars.
6
Thus during the first few decades of the seventh century, just
before the Muslim hurricane was unleashed from Arabia, the Middle
East was dominated by a triangle of powers: Byzantium, Persia,
and the West Turkish Empire. The first two of these had been
waging intermittent war against each other for a century, and
both seemed on the verge of collapse; in the sequel, Byzantium
recovered, but the Persian kingdom was soon to meet its doom,
and the Khazars were actually in on the kill. .They were still
nominally under the suzerainty of the West Turkish kingdom,
within which they represented the strongest effective force,
and to which they were soon to succeed; accordingly, in 627,
the Roman Emperor Heraclius concluded a military alliance with
the Khazars - the first of several to follow - in preparing
his decisive campaign against Persia. There are several versions
of the role played by the Khazars in that campaign which seems
to have been somewhat inglorious - but the principal facts are
well established. The Khazars provided Heraclius with 40000
horsemen under a chieftain named Ziebel, who participated in
the advance into Persia, but then - presumably fed up with the
cautious strategy of the Greeks - turned back to lay siege on
Tiflis; this was unsuccessful, but the next year they again
joined forces with Heraclius, took the Georgian capital, and
returned with rich plunder. Gibbon has given a colourful description
(based on Theophanes) of the first meeting between the Roman
Emperor and the Khazar chieftain.16
-
...To the hostile league of Chosroes with the Avars, the
Roman emperor opposed the useful and honourable alliance
of the Turks.*[By "Turks", as the sequel shows, he means
the Khazars.] At his liberal invitation, the horde of Chozars
transported their tents from the plains of the Volga to
the mountains of Georgia; Heraclius received them in the
neighbourhood of Tiflis, and the khan with his nobles dismounted
from their horses, if we may credit the Greeks, and fell
prostrate on the ground, to adore the purple of the Caesar.
Such voluntary homage and important aid were entitled to
the warmest acknowledgements; and the emperor, taking off
his own diadem, placed it on the head of the Turkish prince,
whom he saluted with a tender embrace and the appellation
of son. After a sumptuous banquet, he presented Ziebel with
the plate and ornaments, the gold, the gems, and the silk,
which had been used at the Imperial table, and, with his
own hand, distributed rich jewels and earrings to his new
allies. In a secret interview, he produced a portrait of
his daughter Eudocia, condescended to flatter the barbarian
with the promise of a fair and august bride, and obtained
an immediate succour of forty thousand horse...
Eudocia (or Epiphania) was the only daughter of Heraclius by
his first wife. The promise to give her in marriage to the "Turk"
indicates once more the high value set by the Byzantine Court
on the Khazar alliance. However, the marriage came to naught
because Ziebel died while Eudocia and her suite were on their
way to him. There is also an ambivalent reference in Theophanes
to the effect that Ziebel "presented his son, a beardless boy"
to the Emperor - as a quid pro quo? .There is another
picturesque passage in an Armenian chronicle, quoting the text
of what might be called an Order of Mobilization issued by the
Khazar ruler for the second campaign against Persia: it was
addressed to "all tribes and peoples [under Khazar authority],
inhabitants of the mountains and the plains, living under roofs
or the open sky, having their heads shaved or wearing their
hair long".17 .This gives us a first intimation of the heterogeneous
ethnic mosaic that was to compose the Khazar Empire. The "real
Khazars" who ruled it were probably always a minority - as the
Austrians were in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy.
7
The Persian state never recovered from the crushing defeat
inflicted on it by Emperor Heraclius in 627. There was a revolution;
the King was slain by his own son who, in his turn, died a few
months later; a child was elevated to the throne, and after
ten years of anarchy and chaos the first Arab armies to erupt
on the scene delivered the coup de grace to the Sassanide
Empire. At about the same time, the West Turkish confederation
dissolved into its tribal components. A new triangle of powers
replaced the previous one: the Islamic Caliphate - Christian
Byzantium and the newly emerged Khazar Kingdom of the North.
It fell to the latter to bear the brunt of the Arab attack in
its initial stages, and to protect the plains of Eastern Europe
from the invaders. .In the first twenty years of the Hegira
- Mohammed's flight to Medina in 622, with which the Arab calendar
starts - the Muslims had conquered Persia, Syria, Mesopotamia,
Egypt, and surrounded the Byzantine heartland (the present-day
Turkey) in a deadly semi-circle, which extended from the Mediterranean
to the Caucasus and the southern shores of the Caspian. The
Caucasus was a formidable natural obstacle, but no more forbidding
than the Pyrenees; and it could be negotiated by the pass of
Dariel*[Now called the Kasbek pass.] or bypassed through the
defile of Darband, along the Caspian shore. .This fortified
defile, called by the Arabs Bab al Abwab, the Gate
of Gates, was a kind of historic turnstile through which the
Khazars and other marauding tribes had from time immemorial
attacked the countries of the south and retreated again. Now
it was the turn of the Arabs. Between 642 and 652 they repeatedly
broke through the Darband Gate and advanced deep into Khazaria,
attempting to capture Balanjar, the nearest town, and thus secure
a foothold on the European side of the Caucasus. They were beaten
back on every occasion in this first phase of the Arab-Khazar
war; the last time in 652, in a great battle in which both sides
used artillery (catapults and ballistae). Four thousand Arabs
were killed, including their commander, Abdal-Rahman ibn-Rabiah;
the rest fled in disorder across the mountains..For the next
thirty or forty years the Arabs did not attempt any further
incursions into the Khazar stronghold. Their main attacks were
now aimed at Byzantium. On several occasions*[AD 669, 673-8,
717-18.] they laid siege to Constantinople by land and by sea;
had they been able to outflank the capital across the Caucasus
and round the Black Sea, the fate of the Roman Empire would
probably have been sealed. The Khazars, in the meantime, having
subjugated the Bulgars and Magyars, completed their western
expansion into the Ukraine and the Crimea. But these were no
longer haphazard raids to amass booty and prisoners; they were
wars of conquest, incorporating the conquered people into an
empire with a stable administration, ruled by the mighty Kagan,
who appointed his provincial governors to administer and levy
taxes in the conquered territories. At the beginning of the
eighth century their state was sufficiently consolidated for
the Khazars to take the offensive against the Arabs..From a
distance of more than a thousand years, the period of intermittent
warfare that followed (the so-called 'second Arab war", 722-37)
looks like a series of tedious episodes on a local scale, following
the same, repetitive pattern: the Khazar cavalry in their heavy
armour breaking through the pass of Dariel or the Gate of Darband
into the Caliph's domains to the south; followed by Arab counter-thrusts
through the same pass or the defile, towards the Volga and back
again. Looking thus through the wrong end of the telescope,
one is reminded of the old jingle about the noble Duke of York
who had ten thousand men; "he marched them up to the top of
the hill. And he marched them down again." In fact, the Arab
sources (though they often exaggerate) speak of armies of 100000,
even of 300000, men engaged on either side - probably outnumbering
the armies which decided the fate of the Western world at the
battle of Tours about the same time..The death-defying fanaticism
which characterized these wars is illustrated by episodes such
as the suicide by fire of a whole Khazar town as an alternative
to surrender; the poisoning of the water supply of Bab al Abwab
by an Arab general; or by the traditional exhortation which
would halt the rout of a defeated Arab army and make it fight
to the last man: "To the Garden, Muslims, not the Fire" - the
joys of Paradise being assured to every Muslim soldier killed
in the Holy War. .At one stage during these fifteen years of
fighting the Khazars overran Georgia and Armenia, inflicted
a total defeat on the Arab army in the battle of Ardabil (AD
730) and advanced as far as Mosul and Dyarbakir, more than half-way
to Damascus, capital of the Caliphate. But a freshly raised
Muslim army stemmed the tide, and the Khazars retreated homewards
across the mountains. The next year Maslamah ibn-Abd-al-Malik,
most famed Arab general of his time, who had formerly commanded
the siege of Constantinople, took Balanjar and even got as far
as Samandar, another large Khazar town further north. But once
more the invaders were unable to establish a permanent garrison,
and once more they were forced to retreat across the Caucasus.
The sigh of relief experienced in the Roman Empire assumed a
tangible form through another dynastic alliance, when the heir
to the throne was married to a Khazar princess, whose son was
to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. .The last Arab campaign
was led by the future Caliph Marwan II, and ended in a Pyrrhic
victory. Marwan made an offer of alliance to the Khazar Kagan,
then attacked by surprise through both passes. The Khazar army,
unable to recover from the initial shock, retreated as far as
the Volga. The Kagan was forced to ask for terms; Marwan, in
accordance with the routine followed in other conquered countries,
requested the Kagan's conversion to the True Faith. The Kagan
complied, but his conversion to Islam must have been an act
of lip-service, for no more is heard of the episode in the Arab
or Byzantine sources - in contrast to the lasting effects of
the establishment of Judaism as the state religion which took
place a few years later.*[The probable date for the conversion
is around AD 740 - see below.] Content with the results achieved,
Marwan bid farewell to Khazaria and marched his army back to
Transcaucasia - without leaving any garrison, governor or administrative
apparatus behind. On the contrary, a short time later he requested
terms for another alliance with the Khazars against the rebellious
tribes of the south. .It had been a narrow escape. The reasons
which prompted Marwan's apparent magnanimity are a matter of
conjecture - as so much else in this bizarre chapter of history.
Perhaps the Arabs realized that, unlike the relatively civilized
Persians, Armenians or Georgians, these ferocious Barbarians
of the North could not be ruled by a Muslim puppet prince and
a small garrison. Yet Marwan needed every man of his army to
quell major rebellions in Syria and other parts of the Omayad
Caliphate, which was in the process of breaking up. Marwan himself
was the chief commander in the civil wars that followed, and
became in 744 the last of the Omayad Caliphs (only to be assassinated
six years later when the Caliphate passed to the Abbasid dynasty).
Given this background, Marwan was simply not in a position to
exhaust his resources by further wars with the Khazars. He had
to content himself with teaching them a lesson which would deter
them from further incursions across the Caucasus. .Thus the
gigantic Muslim pincer movement across the Pyrenees in the west
and across the Caucasus into Eastern Europe was halted at both
ends about the same time. As Charles Martel's Franks saved Gaul
and Western Europe, so the Khazars saved the eastern approaches
to the Volga, the Danube, and the East Roman Empire itself.
On this point at least, the Soviet archaeologist and historian,
Artamonov, and the American historian, Dunlop, are in full agreement.
I have already quoted the latter to the effect that but for
the Khazars, "Byzantium, the bulwark of European civilization
to the East, would have found itself outflanked by the Arabs",
and that history might have taken a different course..Artamonov
is of the same opinion:18
-
Khazaria was the first feudal state in Eastern Europe,
which ranked with the Byzantine Empire and the Arab Caliphate....
It was only due to the powerful Khazar attacks, diverting
the tide of the Arab armies to the Caucasus, that Byzantium
withstood them....
Lastly, the Professor of Russian History in the University
of Oxford, Dimitry Obolensky:19 "The main contribution of the
Khazars to world history was their success in holding the line
of the Caucasus against the northward onslaught of the Arabs.".Marwan
was not only the last Arab general to attack the Khazars, he
was also the last Caliph to pursue an expansionist policy devoted,
at least in theory, to the ideal of making Islam triumph all
over the world. With the Abbasid caliphs the wars of conquest
ceased, the revived influence of the old Persian culture created
a mellower climate, and eventually gave rise to the splendours
of Baghdad under Harun al Rashid.
8
During the long lull between the first and second Arab wars,
the Khazars became involved in one of the more lurid episodes
of Byzantine history, characteristic of the times, and of the
role the Khazars played in it. .In AD 685 Justinian II, Rhinotmetus,
became East Roman Emperor at the age of sixteen. Gibbon, in
his inimitable way, has drawn the youth's portrait:20
-
His passions were strong; his understanding was feeble;
and he was intoxicated with a foolish pride.... His favourite
ministers were two beings the least susceptible of human
sympathy, a eunuch and a monk; the former corrected the
emperor's mother with a scourge, the latter suspended the
insolvent tributaries, with their heads downwards, over
a slow and smoky fire.
After ten years of intolerable misrule there was a revolution,
and the new Emperor, Leontius, ordered Justinian's mutilation
and banishment:21
-
The amputation of his nose, perhaps of his tongue, was
imperfectly performed; the happy flexibility of the Greek
language could impose the name of Rhinotmetus ("Cut-off
Nose"); and the mutilated tyrant was banished to Chersonae
in Crim-Tartary, a lonely settlement where corn, wine and
oil were imported as foreign luxuries.*[The treatment meted
out to Justinian was actually regarded as an act of leniency:
the general tendency of the period was to humanize the criminal
law by substituting mutilation for capital punishment -
amputation of the hand (for thefts) or nose (fornication,
etc.) being the most frequent form. Byzantine rulers were
also given to the practice of blinding dangerous rivals,
while magnanimously sparing their lives.] .During his exile
in Cherson, Justinian kept plotting to regain his throne.
After three years he saw his chances improving when, back
in Byzantium, Leontius was de-throned and also had his nose
cut off. Justinian escaped from Cherson into the Khazar-ruled
town of Doros in the Crimea and had a meeting with the Kagan
of the Khazars, King Busir or Bazir. The Kagan must have
welcomed the opportunity of putting his fingers into the
rich pie of Byzantine dynastic policies, for he formed an
alliance with Justinian and gave him his sister in marriage.
This sister, who was baptized by the name of Theodora, and
later duly crowned, seems to have been the only decent person
in this series of sordid intrigues, and to bear genuine
love for her noseless husband (who was still only in his
early thirties). The couple and their band of followers
were now moved to the town of Phanagoria (the present Taman)
on the eastern shore of the strait of Kerch, which had a
Khazar governor. Here they made preparations for the invasion
of Byzantium with the aid of the Khazar armies which King
Busir had apparently promised. But the envoys of the new
Emperor, Tiberias III, persuaded Busir to change his mind,
by offering him a rich reward in gold if he delivered Justinian,
dead or alive, to the Byzantines. King Busir accordingly
gave orders to two of his henchmen, named Papatzes and Balgitres,
to assassinate his brother-in-law. But faithful Theodora
got wind of the plot and warned her husband. Justinian invited
Papatzes and Balgitres separately to his quarters, and strangled
each in turn with a cord. Then he took ship, sailed across
the Black Sea into the Danube estuary, and made a new alliance
with a powerful Bulgar tribe. Their king, Terbolis, proved
for the time being more reliable than the Khazar Kagan,
for in 704 he provided Justinian with 15000 horsemen to
attack Constantinople. The Byzantines had, after ten years,
either forgotten the darker sides of Justinian's former
rule, or else found their present ruler even more intolerable,
for they promptly rose against Tiberias and reinstated Justinian
on the throne. The Bulgar King was rewarded with "a heap
of gold coin which he measured with his Scythian whip" and
went home (only to get involved in a new war against Byzantium
a few years later)..Justinian's second reign (704-711) proved
even worse than the first; "he considered the axe, the cord
and the rack as the only instruments of royalty".22 He became
mentally unbalanced, obsessed with hatred against the inhabitants
of Cherson, where he had spent most of the bitter years
of his exile, and sent an expedition against the town. Some
of Cherson's leading citizens were burnt alive, others drowned,
and many prisoners taken, but this was not enough to assuage
Justinian's lust for revenge, for he sent a second expedition
with orders to raze the city to the ground. However, this
time his troops were halted by a mighty Khazar army; whereupon
Justinian's representative in the Crimea, a certain Bardanes,
changed sides and joined the Khazars. The demoralized Byzantine
expeditionary force abjured its allegiance to Justinian
and elected Bardanes as Emperor, under the name of Philippicus.
But since Philippicus was in Khazar hands, the insurgents
had to pay a heavy ransom to the Kagan to get their new
Emperor back. When the expeditionary force returned to Constantinople,
Justinian and his son were assassinated and Philippicus,
greeted as a liberator, was installed on the throne only
to be deposed and blinded a couple of years later. .The
point of this gory tale is to show the influence which the
Khazars at this stage exercised over the destinies of the
East Roman Empire - in addition to their role as defenders
of the Caucasian bulwark against the Muslims. Bardanes-Philippicus
was an emperor of the Khazars' making, and the end of Justinian's
reign of terror was brought about by his brother-in-law,
the Kagan. To quote Dunlop: "It does not seem an exaggeration
to say that at this juncture the Khaquan was able practically
to give a new ruler to the Greek empire."23
9
From the chronological point of view, the next event to be
discussed should be the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism,
around AD 740. But to see that remarkable event in its proper
perspective, one should have at least some sketchy idea of the
habits, customs and everyday life among the Khazars prior to
the conversion..Alas, we have no lively eyewitness reports,
such as Priscus's description of Attila's court. What we do
have are mainly second-hand accounts and compilations by Byzantine
and Arab chroniclers, which are rather schematic and fragmentary
- with two exceptions. One is a letter, purportedly from a Khazar
king, to be discussed in Chapter 2; the other is a travelogue
by an observant Arab traveller, Ibn Fadlan, who - like Priscus
- was a member of a diplomatic mission from a civilized court
to the Barbarians of the North..The court was that of the Caliph
al Muktadir, and the diplomatic mission travelled from Baghdad
through Persia and Bukhara to the land of the Volga Bulgars.
The official pretext for this grandiose expedition was a letter
of invitation from the Bulgar king, who asked the Caliph (a)
for religious instructors to convert his people to Islam, and
(b) to build him a fortress which would enable him to defy his
overlord, the King of the Khazars. The invitation - which was
no doubt prearranged by earlier diplomatic contacts - also provided
an opportunity to create goodwill among the various Turkish
tribes inhabiting territories through which the mission had
to pass, by preaching the message of the Koran and distributing
huge amounts of gold bakhshish. .The opening paragraphs of our
traveller's account read:*[The following quotations are based
on Zeki Validi Togan's German translation of the Arabic text
and the English translation of extracts by Blake and Frye, both
slightly paraphrased in the interest of readability.]
-
This is the book of Ahmad ibn-Fadlan ibn-al-Abbas, ibn-Rasid,
ibn-Hammad, an official in the service of [General] Muhammed
ibn-Sulayman, the ambassador of [Caliph] al Muktadir to
the King of the Bulgars, in which he relates what he saw
in the land of the Turks, the Khazars, the Rus, the Bulgars,
the Bashkirs and others, their varied kinds of religion,
the histories of their kings, and their conduct in many
walks of life. .The letter of the King of the Bulgars reached
the Commander of the Faithful, al Muktadir; he asked him
therein to send him someone to give him religious instruction
and acquaint him with the laws of Islam, to build him a
mosque and a pulpit so that he may carry out his mission
of converting the people all over his country; he also entreated
the Caliph to build him a fortress to defend himself against
hostile kings.*[i.e., as later passages show, the King of
the Khazars.] Everything that the King asked for was granted
by the Caliph. I was chosen to read the Caliph's message
to the King, to hand over the gifts the Caliph sent him,
and to supervise the work of the teachers and interpreters
of the Law....[There follow some details about the financing
of the mission and names of participants.] And so we started
on Thursday the 11th Safar of the year 309 [June 21, AD
921] from the City of Peace [Baghdad, capital of the Caliphate].
The date of the expedition, it will he noted, is much later
than the events described in the previous section. But as far
as the customs and institutions of the Khazars' pagan neighbours
are concerned, this probably makes not much difference; and
the glimpses we get of the life of these nomadic tribes convey
at least some idea of what life among the Khazars may have been
during that earlier period - before the conversion - when they
adhered to a form of Shamanism similar to that still practised
by their neighbours in Ibn Fadlan's time. .The progress of the
mission was slow and apparently uneventful until they reached
Khwarizm, the border province of the Caliphate south of the
Sea of Aral. Here the governor in charge of the province tried
to stop them from proceeding further by arguing that between
his country and the kingdom of the Bulgars there were "a thousand
tribes of disbelievers" who were sure to kill them. In fact
his attempts to disregard the Caliph's instructions to let the
mission pass might have been due to other motives: he realized
that the mission was indirectly aimed against the Khazars, with
whom he maintained a flourishing trade and friendly relations.
In the end, however, he had to give in, and the mission was
allowed to proceed to Gurganj on the estuary of the Amu-Darya.
Here they hibernated for three months, because of the intense
cold - a factor which looms large in many Arab travellers' tales:
-
The river was frozen for three months, we looked at the
landscape and thought that the gates of the cold Hell had
been opened for us. Verily I saw that the market place and
the streets were totally empty because of the cold.... Once,
when I came out of the bath and got home, I saw that my
beard had frozen into a lump of ice, and I had to thaw it
in front of the fire. I stayed for some days in a house
which was inside of another house [compound?] and in which
there stood a Turkish felt tent, and I lay inside the tent
wrapped in clothes and furs, but nevertheless my cheeks
often froze to the cushion....
Around the middle of February the thaw set in. The mission
arranged to join a mighty caravan of 5000 men and 3000 pack
animals to cross the northern steppes, and bought the necessary
supplies: camels, skin boats made of camel hides for crossing
rivers, bread, millet and spiced meat for three months. The
natives warned them about the even more frightful cold in the
north, and advised them what clothes to wear:
-
So each of us put on a Kurtak, [camisole] over that a woollen
Kaftan, over that a buslin, [fur-lined coat] over that a
burka [fur coat]; and a fur cap, under which only the eyes
could be seen; a simple pair of underpants, and a lined
pair, and over them the trousers; house shoes of kaymuht
[shagreen leather] and over these also another pair of boots;
and when one of us mounted a camel, he was unable to move
because of his clothes.
Ibn Fadlan, the fastidious Arab, liked neither the climate
nor the people of Khwarizm:
-
They are, in respect of their language and constitution,
the most repulsive of men. Their language is like the chatter
of starlings. At a day's journey there is a village called
Ardkwa whose inhabitants are called Kardals; their language
sounds entirely like the croaking of frogs.
They left on March 3 and stopped for the night in a caravanserai
called Zamgan - the gateway to the territory of the Ghuzz Turks.
From here onward the mission was in foreign land, "entrusting
our fate to the all-powerful and exalted God". During one of
the frequent snow-storms, Ibn Fadlan rode next to a Turk, who
complained: "What does the Ruler want from us? He is killing
us with cold. If we knew what he wants we would give it to him."
Ibn Fadlan: "All he wants is that you people should say: "There
is no God save Allah"." The Turk laughed: "If we knew that it
is so, we should say so." .There are many such incidents, which
Ibn Fadlan reports without appreciating the independence of
mind which they reflect. Nor did the envoy of the Baghdad court
appreciate the nomadic tribesmen's fundamental contempt for
authority. The following episode also occurred in the country
of the powerful Ghuzz Turks, who paid tribute to the Khazars
and, according to some sources, were closely related to them:24
-
The next morning one of the Turks met us. He was ugly in
build, dirty in appearance, contemptible in manners, base
in nature; and we were moving through a heavy rain. Then
he said: "Halt." Then the whole caravan of 3000 animals
and 5000 men halted. Then he said: "Not a single one of
you is allowed to go on." We halted then, obeying his orders.*[Obviously
the leaders of the great caravan had to avoid at all costs
a conflict with the Ghuzz tribesmen.] Then we said to him:
"We are friends of the Kudarkin [Viceroy]". He began to
laugh and said: "Who is the Kudarkin? I shit on his beard."
Then he said: "Bread." I gave him a few loaves of bread.
He took them and said: "Continue your journey; I have taken
pity on you."
The democratic methods of the Ghuzz, practised when a decision
had to be taken, were even more bewildering to the representative
of an authoritarian theocracy:
-
They are nomads and have houses of felt. They stay for
a while in one place and then move on. One can see their
tents dispersed here and there all over the place according
to nomadic custom. Although they lead a hard life, they
behave like donkeys that have lost their way. They have
no religion which would link them to God, nor are they guided
by reason; they do not worship anything. Instead, they call
their headmen lords; when one of them consults his chieftain,
he asks: "O lord, what shall I do in this or that matter?"
The course of action they adopt is decided by taking counsel
among themselves; but when they have decided on a measure
and are ready to carry it through, even the humblest and
lowliest among them can come and disrupt that decision.
The sexual mores of the Ghuzz - and other tribes - were a remarkable
mixture of liberalism and savagery:
-
Their women wear no veils in the presence of their men
or strangers. Nor do the women cover any parts of their
bodies in the presence of people. One day we stayed at the
place of a Ghuzz and were sitting around; his wife was also
present. As we conversed, the woman uncovered her private
parts and scratched them, and we all saw it. Thereupon we
covered our faces and said: "May God forgive me." The husband
laughed and said to the interpreter: "Tell them we uncover
it in your presence so that you may see and restrain yourselves;
but it cannot be attained. This is better than when it is
covered up and yet attainable." Adultery is alien to them;
yet when they discover that someone is an adulterer they
split him in two halves. This they do by bringing together
the branches of two trees, tie him to the branches and then
let both trees go, so that the man tied to them is torn
in two.
He does not say whether the same punishment was meted out to
the guilty woman. Later on, when talking about the Volga Bulgars,
he describes an equally savage method of splitting adulterers
into two, applied to both men and women. Yet, he notes with
astonishment, Bulgars of both sexes swim naked in their rivers,
and have as little bodily shame as the Ghuzz..As for homosexuality
- which in Arab countries was taken as a matter of course -
Ibn Fadlan says that it is "regarded by the Turks as a terrible
sin". But in the only episode he relates to prove his point,
the seducer of a "beardless youth" gets away with a fine of
400 sheep. .Accustomed to the splendid baths of Baghdad, our
traveller could not get over the dirtiness of the Turks. "The
Ghuzz do not wash themselves after defacating or urinating,
nor do they bathe after seminal pollution or on other occasions.
They refuse to have anything to do with water, particularly
in winter....".When the Ghuzz commander-in-chief took off his
luxurious coat of brocade to don a new coat the mission had
brought him, they saw that his underclothes were "fraying apart
from dirt, for it is their custom never to take off the garment
they wear close to their bodies until it disintegrates". Another
Turkish tribe, the Bashkirs, 'shave their beards and eat their
lice. They search the folds of their undergarments and crack
the lice with their teeth." When Ibn Fadlan watched a Bashkir
do this, the latter remarked to him: "They are delicious." .All
in all, it is not an engaging picture. Our fastidious traveller's
contempt for the barbarians was profound. But it was only aroused
by their uncleanliness and what he considered as indecent exposure
of the body; the savagery of their punishments and sacrificial
rites leave him quite indifferent. Thus he describes the Bulgars'
punishment for manslaughter with detached interest, without
his otherwise frequent expressions of indignation: "They make
for him [the delinquent] a box of birchwood, put him inside,
nail the lid on the box, put three loaves of bread and a can
of water beside it, and suspend the box between two tall poles,
saying: "We have put him between heaven and earth, that he may
be exposed to the sun and the rain, and that the deity may perhaps
forgive him." And so he remains suspended until time lets him
decay and the winds blow him away.".He also describes, with
similar aloofness, the funeral sacrifice of hundreds of horses
and herds of other animals, and the gruesome ritual killing
of a Rus*[Rus: the Viking founders of the early Russian settlements
- see below, Chapter III.] slave girl at her master's bier.
About pagan religions he has little to say. But the Bashkirs'
phallus cult arouses his interest, for he asks through his interpreter
one of the natives the reason for his worshipping a wooden penis,
and notes down his reply: "Because I issued from something similar
and know of no other creator who made me." He then adds that
'some of them [the Bashkirs] believe in twelve deities, a god
for winter, another for summer, one for the rain, one for the
wind, one for the trees, one for men, one for the horse, one
for water, one for the night, one for the day, a god of death
and one for the earth; while that god who dwells in the sky
is the greatest among them, but takes counsel with the others
and thus all are contented with each other's doings.... We have
seen a group among them which worships snakes, and a group which
worships fish, and a group which worships cranes....".Among
the Volga Bulgars, Ibn Fadlan found a strange custom:
-
When they observe a man who excels through quickwittedness
and knowledge, they say: "for this one it is more befitting
to serve our Lord." They seize him, put a rope round his
neck and hang him on a tree where he is left until he rots
away.
Commenting on this passage, the Turkish orientalist Zeki Validi
Togan, undisputed authority on Ibn Fadlan and his times, has
this to say:25 "There is nothing mysterious about the cruel
treatment meted out by the Bulgars to people who were overly
clever. It was based on the simple, sober reasoning of the average
citizens who wanted only to lead what they considered to be
a normal life, and to avoid any risk or adventure into which
the "genius" might lead them." He then quotes a Tartar proverb:
"If you know too much, they will hang you, and if you are too
modest, they will trample on you." He concludes that the victim
'should not be regarded simply as a learned person, but as an
unruly genius, one who is too clever by half". This leads one
to believe that the custom should be regarded as a measure of
social defence against change, a punishment of non-conformists
and potential innovators.*[In support of his argument, the author
adduces Turkish and Arabic quotations in the original, without
translation - a nasty habit common among modern experts in the
field.] But a few lines further down he gives a different interpretation:
-
Ibn Fadlan describes not the simple murder of too-clever
people, but one of their pagan customs: human sacrifice,
by which the most excellent among men were offered as sacrifice
to God. This ceremony was probably not carried out by common
Bulgars, but by their Tabibs, or medicine men, i.e. their
shamans, whose equivalents among the Bulgars and the Rus
also wielded power of life and death over the people, in
the name of their cult. According to Ibn Rusta, the medicine
men of the Rus could put a rope round the neck of anybody
and hang him on a tree to invoke the mercy of God. When
this was done, they said: "This is an offering to God."
Perhaps both types of motivation were mixed together: 'since
sacrifice is a necessity, let's sacrifice the trouble-makers".
.We shall see that human sacrifice was also practised by the
Khazars - including the ritual killing of the king at the end
of his reign. We may assume that many other similarities existed
between the customs of the tribes described by Ibn Fadlan and
those of the Khazars. Unfortunately he was debarred from visiting
the Khazar capital and had to rely on information collected
in territories under Khazar dominion, and particularly at the
Bulgar court.
10
It took the Caliph's mission nearly a year (from June 21, 921,
to May 12, 922) to reach its destination, the land of the Volga
Bulgars. The direct route from Baghdad to the Volga leads across
the Caucasus and Khazaria - to avoid the latter, they had to
make the enormous detour round the eastern shore of the "Khazar
Sea", the Caspian. Even so, they were constantly reminded of
the proximity of the Khazars and its potential dangers. .A characteristic
episode took place during their sojourn with the Ghuzz army
chief (the one with the disreputable underwear). They were at
first well received, and given a banquet. But later the Ghuzz
leaders had second thoughts because of their relations with
the Khazars. The chief assembled the leaders to decide what
to do:
-
The most distinguished and influential among them was the
Tarkhan; he was lame and blind and had a maimed hand. The
Chief said to them: "These are the messengers of the King
of the Arabs, and I do not feel authorized to let them proceed
without consulting you." Then the Tarkhan spoke: "This is
a matter the like of which we have never seen or heard before;
never has an ambassador of the Sultan travelled through
our country since we and our ancestors have been here. Without
doubt the Sultan is deceiving us; these people he is really
sending to the Khazars, to stir them up against us. The
best will be to cut each of these messengers into two and
to confiscate all their belongings." Another one said: "No,
we should take their belongings and let them run back naked
whence they came." Another said: "No, the Khazar king holds
hostages from us, let us send these people to ransom them."
They argued among themselves for seven days, while Ibn Fadlan
and his people feared the worst. In the end the Ghuzz let them
go; we are not told why. Probably Ibn Fadlan succeeded in persuading
them that his mission was in fact directed against the Khazars.
The Ghuzz had earlier on fought with the Khazars against
another Turkish tribe, the Pechenegs, but more recently had
shown a hostile attitude; hence the hostages the Khazars took..The
Khazar menace loomed large on the horizon all along the journey.
North of the Caspian they made another huge detour before reaching
the Bulgar encampment somewhere near the confluence of the Volga
and the Kama. There the King and leaders of the Bulgars were
waiting for them in a state of acute anxiety. As soon as the
ceremonies and festivities were over, the King sent for Ibn
Fadlan to discuss business. He reminded Ibn Fadlan in forceful
language ("his voice sounded as if he were speaking from the
bottom of a barrel") of the main purpose of the mission to wit,
the money to be paid to him 'so that I shall be able to build
a fortress to protect me from the Jews who subjugated me". Unfortunately
that money - a sum of four thousand dinars - had not been handed
over to the mission, owing to some complicated matter of red
tape; it was to be sent later on. On learning this, the King
- "a personality of impressive appearance, broad and corpulent"
- seemed close to despair. He suspected the mission of having
defrauded the money: ""What would you think of a group of men
who are given a sum of money destined for a people that is weak,
besieged, and oppressed, yet these men defraud the money?" I
replied: "This is forbidden, those men would be evil." He asked:
"Is this a matter of opinion or a matter of general consent?"
I replied: "A matter of general consent."" .Gradually Ibn Fadlan
succeeded in convincing the King that the money was only delayed,*[Apparently
it did arrive at some time, as there is no further mention of
the matter.] but not to allay his anxieties. The King kept repeating
that the whole point of the invitation was the building of the
fortress "because he was afraid of the King of the Khazars".
And apparently he had every reason to be afraid, as Ibn Fadlan
relates:
-
The Bulgar King's son was held as a hostage by the King
of the Khazars. It was reported to the King of the Khazars
that the Bulgar King had a beautiful daughter. He sent a
messenger to sue for her. The Bulgar King used pretexts
to refuse his consent. The Khazar sent another messenger
and took her by force, although he was a Jew and she a Muslim;
but she died at his court. The Khazar sent another messenger
and asked for the Bulgar King's other daughter. But in the
very hour when the messenger reached him, the Bulgar King
hurriedly married her to the Prince of the Askil, who was
his subject, for fear that the Khazar would take her too
by force, as he had done with her sister. This alone was
the reason which made the Bulgar King enter into correspondence
with the Caliph and ask him to have a fortress built because
he feared the King of the Khazars.
It sounds like a refrain. Ibn Fadlan also specifies the annual
tribute the Bulgar King had to pay the Khazars: one sable fur
from each household in his realm. Since the number of Bulgar
households (i.e., tents) is estimated to have been around 50000,
and since Bulgar sable fur was highly valued all over the world,
the tribute was a handsome one.
11
What Ibn Fadlan has to tell us about the Khazars is based -
as already mentioned - on intelligence collected in the course
of his journey, but mainly at the Bulgar court. Unlike the rest
of his narrative, derived from vivid personal observations,
the pages on the Khazars contain second-hand, potted information,
and fall rather flat. Moreover, the sources of his information
are biased, in view of the Bulgar King's understandable dislike
of his Khazar overlord - while the Caliphate's resentment of
a kingdom embracing a rival religion need hardly be stressed.
.The narrative switches abruptly from a description of the Rus
court to the Khazar court:
-
Concerning the King of the Khazars, whose title is Kagan,
he appears in public only once every four months. They call
him the Great Kagan. His deputy is called Kagan Bek; he
is the one who commands and supplies the armies, manages
the affairs of state, appears in public and leads in war.
The neighbouring kings obey his orders. He enters every
day into the presence of the Great Kagan, with deference
and modesty, barefooted, carrying a stick of wood in his
hand. He makes obeisance, lights the stick, and when it
has burned down, he sits down on the throne on the King's
right. Next to him in rank is a man called the K-nd-r Kagan,
and next to that one, the Jawshyghr Kagan. .It is the custom
of the Great Kagan not to have social intercourse with people,
and not to talk with them, and to admit nobody to his presence
except those we have mentioned. The power to bind or release,
to mete out punishment, and to govern the country belongs
to his deputy, the Kagan Bek..It is a further custom of
the Great Kagan that when he dies a great building is built
for him, containing twenty chambers, and in each chamber
a grave is dug for him. Stones are broken until they become
like powder, which is spread over the floor and covered
with pitch. Beneath the building flows a river, and this
river is large and rapid. They divert the river water over
the grave and they say that this is done so that no devil,
no man, no worm and no creeping creatures can get at him.
After he has been buried, those who buried him are decapitated,
so that nobody may know in which of the chambers is his
grave. The grave is called "Paradise" and they have a saying:
"He has entered Paradise". All the chambers are spread with
silk brocade interwoven with threads of gold. .It is the
custom of the King of the Khazars to have twenty-five wives;
each of the wives is the daughter of a king who owes him
allegiance. He takes them by consent or by force. He has
sixty girls for concubines, each of them of exquisite beauty.
Ibn Fadlan then proceeds to give a rather fanciful description
of the Kagan's harem, where each of the eighty-five wives and
concubines has a "palace of her own", and an attendant or eunuch
who, at the King's command, brings her to his alcove "faster
than the blinking of an eye..After a few more dubious remarks
about the "customs" of the Khazar Kagan (we shall return to
them later), Ibn Fadlan at last provides some factual information
about the country:
-
The King has a great city on the river Itil [Volga] on
both banks. On one bank live the Muslims, on the other bank
the King and his court. The Muslims are governed by one
of the King's officials who is himself a Muslim. The law-suits
of the Muslims living in the Khazar capital and of visiting
merchants from abroad are looked after by that official.
Nobody else meddles in their affairs or sits in judgment
over them.
Ibn Fadlan's travel report, as far as it is preserved, ends
with the words:
-
The Khazars and their King are all Jews.*[This sounds like
an exaggeration in view of the existence of a Muslim community
in the capital. Zeki Validi accordingly suppressed the word
"all". We must assume that "the Khazars" here refers to
the ruling nation or tribe, within the ethnic mosaic of
Khazaria, and that the Muslims enjoyed legal and religious
autonomy, but were not considered as "real Khazars".] The
Bulgars and all their neighbours are subject to him. They
treat him with worshipful obedience. Some are of the opinion
that Gog and Magog are the Khazars.
12
I have quoted Ibn Fadlan's odyssey at some length, not so much
because of the scant information he provides about the Khazars
themselves, but because of the light it throws on the world
which surrounded them, the stark barbarity of the people amidst
whom they lived, reflecting their own past, prior to the conversion.
For, by the time of Ibn Fadlan's visit to the Bulgars, Khazaria
was a surprisingly modern country compared to its neighbours.
.The contrast is evidenced by the reports of other Arab historians,*[The
following pages are based on the works of lstakhri, al- Masudi,
Ibn Rusta and Ibn Hawkal (see Appendix II).] and is present
on every level, from housing to the administration of justice.
The Bulgars still live exclusively in tents, including the King,
although the royal tent is "very large, holding a thousand people
or more".26 On the other hand, the Khazar Kagan inhabits a castle
built of burnt brick, his ladies are said to inhabit "palaces
with roofs of teak",27 and the Muslims have several mosques,
among them "one whose minaret rises above the royal castle".28
.In the fertile regions, their farms and cultivat ed areas stretched
out continuously over sixty or seventy miles. They also had
extensive vineyards. Thus Ibn Hawkal: "In Kozr [Khazaria] there
is a certain city called Asmid [Samandar] which has so many
orchards and gardens that from Darband to Serir the whole country
is covered with gardens and plantations belonging to this city.
It is said that there are about forty thousand of them. Many
of these produce grapes."29 .The region north of the Caucasus
was extremely fertile. In AD 968 Ibn Hawkal met a man who had
visited it after a Russian raid: "He said there is not a pittance
left for the poor in any vineyard or garden, not a leaf on the
bough.... [But] owing to the excellence of their land and the
abundance of its produce it will not take three years until
it becomes again what it was." Caucasian wine is still a delight,
consumed in vast quantities in the Soviet Union. lHowever, the
royal treasuries' main source of income was foreign trade. The
sheer volume of the trading caravans plying their way between
Central Asia and the Volga-Ural region is indicated by Ibn Fadlan:
we remember that the caravan his mission joined at Gurganj consisted
of "5000 men and 3000 pack animals". Making due allowance for
exaggeration, it must still have been a mighty caravan, and
we do not know how many of these were at any time on the move.
Nor what goods they transported - although textiles, dried fruit,
honey, wax and spices seem to have played an important part.
A second major trade route led across the Caucasus to Armenia,
Georgia, Persia and Byzantium. A third consisted of the increasing
traffic of Rus merchant fleets down the Volga to the eastern
shores of the Khazar Sea, carrying mainly precious furs much
in demand among the Muslim aristocracy, and slaves from the
north, sold at the slave market of Itil. On all these transit
goods, including the slaves, the Khazar ruler levied a tax of
ten per cent. Adding to this the tribute paid by Bulgars, Magyars,
Burtas and so on, one realizes that Khazaria was a prosperous
country - but also that its prosperity depended to a large extent
on its military power, and the prestige it conveyed on its tax
collectors and customs officials. .Apart from the fertile regions
of the south, with their vineyards and orchards, the country
was poor in natural resources. One Arab historian (Istakhri)
says that the only native product they exported was isinglass.
This again is certainly an exaggeration, yet the fact remains
that their main commercial activity seems to have consisted
in re-exporting goods brought in from abroad. Among these goods,
honey and candle-wax particularly caught the Arab chroniclers'
imagination. Thus Muqaddasi: "In Khazaria, sheep, honey and
Jews exist in large quantities."30 It is true that one source
- the Darband Namah - mentions gold or silver mines
in Khazar territory, but their location has not been ascertained.
On the other hand, several of the sources mention Khazar merchandise
seen in Baghdad, and the presence of Khazar merchants in Constantinople,
Alexandria and as far afield as Samara and Fergana. .Thus Khazaria
was by no means isolated from the civilized world; compared
to its tribal neighbours in the north it was a cosmopolitan
country, open to all sorts of cultural and religious influences,
yet jealously defending its independence against the two ecclesiastical
world powers. We shall see that this attitude prepared the ground
for the coup de theatre - or coup d'tat -
which established Judaism as the state religion. .The arts and
crafts seem to have flourished, including haute couture.
When the future Emperor Constantine V married the Khazar Kagan's
daughter (see above, section 1), she brought with her dowry
a splendid dress which so impressed the Byzantine court that
it was adopted as a male ceremonial robe; they called
it tzitzakion, derived from the Khazar-Turkish pet-
name of the Princess, which was Chichak or "flower" (until she
was baptized Eirene). "Here," Toynbee comments, "we have an
illuminating fragment of cultural history."31 When another Khazar
princess married the Muslim governor of Armenia, her cavalcade
contained, apart from attendants and slaves, ten tents mounted
on wheels, "made of the finest silk, with gold-and silver-plated
doors, the floors covered with sable furs. Twenty others carried
the gold and silver vessels and other treasures which were her
dowry".32 The Kagan himself travelled in a mobile tent even
more luxuriously equipped, carrying on its top a pomegranate
of gold.
13
Khazar art, like that of the Bulgars and Magyars, was mainly
imitative, modelled on Persian-Sassanide patterns. The Soviet
archaeologist Bader33 emphasized the role of the Khazars in
the spreading of Persian-style silver-ware towards the north.
Some of these finds may have been re-exported by the Khazars,
true to their role as middlemen; others were imitations made
in Khazar workshops - the ruins of which have been traced near
the ancient Khazar fortress of Sarkel.*[Unfortunately, Sarkel,
the most important Khazar archaeological site has been flooded
by the reservoir of a newly built hydro-electric station.] The
jewellery unearthed within the confines of the fortress was
of local manufacture.34 The Swedish archaeologist T. J. Arne
mentions ornamental plates, clasps and buckles found as far
as Sweden, of Sassanide and Byzantine inspiration, manufactured
in Khazaria or territories under their influence.35 .Thus the
Khazars were the principal intermediaries in the spreading of
Persian and Byzantine art among the semi-barbaric tribes of
Eastern Europe. After his exhaustive survey of the archaeological
and documentary evidence (mostly from Soviet sources), Bartha
concludes:
-
The sack of Tiflis by the Khazars, presumably in the spring
of AD 629, is relevant to our subject.... [During the period
of occupation] the Kagan sent out inspectors to supervise
the manufacture of gold, silver, iron and copper products.
Similarly the bazaars, trade in general, even the fisheries,
were under their control.... [Thus] in the course of their
incessant Caucasian campaigns during the seventh century,
the Khazars made contact with a culture which had grown
out of the Persian Sassanide tradition. Accordingly, the
products of this culture spread to the people of the steppes
not only by trade, but by means of plunder and even by taxation....
All the tracks that we have assiduously followed in the
hope of discovering the origins of Magyar art in the tenth
century have led us back to Khazar territory.36
The last remark of the Hungarian scholar refers to the spectacular
archaeological finds known as the "Treasure of Nagyszentmiklos"
(see frontispiece). The treasure, consisting of twentythree
gold vessels, dating from the tenth century, was found in 1791
in the vicinity of the village of that name.*[It now belongs
to Rumania and is called Sinnicolaul Mare.] Bartha points out
that the figure of the "victorious Prince" dragging a prisoner
along by his hair, and the mythological scene at the back of
the golden jar, as well as the design of other ornamental objects,
show close affinities with the finds in Novi Pazar in Bulgaria
and in Khazar Sarkel. As both Magyars and Bulgars were under
Khazar suzerainty for protracted periods, this is not very surprising,
and the warrior, together with the rest of the treasure, gives
us at least some idea of the arts practised within the Khazar
Empire (the Persian and Byzantine influence is predominant,
as one would expect).*[The interested reader will find an excellent
collection of photographs in Gyula László's The Art of the
Migration Period (although his historical comments have
to be treated with caution).] .One school of Hungarian archaeologists
maintains that the tenth century gold-and silversmiths working
in Hungary were actually Khazars.37 As we shall see later on
(see III, 7, 8), when the Magyars migrated to Hungary in 896
they were led by a dissident Khazar tribe, known as the Kabars,
who settled with them in their new home. The Kabar-Khazars were
known as skilled gold and silversmiths; the (originally more
primitive) Magyars only acquired these skills in their new country.
Thus the theory of the Khazar origin of at least some of the
archaeological finds in Hungary is not implausible - as will
become clearer in the light of the Magyar-Khazar nexus discussed
later on.
14
Whether the warrior on the golden jar is of Magyar or Khazar
origin, he helps us to visualise the appearance of a cavalryman
of that period, perhaps belonging to an elite regiment. Masudi
says that in the Khazar army 'seven thousand of them*[Istakhri
has 12000.] ride with the King, archers with breast plates,
helmets, and coats of mail. Some are | | |