9. Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe, Gumilev
VIII. Chimera throw (899-944). A deep dive into Khazaria in this period.
[I want to keep a steady flow for this book because upcoming commitments might limit my ability to be timely.] We’re at 30% uploaded.
44. AT THE TURN OF THE IX-X CENTURIES
The world around Khazaria was changing. These changes did not concern the Khazars themselves, but the Rakhdonite merchants felt sad. China, the silk supplier, lay in ruins after Huang Chao's grand peasant uprising and suppression by the last Huns, the Chateau Turks, who saved the Tang Dynasty. Chinese peasants were especially embittered against foreign merchants, whose colony in Guangzhou was completely massacred in 879. The same thing happened in Chang 'an in 881. Jewish merchants who were in China during these years all died, their property was looted, the caravan route was left unattended, the dams on the Yellow River were not repaired, and in half a century there were 9 breakthroughs, i.e. huge floods.
And it is not surprising that the export of silk was suspended, and in fact it was the main source of income of the Rakhdonites. The circumstances in the West were equally unfavorable. The Carolingians, who supported the Jews, lost the trust of their subjects. At first, they were refused submission by the French, who chose Edward of Paris as king. After his early death, the French feudal lords continued the war with the emperors until a complete victory - the election of King Hugo Capet in 987. It became difficult for Jews to live in France.
The situation in Germany was more favorable for them. The Saxon kings, who replaced the Carolingians, took Jewish merchants under their protection and provided them with a trade route through the Arelat Kingdom and the Toulouse Palatinate to Spain.
But the Muslim caliphs of Spain did not need silks and furs, but slaves. Consequently, it was necessary to get boys and girls, and parents, as a rule, did not give them away. Baghdad was going through a difficult time. The country around him was ravaged by uprisings of black slaves - Zinja and Bedouin-Karmats. There, too, they bought slaves - Gulyams - to replenish the army. And since from 866 the power in Baghdad passed from the caliphs to the Turkic guards, their commanders were most willing to buy their fellow countrymen. Obtaining slaves became an urgent task of the Rakhdonites, but this occupation was connected with the war. And war is risky and expensive.
Of course, it would be possible to recommend Radonites to change their profession and engage in, for example, watermelon breeding and sheep herding, but for this it would be necessary to abolish the “law of irreversibility” of evolution. Their ancestors did not create an extensive system of a rigid type, in order to simply cancel out all the efforts, exploits, achievements and, finally, the luxurious living conditions that they achieved over a hundred years of hard work and victories. A rigid system is therefore strong because it is adapted to local conditions in the best way when it is created. When the environment changes, rebuilding the system is difficult.
Conversely, a discrete system is elastic, but it does not allow for full coordination of forces for solving foreign policy tasks. Therefore, rigid systems win in stable conditions, and discrete systems survive even with a constantly changing habitat and ethnic environment.
The Jewish Khazaria is an example of a rigid system, the Eurasian ethnic groups surrounding Khazaria are discrete systems. In the IX-X centuries, changes in the geographical environment (due to the transfer of the path of cyclones to the north, to the forest zone of Eurasia) could be either useful or harmful for ethno-economic systems, but not neutral. And since the interests of Jews and Khazars in the chimerical integrity of the kaganate were opposite, climatic fluctuations were reflected in the history of Eastern Europe and the Great Steppe.
45. ANGER OF THE ELEMENTS
As long as the steppes were moistened and the marshes dried up in the Volga-Oka interfluve, the Caspian Sea behaved quietly. It stood at an absolute mark of minus 36 m, (to sea level), thanks to which vast areas of fertile land in the lower reaches of the Volga were inhabited by farmers. By the beginning of the tenth century, when the Volga turned from a quiet river into a stormy stream that collected the moisture of the rains that fell on a huge area from Valdai to the Urals, the level of the Caspian Sea rose to minus 29 m[1]. (Up 7 meters, the northern shore-line sloped gently and 7 meters of water took out may kilometers of dry land).
Map "Russia at the end of the XI- beginning of the XII century" (68 KB). Hard to make out this map, but you can locate Crimea at the bottom, so MOPE means “sea”, and Mope under the key must be the Baltic Sea.
http://gumilevica.kulichki.net/maps/args06.gif
For the inhabitants of the southern edge of the Caspian Sea, this did not matter significantly. The shores there are steep, mountains all around, the sea has risen, flooded the coastal fortress... well, let it be. But for the gentle northern shore, the rise in sea level was of great importance. Fields, orchards and vineyards were under the water of the Volga, which stood on a support. It was impossible to use the flooded lands, people began to settle on the tops of the Baer hills, waiting for the time when the water would go away. And the water kept rising. They had to go to the steppe.
But there was no salvation for the Khazars in the coastal tracts either. Deprived of rain, (the rains had moved north, into the Volga watershed), the steppe turned into a semi-desert, and this last one into a desert in which even nomads could not live. In the tenth century, the Karluks left the shores of Balkhash to settle in the oases of Central Asia, the Pechenegs left the shores of the Aral Sea for the shores of the Black Sea, and the Guzes moved to the Urals and Emba. Only the Cumans (Cumans or Kumans were a Turkic nomadic people from Central Asia comprising the western branch of the Cuman–Kipchak confederation who spoke the Cuman language. They are referred to as Polovtsy in Rus, Cumans in Western and Kipchaks in Eastern sources), who inhabited the western slopes of the Altai and the southern strip of Western Siberia, where pine forests stood at that time [2], were not affected by the drought. They were saved by the deep rivers that surrounded the Barabinsk steppe from the east and west.
It was easier on the western outskirts of the Great Steppe, on the banks of the Dnieper, Donets and Don, as the meridional currents in the atmosphere contributed to the normal humidification of this area. Therefore, the Pechenegs, (Pechenegs or Patzinaks were a semi-nomadic Turkic people from Central Asia who spoke the Pecheneg language. In the 9th and 10th centuries, the Pechenegs controlled much of the steppes of southeast Europe and the Crimean Peninsula), having broken through to the Dnieper, restored livestock, including horses, and thereby military power, thanks to which they could keep themselves independent.
Since the eastern steppes turned out to be very inhospitable, the Khazars rushed to the northwest and, starting from the second half of the IX century, inhabited the terraces of the lower Don, where they brought with them the culture of Terek grapes. The four above-floodplain terraces of the Don smoothly turn into watershed steppes, but already on the second terrace the features of azonality are manifested - the cleavage of the forest, thickets of willow, etc., which determined the lifestyle of the Alans, (Alans were an ancient and medieval Iranian nomadic pastoral people of the North Caucasus – generally regarded as part of the Sarmatians, and possibly related to the Massagetae. Modern historians have connected the Alans with the Central Asian Yancai of Chinese sources and with the Aorsi of Roman sources), Khazars and Cossacks. The author succeeded in 1965 . to find on the middle Don a small settlement remains containing ceramics of all eras - from the X to the XII century, which indicates the cultural continuity of the population of the Don Valley, regardless of the introduction of foreign ethnic elements into it.
Of course, this branch of the Khazars was lucky compared to others. In 860 they adopted Orthodoxy from St. Cyril and thanks to this they became part of the Christian community, as a result of which they established friendship with the Crimean Goths, Greeks and Alans. And others continued to bear the burden of taxes, which the Khazar government could not reduce, even if it wanted to.
But the Khazar Jews did not suffer at all from the drought and floods. They lived in cities, in comfortable wooden houses, warm in winter and cool in summer. They bought food at the bazaar. The caravaneers passing through Itil paid for everything without haggling, as they shifted the growing costs to buyers in China and Provence. Therefore, natural (flooding) phenomena had no effect on social relations within the Jewish community: their impact was amortized in the Khazar ethnic group that housed the community. The weakening of the nomads, whose flocks were dying from lack of food, (drought) was only in the hands of the Jews: meat could be bought cheaply, and a weak enemy was not dangerous.
Therefore, in the tenth century, the activity of the Khazar government did not decrease, but increased. Consequently, violent wars were to begin... (for slave among other reasons), and they really broke out in the south and west. But not in the north! The transfer of the path of Atlantic cyclones to the forest zone was associated with heavy snowfall, prolonged summer and autumn rains and, accordingly, waterlogging of forest clearings, i.e. places most promising for primitive agriculture. The economy of the ethnic groups of the Volga-Oka interfluve was undermined. This means that the strength of their resistance to foreign invaders has weakened. If in the middle of the IX century the Khazar Jews agreed with the Normans on the partition of Eastern Europe, then by the beginning of the X century. they captured almost all of it. The Khazaria included: Burtas (on the Middle Volga), Bulgarians [3] (on the Lower Kama), Suvaz (Chuvash on the Upper Volga)[4], Arisu (Mordvinian Erzya), Cheremis (Mari, in the Volga region), Vyatichi (on the Oka), Northerners (on the Desna) and Slavs, "by which other Slavic tribes are meant"[5]. The turn of the IX-X centuries. - this is the culmination of Judeo-Khazar power and a catastrophe for the native aborigines of Eastern Europe, who faced an alternative: slavery or ruin?
46. AROUND THE CASPIAN SEA
Trade routes were the nerves of the Judean Khazaria, but the Caspian Sea is too often restless, the channels of the Volga Delta at the mouths are shallow and impassable for large naval ships, and the eastern shores are waterless and deserted. Therefore, the government did not have its own fleet, preferring to use caravan routes bypassing the Caspian Sea.
The most convenient way was from Baghdad through the Caucasus, where, after passing Derbent, merchants immediately got to Khazaria and from there to Bulgar and Great Perm. The second way went through Mera, Bukhara and Khorezm along the banks of the Amu Darya, through the Ustyurt plateau - the gateway to the country of the Turks, then crossed the Embu, Yaik, Sakmaru rivers and then went along the left bank of the Volga to Bulgar. The disadvantage of this route was that it ran through the nomads of the Guzs, Pechenegs and Bashkirs, and the latter were considered terrible thugs, and the former, when Ibn Fadlan passed through their lands, decided whether to cut the Caliph's ambassadors in half, or, stripped naked, let them go back, or give the ambassadors to the Khazars in exchange for their own, who were in captivity; but then Ibn-Fadlan was passed on.[6]
Another road from the Muslim countries of Central Asia went through the lower Emba and the lower reaches of the Yaik directly to the Volga, to Itil. This way was equipped with magnificent caravanserais made of hewn stone and wells lined with stone, at a distance of about 25 km from each other (a normal daily caravan crossing). But, despite all the measures taken, the eastern route was longer and more difficult than the western, Caucasian, and was used only when there was no other way out.
[I wish I had a map of these two routes.]
But the sea also did not remain empty: Rus ships sailed along it from Itil to Gurgan, where goods were loaded onto camels for shipment to Baghdad. Of course, this route was also under the control of the Khazar king, who was vitally interested in the merchants passing through these routes unhindered and that the income came to his treasury regularly.
Even the collapse of the caliphate did not interfere with trade operations, when the emirs ceased to obey the caliph and kept the taxes collected for themselves. In 866, the Turkic mercenaries took Baghdad and replaced the caliph with their protege. This was the end of the domination of the Arabs in the state created by their ancestors.[7]
Changes have also affected the Caucasus. In 859, Ganja was restored, where the Arab rulers from the Shayban tribe were strengthened. In 869, Hashimids, Arabs from the Sulaym tribe, came to power in Derbent. But both, being devout Sunnis, did not break off relations with Baghdad and the Sajids, the governors of Azerbaijan.[8] Therefore, the Khazar king had no reason to worry.
But it was necessary to react in a completely different way to the Shiite movement of the Iranian peoples who lived on the southern beret of the Caspian Sea. In 867, the highlanders of Tabaristan, who rebelled under the banner of the Alids, separated from the caliphate.
The regions of the Southern Caspian Sea, protected from the north by the sea, and from the south by the mighty Elbursa ridge, were a safe haven for ancient ethnic groups that preserved their de facto independence under the Seleucids and even under the Sassanids. The Arab conquest also did not disrupt the flow of life of the mountaineers of Elbursa, as well as the mountaineers of Asturias, Baskonia and Cilicia, although it caused hatred of the Arabs. The influence of Islam, adopted only in 842, was negligible, and therefore Shiite propaganda, essentially anti-Arab, found suitable ground in Daylem and Tabaristan. These mountaineers willingly went to fight not for the Alids, but against the Abbasids. And the more the Baghdad caliphate weakened, the more formidable the power of the Dalemites became, a relic that did not waste its strength like the Arabs and Persians did, and a worthy opponent of the steppe Turks, the only combat-ready army of the Sunni rulers.
The region that supplied the Khazar kings with mercenaries was Gurgan [9] - the "wolf country", located on the southeastern shore of the Caspian Sea. The warlike inhabitants of this poor land willingly justified their nickname - "wolves" - and sold their valor to those who paid for it. Officially, Gurgan was subordinate to the governor of Khorasan, where the descendants of the Persian aristocrats, the Tahirids, the faithful Sunnis, ruled.
In 872, the leader of the rebellious Shiites of Tabaristan, Hassan, invaded and conquered Gurgan, and then captured the rich cities of Qazvin and Rey (Tehran). The Khazar Jews immediately lost both the convenient caravan route and the brave mercenaries who stopped coming to Itil. The era of peacefulness is over. The war with the Shiites became an urgent necessity for the Khazar Jews.
Pagan warriors, i.e. Scandinavian Varangians, were needed for the war with the Muslims. The Khazar tsar invited Helga's (Oleg) squad, promising the Varangians the partition of Eastern Europe and support for the destruction of the Russian Khaganate and Askold.
In 882, King Oleg captured Smolensk and Kiev, and by 885 he subdued the Northerners and Radimichi, who had previously been tributaries of Khazaria. It ruined him.
47. THE DECEIVED ALLY
Neither the Varangians nor the Radonites, concluding an agreement on the division of spheres of influence, were not going to comply with it. The Varangians could not make conquests beyond the river valleys. Therefore, they compensated themselves with rich Kiev. But Kiev turned out to be a trap, because the Jews could crowd the Varangians with the steppe cavalry of their allies.
The complete conquest of Kiev by the Khazar Jews did not happen. The Cambridge Anonymous lists the enemies of the Khazar Jewish community: "Asia (the Ossetians), Bab-al-Abvab (Derbent), Zibukh (the Circassians), Turks (Hungarians), Luznia (Ladozhans, i.e. Oleg's Varangian squads)"[10], who quickly lost the war with the Khazar Jews, but stayed in Kiev, as they were covered by the Magyars from the steppe. However, soon the Magyars had a hard time, because against them and the Varangians, the Khazar Jews raised the mercenary Slavic tribes of the Tivertsy and Ulich [11]. And when in 895 The Magyars were attacked by Bulgarians and Pechenegs, who massacred their wives and children, the Magyars left Levedia and went to Pannonia, and the victorious Pechenegs occupied the abandoned steppes.[12] And Byzantium could not intervene in this war, because all the forces were connected by the Bulgarians of Tsar Simeon, who were marching along the Balkan peninsula from victory to victory. Then the isolated principality of the Kiev Varangians became a vassal of the community of Khazar Jews, which used the Rus and Slavs in wars with Christians and Shiite Muslims, suppressing the indignation of pagans by the hands of Sunni Muslim mercenaries. About 900 c . The merchant organization of the Radonites became the hegemon of Eastern Europe... But not before.[13]
The silence of the chronicler Nestor shows that in the following years Oleg did not win, and already in the early tenth century the Russian fleet operated in the Caspian Sea against the enemies of the Khazar tsar. Obviously, the Kiev Varangians began to supply the Khazar tsar with "blood tribute", (warriors). They sent Slavo-Russ subordinate to them to die for the trade routes of the Radonites.
Things turned out favorably for the Khazar king in Central Asia, where power fell into the hands of enlightened Samanids, patrons of cities, and thereby of international trade.
Map 1. Khazar Khaganate in the X century (56 KB)
http://gumilevica.kulichki.net/maps/args07.html
The numbers (at the bottom) indicate the Transcaucasian states
1 - Serir 2 - Savirs 3 - Shirvan 4 - Albania 5 - Tabasaran 6 - Egrisi 7 - Lazika 8 - Iberia 9 - Armenia 10 - Kartli 11 - Kakheti 12 - Lacs 13 - The Huns
In 900 Ismail Samani defeated the Shiite state of the Alids in the Southern Caspian region. But the local population of Gilan, Daylem and Mazanderan, who had never submitted to foreigners, took refuge in mountain castles, but the power of the Samanids in Tabaristan was illusory. As long as the Dalemites were covered from the south by the mountains of Elbursa, and from the north by the Caspian Sea, they could hold on, since "neither the Samanids nor the Khazars had a fleet"[14]. But in 909, the rooks of the Rus appeared on the sea, who defeated the island of Abaskun. The following year, the Rus attacked Mazanderan, but were defeated and left. In 913 A huge fleet of 500 ships, with the permission of the Khazar king Benjamin, entered the Caspian Sea and plundered the coasts of Gilan, Tabaristan and Shirvan. It is natural to assume that the Russians were simply invited by Tsar Benjamin to deal with the robbers-mountaineers [15]. The Rus fought the Gilyans and the Dalems, apparently without great success, and then attacked Shirvan and Baku, where the Sajids, the rulers appointed by the caliph, the Sunnis and, consequently, the friends of the Khazars were sitting, and here they turned with the ferocity characteristic of their Scandinavian leaders.
Having collected a lot of loot, the Rus returned to Itil, sent the Khazar king an agreed share and stopped to rest. Then the Muslim guard of the Khazar king demanded permission from him to take revenge on the Russians for the blood of Muslims and for the fullness of women and children. The tsar allowed it, and in a three-day battle, the Russians, tired of the campaign, were defeated. The death toll is estimated at 30 thousand people. They were killed, not taken prisoner. The remnants of the Rus fled along the Volga to the north, but were exterminated by the Burtas and Bulgars. Obviously, the Varangian inappropriate initiative caused reprisals on the part of the Khazar Muslims, especially since the defeat of the enemies of Dalem so eased the situation of the Shiites that in 913 they freed themselves from the power of the Samanids and ousted the latter from Gilan and Tabaristan.[16]
Throughout the first half of the tenth century, the Dalemites developed success. Some of them moved south, captured Fars, Kirman, Khuzistan, and finally in 945 Baghdad, where their leaders kept the caliphs under their care for 110 years. The other part subdued Azerbaijan in 914 and reached Derbent.[17] The Caspian trade was controlled by the enemies of Khazaria, more precisely, the enemies of Khazar trade.
The damage was great, but recoverable, because there was a caravan road east of the Caspian Sea. In 913, the Khazars, in alliance with the Guzes, defeated the eastern Pechenegs, who roamed between the Volga and Yaik.[18] This partially compensated them for the loss of their allies in Transcaucasia - the Sajids, but the domination of the rude and ferocious Dalemites in Iran and Azerbaijan poisoned the lives of the Khazar Jews.
And the most annoying thing was that it was impossible to send loyal Sunni mercenaries from Gurgan against them, because the ruler of the faithful, the caliph of Baghdad, gave orders through the Dalem emirs, and they did not allow him to order the killing of their brothers by the hands of Muslims. Consequently, it was necessary to raise the Rus again to the war for the trade interests of the Jewish community, and the Russ, after the betrayal of 913, did not seek to repeat the campaigns to the Caspian.
Of course, it would be possible to mobilize the Khazars themselves, at least that part of them that was converted to Orthodoxy back in the VIII century, but the government did not dare to do this, I think, with good reason. The Khazars had no benefits from trade, and they had nothing to fight for. Therefore, events flowed in a different direction.
48. ENEMIES OF THE RENEWED KHAZARIA
It has always been known that war is a difficult and unpleasant business. But there are things worse than war: enslavement, insulting revered shrines, plundering property and, finally, insulting neglect. All this fell to the lot of the peoples of Eastern Europe after they found themselves in the sphere of influence of the Jewish Khazaria. The ethnic differences between them did not give them the opportunity to unite. And the Itil government could easily set them against each other, using old, but not forgotten intertribal accounts.
Back in the IX century, King Benjamin waged war against the Aces (Ossetians), "Turks" (Magyars), "Paynils" (Pechenegs) and "Macedon" (Byzantines). Benjamin defeated a coalition of opponents with the help of Alan. Then King Aaron defeated the Alans with the help of Torcs (Guz) in the early tenth century. M.I. Artamonov dates this event to 932 and connects with it the persecution of Christianity, from which Aaron forced the defeated Alans to renounce.
In 922, the head of the Kama Bulgarians Almush converted to Islam and separated his state from Khazaria, counting on the help of the caliph of Baghdad, who was supposed to forbid Muslim mercenaries to fight against their co-religionists. In addition, he asked the caliph for money to build a fortress against "the Jews who enslaved him."
The Caliph ordered to sell the confiscated estate of the executed vizier and hand over the money to the ambassador Ibn-Fadlan, but the buyer "could not" catch up with the caravan of the embassy [19], and the fortress in Bulgar was not built, and the Khorezmians in the tenth century. they no longer paid attention to the orders of the weakened Baghdad caliphs, since they concerned not with spiritual, but worldly affairs.
Apostasy did not strengthen, but weakened the Great Bulgars. One of the three Bulgarian tribes - the Suvaz (ancestors of the Chuvash) - refused to convert to Islam and fortified themselves in the forests of the Volga region. The split Bulgarian state could not compete with the Jewish Khazaria.[20]
The situation of the Guzs was similar. In 921, one of their leaders converted to Islam, but his tribesmen offered him a renunciation, either of the new faith or of power. [21] Guz returned to the ancient gods.
So, attempts to get rid of the Jews with the help of Muslims were doomed to failure. This was taken into account by the Russ and Slavs (the glades), put by the Varangian invaders in a position by no means favorable, which was diligently obscured by the chronicler Nestor. Fortunately, we have the opportunity to fill in the blank information he omitted.
The Khazars did not have their own coins, using Arabic dirgems. Some part of this money, of course, remained with the subjects of the Khazar king. The area of dirgems with Kufic inscriptions in 883-900 reached the eastern border of the Russian land, i.e. they were used by northerners who were in the sphere of influence of Khazaria.[22] After 900, dirgems appear in the treasures of the Russian land, which indicates its inclusion in the economic system of Khazaria. These dirgems are not spoils of war, because victories are always reflected in the annals. This is payment for services on the Caspian Sea in 909-910, i.e. for the blood of the Slavic-Russian heroes, shed for the sake of other people's interests, for the suppression of the Drevlyans in 914, for the war with the Pechenegs in 920, for the betrayal committed by Tsar Benjamin in 913, which went unpunished, and for many things that contemporaries tried not to notice and descendants tried to forget. There are no reasons to praise Oleg the Prophetic.
It goes without saying that the Varangian government could not be popular among the Slavic population of the Dnieper. This was noticed by S.M. Solovyov, although he did not have the information now included in the arsenal of science. Oleg is considered by him not as a brave warrior, but as a cunning politician and a collector of tribute from defenseless Slavic tribes.[23] And so it was.
If we believe the chronicle, which does not mark a single event of national history from 920 to 941, then we must recognize the Russians as cowards and philistines, unable either to avenge the betrayed and murdered compatriots, or to defend their goods from the tribute collectors who transported the looted property to Itil. But it is necessary to not believe the chronicles, but the totality of information: the latter show that the Khazar Jews had to suppress popular movements all the time and the Russ gave them a lot of trouble. In addition, the international situation was changing, and this greatly affected the fate of Jews, not only the Khazar, but also the neighboring ones. And this, in turn, had an impact on the Khazarian foreign policy.
Khazar Jews could not be afraid of Muslims divided into parties and sultanates, but they had to reckon with the growing power of Byzantium, where the Macedonian dynasty came to power. All Orthodox Christians were potential allies of Byzantium, and their number grew thanks to the activities of Cyril and Methodius. In 867, the first baptism of Russia took place [24], and it is unlikely to be erroneous to assume that the Varangian conquest stopped the communion of Russia to Orthodoxy. And who would benefit from it? Only Khazar Jews!
Of course, the Greeks could not rejoice over such an occasion, especially since the Khazar trade fed Baghdad, and the Khazar diplomacy incited the Bulgarians to Constantinople. On the other hand, the Byzantine Jews did not show affection for countries where they were disliked and offended. Therefore, "a number of Jews joined him (the Khazar king) from Muslim countries and from the Byzantine Empire." According to Masudi, "the reason is that the emperor, who now reigns (in 943) and bears the name Armanus (Roman), converted the Jews of his country to Christianity by force and did not like them... and a large number of Jews fled from Rum to the country of the Khazars". [25] It is quite understandable that relations between Christians and Jews have escalated, and... blood has flowed.
49. THE EXPLOITS OF THE COMMANDER PESACH
The Greek-Khazar conflict, which reflected the Armenian-Jewish rivalry,[26] could not go unnoticed in Russia.[27] There should have been hope in Kiev to get rid of the burdensome alliance with Khazaria by an alliance with distant Byzantium. Therefore, Roman Lekapin's emissaries were able to "incite" [28] the Prince of Kiev to participate in the Byzantine war against the Khazars, which began in 939. [29]
The war was unleashed by the Khazar king Joseph, who "overthrew many uncircumcised", i.e. killed many Christians. Unfortunately, the source is silent about where the executions were carried out, but apparently Christians who lived inside the Khazars suffered, since there is no mention of the campaign. These executions were considered as a response to the persecution of Jews in Byzantium, but it should be noted that the Khazar Christians were not guilty of the actions of the Byzantine emperor.
Then the Russ came out. Their leader in the source is called X-l-gu (Helgu, i.e. Oleg), although according to the "Tale of Bygone Years" Igor the Old ruled at that time. If Helgu is a proper name, then it was the namesake of the Prophetic Oleg, but rather it is the title of the Scandinavian leader, i.e. Igor himself is meant, because Helgu is called "the tsar of Russia". [30] In 939 (or at the beginning of 940), Helga took the city of S-m-k-rai (Samkerts, on the shore of the Kerch Strait) by a sudden night attack, "because there was no chief there, slave Hashmonai." Apparently, the Rus attack was a surprise for the Khazar king.
At the same time, another Russian rat, the army, led by voivode Sveneld, conquered the Ulich tribe that lived in the lower reaches of the Dniester and Bug. The Jews fought against the Kievan prince as early as 885 [31] and, of course, were in alliance with the Khazars. Then they managed to defend their independence from Kiev. Finally, the Rus troops, after a three-year siege that ended in 940, took the stronghold of the streets - the city was Crossed and imposed tribute on them in favor of the voivode Sveneld. [32] From here it can be seen that the war was waged over a vast territory, very thoughtfully and purposefully. This does not look at all like a random border incident or a predatory raid by Varangian vigilantes.
The Khazar king responded to the blow with a blow. The commander "venerable Pesach" liberated Samkerts, threw the Rus from the shores of the Sea of Azov, invaded the Crimea, took three Greek cities there, where he "beat men and women", but was stopped by the walls of Chersonesos, where the surviving Christian population of the Crimea was saved.
Then Pesach went to Helga, i.e. he approached Kiev, devastated the country and forced Helga, against his will, to fight with former allies-the Byzantines for the triumph of the merchant community of Itil. All these events are omitted in the Russian chronicle, with the exception of the subsequent campaign against Byzantium. This is understandable: it is sad to write about the defeat of your country, but this defeat is confirmed by new indirect data.
Around 940, the Dnieper left bank fell away from the Kiev Principality (the Northerners and the Radimichi subsequently had to be conquered anew).[33] The Russ gave the winner their best weapon - swords [34] and, apparently, pledged to pay tribute collected from the tribes of the right bank, i.e. from the Drevlyans (see below). The conquered lands of the Ulich and Tivertsy - in the lower reaches of the Dniester and the Danube - fell into the hands of the Pechenegs.[35] The Krivichi were freed and created an independent Polotsk Principality. A fragment of Varangian Russia turned from an unequal ally of the Khazar Khaganate into a vassal, forced to pay tribute with the blood of his heroes.
The Russians had absolutely no reasons to fight the Greeks for. Nestor could not think of a suitable motive for the campaign and limited himself to a bare statement of facts. But the Jewish anonymous (source) revealed the causes of the tragedy. Not without pride, he attributed it to the pressure of the "honorable Pesach" on the Russian Prince Helga (the Greeks also do not know the name of Igor), who "fought against the Custantina at sea for four months. And his heroes fell there, because the Macedonians overcame him with fire. And he fled, and was ashamed to return to his own country, and went by sea to Persia, and he and his whole camp fell there. Then the Rus became subordinate to the power of the Khazars".[36]
This war took place in 941. Its terrible consequences for Russian heroes are described in the "Tale of Bygone Years", despite the efforts of the chronicler to present the events more carefully. Ten thousand ships landed troops on the northern coast of Asia Minor, and such atrocities began, which were unusual even in those days. Russ crucified prisoners (sic), shot them with bows, drove nails into skulls; burned monasteries and churches,[37] despite the fact that many Russ converted to Orthodoxy back in 867. All this points to a war of a completely different nature than the other wars of the tenth century. Apparently, the Russian soldiers had experienced and influential instructors, and not only the Scandinavians. The Greeks pulled up their forces, dropped the landing into the sea and burned the Russian boats with Greek fire. (It is something that burns but is not extinguished with water, so used as a weapon in the navy; probably with catapults). Who of the Russians did not burn, drowned. The Khazar Jews got rid of both possible opponents.
According to the "Tale of Bygone Years", the campaign against Byzantium was repeated in 944. A.A.Shakhmatov considers the story of this campaign an invention, but apparently he is wrong.[38] In 943-944, the Khazar Jews threw the surviving Russian soldiers into Arran (Azerbaijan), where the Dalem Shiites settled.
During the landing, the Rus defeated the troops of the ruler of Arran Mar-Zuban ibn-Muhammad and took the city of Berdaa on the banks of the Kura. Marzuban blocked the fortress, and in constant skirmishes both sides suffered heavy losses. However, dysentery turned out to be more terrible than the arrows and sabers of Dalem. The epidemic broke out in the camp of the Rus. After the leader of the Rus was killed in one of the skirmishes, they made their way to the shore and sailed back to Khazaria. [39]
So, but it remains unclear where they went then. Not one returned to Russia, because then the chronicler would not have dared to keep silent about such a significant campaign, as he did not omit the invasion of the Russian fleet in Asia Minor, although the defeat there did not beautify the Rus.
Maybe all the rooks of the Rus drowned in the Caspian Sea? The way from the mouth of the Kura to the Volga delta is considerable, the sea is stormy... anything can happen. But the Russ did not swim in the open sea, but along the Caucasian coast, and in the event of a mass shipwreck, one of them would have reached the shore. And the relations of Russia with Derbent in the tenth century were not interrupted. So, even if the escaped Russ were sold into slavery, then in this case they would have given news of themselves to their homeland. No, the hypothesis of a shipwreck in which 20 thousand [40] experienced sailors would have died is so unlikely that it can be rejected.
But let us recall that in Khazaria there was a law on the death penalty of soldiers who did not win a victory. Russ fell entirely under it. And there is nothing to puzzle over, looking for other reasons for the disappearance of the allied army, especially since in 913 the situation was similar, and the end is known. It was even easier here: it was not difficult to kill the sick and recovering, so the action was held without noise.
It is simply amazing how ordinary people, both ancient and modern, cannot imagine stereotypes of behavior other than their own, familiar, and how expensive it costs them every time they meet with a different superethnos. The average man does not learn from someone else's experience, and, in addition, the Varangian commanders of the Slavic "wars" were not sorry. Another tragedy in the Caspian Sea has passed without a trace.
Simultaneously with the Caspian tragedy, a second one occurred - the Black Sea one. In the same 944, Igor the Old led a huge land army of Varangians, Rus, mobilized Slavs and Pechenegs who joined them, as well as a fleet to Byzantium, as if the Greek fire had taught him nothing. If we consider this campaign an attempt at revenge, then its organization seems to be super-strange. Wooden boats in the open sea had already demonstrated their weakness in front of ships armed with Greek fire; the Slavic army on foot went without a rear, i.e. without supplies, and the alliance with the Pechenegs could hardly be considered reliable. Such an operation could have been decided only under Khazar pressure, but everything ended well.
The grandiose campaign turned out to be just a military demonstration. The Greeks offered acceptable terms of peace, which was concluded at the end of 944.[41] Igor took his diverse army home. But something else is interesting here - dates. It was possible to move the army from Kiev to the Danube only in autumn, so that the soldiers fed on the enemy's fields. In the autumn, from September, [42] Polyudye began, and, as you know, Igor went to collect tribute from the Drevlyans. It means that the campaign was led not by him, but by one of his voivodes, most likely Sveneld, whose youths scored a lot of loot in Bulgaria. Igor's warriors decided to make up for lost time by looting Drevlyans.[43] The tragic outcome of this collision is known.
The ally of the Judeo-Khazar merchant power was the Baghdad Caliphate. It was through trade with the world centers of slavery, Baghdad and Cordoba, that the rulers of Itil became rich. The enemy of Judeo-Khazaria was the Bundist power from Dalem, which had already captured Western Iran. Her troops stood at the walls of Baghdad and captured it in the following year, 945.
Byzantium should have rejoiced at the humiliation of its long-time rival if his role as the leader of Muslims in the holy war against the Greeks had not been intercepted by the Hamdanid dynasty - the emirs of Mosul, and the title of caliph was not appropriated by the Emir of Spain Abdarrahman III. The ships of the Spanish pirates plied the entire Mediterranean Sea to Crete, where these Arab-Berber robbers set up a base for their fleet. Therefore, it was difficult for the Greeks to fight on two fronts, and they hurried to make peace.
The Judeo-Khazar government did not care which Muslim ruler bore the title of caliph, since both of them bought furs, honey and slaves. But, having captured by 944 a huge territory - up to the Dnieper and the upper Volga, Tsar Joseph could not help but be afraid of his warlike subjects. Therefore, he sent Russian squads on campaigns, shifting the worries of collecting tribute and protecting trade routes to Prince Igor. The decrease in the number of Rus weakened the Kiev prince and made him an obedient vassal, a collector of tribute from the right-bank Dnieper Slavs. Igor needed a squad for this, and it had to be replenished with Slavs. This gave the course of events a turn that King Joseph could not have foreseen.
Now let's try to calculate what the union with Tsar Joseph cost Russia. In 913, there were 500 Russian ships on the Caspian Sea and 100 soldiers on each: a total of 50 thousand soldiers, according to Masudi.[44] None returned.
This figure is doubtful by V.V.Mavrodin.[45] According to chronicle data, the Russian boat could accommodate only 40 people, so there were no more than 20 thousand Rus[46], the same as in 943. However, if we take into account the tremendous losses of the Rus on the Black Sea just two years ago, it is clear that the Russ fielded more troops in 913 than in 943. Therefore, Masudi's testimony deserves preference. Apparently, there were from 35 to 50 thousand Russians.[47]
But if so, then much becomes clear: A.A.Shakhmatov's skepticism towards Nestor's message about Igor's second campaign to Byzantium, which coincides with the Arran catastrophe by date; the weakening of the Kievans and Igor's death in the Drevlyansky land, which was actually liberated and captured under Olga only by betrayal; the appearance of a Jewish quarter in Kiev. The latter, as the most important, requires proof.
The letter of the Spanish vizier Hasdai ibn Shafrut was delivered to the Khazar king Joseph around 954-961 [48] in this way: to the "Israelites living in the land of the Tungars" (Hungarians), from there to Russia, then to the Bulgars. [49] From Bulgar, the letter reached the addressee. Consequently, Jews lived not only on the Tisa and Kama, but also on the Dnieper. It was a "gift" of the Varangian kings to the Kievans who accepted them. So, in three years of alliance with Tsar Joseph, the Rus suffered two heavy defeats and lost many brave soldiers. But even if they had won, the victory would have given them nothing, because it was impossible to gain a foothold in Asia Minor or Transcaucasia, and it was not necessary. Both wars were conducted exclusively in the interests of the merchant community of Itil. It seemed that the Slavo-Russ should share the bitter fate of the Turkic Khazars.
50. WHO IS TO BLAME?
It may seem that the aggression in the interests of the merchant elite of the Jewish community, carried out by the hands of Khorezm mercenaries and militant Rus, was the fruit of the evil will of the Khazar kings Benjamin, Aaron and Joseph with the connivance of the Khazar kagans, whose names history has not preserved. Indeed, a lot of blood was shed, innocent inhabitants of the Black and Caspian Seas coasts died, Russian heroes laid down their heads for someone else's cause, Khazars were robbed and insulted daily, Alans lost their Christian shrines, Slavs paid tribute to the white of smoke, just so that they would not be touched by the Pechenegs, the Guzs did not close their eyes, guarding their tents from a surprise attack. This permanent disgrace was hard for all peoples, except for the merchant elite of Itil and the mercenaries who served them, but the latter paid for decent maintenance with their blood.
If we try to condemn the Jewish community of Khazaria for this situation, the question immediately arises: what was to wait for? The Jews came to Khazaria as a result of the persecution they were subjected to in Iran for their proximity to the Mazdakites, and in Byzantium for cooperation with the Arabs caused by trade rivalry with the Greeks and Armenians. Both of them were no less skilled in trading operations than the Jews, and besides, they enjoyed the support of their government. The Jews, in order to bypass their competitors, took advantage of the support of another government, the Arab one, but the caliphs demanded their help in military operations, for example, the surrender of Christian fortresses, which entailed the sale into slavery of all Christians who were not killed during the capture of the city, and the desecration of Christian shrines. Naturally, the relatives and co-religionists of the victims sought revenge.
The pagan allies of the Khazars did the same with Muslim cities, with the only exception that the Khazar Jews sacrificed the hired Dalem Shiites - mountaineers who did not know how to trade. But in 945, the leader of the Dalemites entered Baghdad and began to rule on behalf of the caliph, having the title "Amir al-Umar" (emir of emirs - commander-in-chief). This meant that the Khazar Jews had lost the Caspian war. They had to focus on the allied Central Asia and the newly conquered Eastern Europe.
The Jewish community received the military force it needed from Central Asia and paid for it with tribute from Eastern Europe. But could she have done otherwise? After all, having let go of power, she lost both accumulated wealth and control over transit trade, and consequently, all means of livelihood. The townspeople and merchants could not return to farming and cattle breeding, because they did not have the skills necessary for these occupations. Having lost power, they lost their wealth, and after that, their lives. Therefore, they had to hold on and win.
But victories and the expansion of a power do not always lead to prosperity and sustainability. The conquest of a strong ethnic group sometimes costs more than the income that can be obtained. This was shown first by the Kama Bulgarians, who were freed from the Khazar hegemony. After the Bulgarians, under unclear circumstances, Guza and Pechenegs achieved independence. All of them became enemies of the Judeo-Khazars.
The victories of Pesach allowed the Khazar tsar to transfer tax oppression to the Russian population of the Dnieper region, because the Varangian kings were ready to pay for their rest with tribute collected from the Slavs, less organized and therefore less dangerous. And further events followed from this.
So, if we apply human ethnic norms to the historical process, then the Varangians can be blamed for the troubles of the Russian land, of course, not for the fact that they captured Kiev by deception, because deception in the war is not a betrayal of the trusted, and not for the fact that they robbed the conquered Slavic tribes, since they did not defend their own freedom, preferring to pay tribute, and for the fact that, having led the tribe of the glades, then called Russia, these kings "brilliantly lost" all the wars: with the Greeks, the Pechenegs, the Dalemites and the Khazar Jews. It is disgusting that they, having seized the initiative from the Rus, brought the country to complete collapse and turned it into a vassal of the Khazar kings. But even worse, having given the Khazar Jews their swords as tribute, i.e. essentially disarming their army, these usurpers threw their heroes at opponents armed with Greek fire or light curved sabers. This is such irresponsibility, such disregard for the duties of the ruler that any excuses are inappropriate.
However, the small Varangian squads could not stay in a foreign country without the support of some groups of the local population. These pro-Varangian "gostomysly"[50] are perhaps more to blame than all others, since they sacrificed their homeland and the lives of their fellow tribesmen for their own selfish interests. And there was resistance to the Varangians even in Novgorod, although information about it was preserved only in the late Nikon chronicle [51]. However, it is trustworthy. The "Westerner" Nestor would have no need to compose a "Norman theory" of the origin of Russia and to hush up the ancient, free, glorious period of the history of the Russian Kaganate, if it were not for the need to convince those who were skeptical of the stories about the exploits of the Varangian kings. And there were probably a lot of such people in Ancient Russia.
But in addition to an emotional attitude to long-past facts, an objective analysis of them is necessary. The friends of the Varangians, whether they wanted it or not, contributed to the inclusion of Russian land in the world market, which at that time was under the control of the Jewish Khazaria. Russia supplied furs, tin and slaves to the world market, but received nothing in return, as it supplied these goods as tribute.
That is why Prince Igor the Old, collecting tribute in the country of the Drevlyans, was forced to release part of his squad, after which he was killed by the Drevlyans [52]. The squad had to be paid with the same tribute, but from it was necessary to send tribute to Khazaria so that the commander Pesach would not repeat the campaign. Igor was more afraid of the Khazars and decided to collect the required amount at the lowest cost. Therefore, he began to save on "safety measures" and ruined not only himself, but also his supporters. But you shouldn't feel sorry for him. Thanks to his oversight, Russia regained its freedom and glory.
And now let's make a conclusion that suggests itself. It is absurd to blame the ancient ethnic groups for the fact that they defended their vital interests and either won and dealt with the defeated, or died in the struggle. But those who took up the case and lost solely because of laziness and frivolity, which put the confidant in a difficult position, can and should be condemned. This was understood by the ancient Russ and Slavs, who replaced not only rulers, but also enemies.
NOTES
[1] See: Gumilev L.N. The Discovery of Khazaria; aka, The heterochrony of humidification of Eurasia in the Middle Ages // Vestn. LSU. 1966. No. 18. pp. 81-90; The origins of the rhythm of the nomadic culture of Central Asia (The experience of historical and geographical synthesis) // Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1966. No. 4. pp. 85-94.
[2] See: Gribanov L.N. Change of the southern border of the pine area in Kazakhstan // Bulletin of Agricultural Science (Alma-Ata). 1965. No. 6. pp. 78-86.
[3] The son of the Bulgarian Elteber was a hostage of the Khazars, and "the Khazar king demanded daughters for himself in the harem" (Kovalevsky A.P. Decree, op.C.141).
[4] See: Kovalevsky A.P. Decree.op. p.139 and note 599.
[5] Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars.P.385.
[6] See: Kovalevsky A.P. Decree. op. p. 129.
[7] Muller A. History of Islam. Vol. II. p. 223.
[8] See: Minorsky V.F. Decree. op. p. 40.
[9] Gurgan - from the Persian word "gurg" - wolf; this is ancient Hyrkania, in Arabic - Jurjan.
[10] Kokovtsov P.K. Decree. op. p. 123.
[11] PVL.Ch. 1. P. 21.
[12] Grousset R. L'Empire des Steppes. Paris, 1960. P.238.
[13] See: Gumilev L.N. The Legend of the Khazar tribute (experience of critical commentary) // Russian Literature. 1974. No. 3. pp. 171-173.
[14] Masudi; cit.by: Minorsky V.F. Decree. Op . p.198-201.
[15] They are called "Ajam", i.e. "non-Muslims". See: Minorsky V.F. Decree. op. p. 199.
[16] See: Petrushevsky I.P. Decree.op. p.249.
[17] See: Minorsky A.V. Decree. op. P. 215.
[18] Grousset R. L'Empire. P. 238.
[19] See: Kovalevsky A.P. Decree. op. P. 133.
[20] Ibid., p. 139.
[21] Ibid., p. 127.
[22] See: Shirinsky S.S. Objective regularities and subjective factor in the formation of the Old Russian state // Leninist ideas in the study of primitive society, slavery and feudalism. M., 1970. pp. 203-206.
[23] See: Solovyov S.M. The history of Russia since ancient times.
[24] See: History of Byzantium. Vol. II. P. 229.
[25] Cit.by: Minorsky V.F. Decree. Op. p. 193.
[26] Basil the Macedonian was an Armenian who migrated to Macedonia. The era of the Macedonian dynasty was a time of predominance of Armenians at court and in administration.
[27] Russia in the narrow sense included three cities: Kiev, Chernihiv and Pereyaslav.
[28] See: Kokovtsov P.K. Decree. op. p. 117.
[29] This war is described in detail by an anonymous Cambridge Jewish author of the XII century. Despite the amorphous nature of the narrative, the authenticity of the events is confirmed by historical analysis (see: Gumilev L.N. The Legend of the Khazar tribute ... p. 168).
[30] See: Kokovtsev N.K. Decree. op. p. 117.
[31] PVL. Ch. II. p. 254.
[32] See: Shakhmatov A.A. Searches... pp.102-103.
[33] See: Zaitsev A.K. Chernigov Principality//The Old Russian principalities of the X-XIII centuries. M., 1975. pp. 67-68.
[34] See: Gumilev L.N. The Legend of the Khazar tribute ... p. 170.
[35] See: Berlin I. Decree.op. pp.147-149.
[36] Kokovtsov P.K. Decree. op. p. 120.
[37] PVL. Part 1. pp. 33, 230.
[38] See; Shakhmatov A.A. "The Tale of Bygone Years" and its sources. p. 72; D.S. Likhachev disputes this opinion, relying on the conclusion in 945 of a treaty beneficial for Russia. However, according to his clarification, Igor was killed in the autumn of 944 (see: PVL. Ch. II. p. 288, 295), therefore, the contract was already concluded with Olga's government, after a sharp turn in political orientation.
[39] For an analysis of hypotheses about the Rus' campaigns on the Caspian Sea, see: Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars. pp. 374-380. For criticism of the proposed hypotheses, see: Gumilev L.N. The Legend of the Khazar tribute.
[40] See: Artamonov M.I. Voevoda Sveneld//Culture of Ancient Russia. M., 1966. P. 33; Froyanov I.Ya. Kievan Rus. P.189.
[41] PVL. Ch. II. P. 289.
[42] Ibid. P. 295.
[43] The squad said to Igor: "The boys of Sven'zhi have changed the essence of weapons and ports, and we are pazi" (PVL. 4.1. P. 39).
[44] See: Bartold V.V. Essays. Vol.II. Ch.1. M., 1963. P.829.
[45] See: Mavrodin V.V. Essays on the history of feudal Russia. L., 1949. p.47.
[46] See: Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars. P.371.
[47] See: Rybakov B.A. Military affairs//The history of the culture of Ancient Russia. M.; L., 1948. p. 400.
[48] See: Artamonov M.I. Decree. op. p.8.
[49] See: Gumilevsky F. Decree. op. p. 94.
[50] In later chronicles, this word is personified in a proper name - "elder Gostomysl" (see: PVL. Ch. II. p. 214), the meaning of the term is sympathetic to foreigners.
[51] "...Offend novogorodtsi, verbally, as if we were a slave and suffered a lot of evil in every way from Rurik and for his sake... That same summer, did Rurik kill Vadim the Brave and many other Novgorodians ?? Will you get rid of them?? his."
[52] According to Nestor's dry report, "the Drevlyans killed Igor and his squad." Lev the Deacon reports that Igor, captured, "was tied to two trees and torn into two parts" (Lev the Deacon. History in ten books (hereinafter: Lev the Deacon) / Translated by M.M.Kopylenko. Book IV. Chapter 10. St. Petersburg, 1820. p. 66). The year of Igor's death is confused by the chronicler: instead of 945, 944 is necessary (see: PVL. 4.11. p. 295).
.