3. Khazars Book, historical section
There are tons of details and mini-stories in this book. Do you need them for understanding? I don’t know, but I haven’t seen another history written like this.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
Although the Vikings were Scandinavians or Balts by birth, they were not representative of their own peoples. A passional push caused ethnic divergence. Young men who left their homeland for Greenland or Normandy, the green island of Erin, or the shores of the azure Mediterranean Sea, formed an independent ethnic consortia, sometimes perishing, sometimes triumphant. And because they were dispersed throughout Europe, their meeting with the Judeo-Khazars was foreseen. And its nature was determined by the historical background in which it occurred. There are no sources covering this page of history; therefore, again it is necessary to look at the balance of power in order to grasp at least the general direction of events.
As has been shown, already in the ninth century, after the actual split of the church, Byzantium became an eastern kingdom, isolated from all its neighbors, who became first rivals, then enemies. Bound by permanent war with Bulgaria and unsuccessful attempts to keep southern Italy from the onslaught of the Arabs, Byzantium could not actively resist the strengthening of the Khazar kings, so Orthodoxy lost its positions in Dagestan and the North Caucasus, barely keeping the southern coast of Crimea.
Charlemagne's attempt to create a super-ethnic Christian empire of the Germans in the West, just as in the East there was a similar empire of the Greeks, was not promising, but the growing passionarity in the IX century toppled this grand structure, as if it was a house of cards.
By 888 the "territorial revolution" [56, p.247] had taken place, i.e. the ethnic groups, called "nations" by O. Thierry appeared: Breton, Acquitan, Provençal, French, Burgundian, Italian and German, the latter consisting of sub-ethnic "tribes" of Saxons, Francons, Bavarians, Swabs (Alemans) and Thuringians. All of them spent their forces fighting each other, and therefore resisted the attacks of the Arabs and Normans very poorly. For the Khazars they were not dangerous. [306-307] But the Khazar Jews were dangerous to France, for by coming with much money to Provence they bought the patronage of the king and nobles and protection from persecution by the clergy and people. The exasperation on both sides grew. The Jews retained more vestiges of ancient learning than the French, and so defeated the Christians in the disputes that arose over the Old Testament. Their propaganda was successful. A young monk from Alemania converted to Judaism in 847, married a Jewess, went to Spain, and there incited the Arabs to persecute the Christians. The bishops of Gaul complained that Jews bought Christian slaves and made them perform Jewish rites, that they abducted Christian children and sold them to Muslims, that Jews, out of hatred for their rivals, helped Muslims and Normans by opening gates of besieged cities, and that they called pork "Christian meat," to which Christians took great offense [9, vol. V, pp. 487- 488].
It is difficult to say what was true in these accusations, but what is important for us is that the mutual bitterness and animosity between the natives and the Jews in the Rhone threatened the French with the same consequences as the Jewish infiltration of the Volga. Provence could easily have turned into a likeness of Khazaria, especially since the military strength of the Berbers, who willingly hired themselves into the armies of neighboring countries, was no less than that of the Khorezmians. But for this, in addition to a lot of money, time was needed, and that was exactly what the Jews lacked. Why is that? We shall see below.
For now, let us note that there was an agreement between the Khazar Jews and the Gentile Normans. "The Tale of Bygone Years" reports that in 859 "Varangians from Overseas" were charging tribute from the Chuds, Slavs, Meri and Kriviches, and the Khazars - from the Polans, Northerners and Vyatichi. If we take into account that in 860 Kievan Rus attacked Constantinople and almost took it, in the European balance of power, the text is suggestive.
p137 (Russian page number)
If they really were subjects of the Khazars, this could not but cause a Khazar-Byzantine conflict, but instead the Khazar kagan this very year accepted the mission of St. Cyril and allowed him to baptize pagans in his capital. Cyril made the trip in a most peaceful environment, from which it follows that Russia, which was at war with the Greeks, was in no way connected with the Khazars and their government.
There were several kings in Sweden about 859: Bjorn Priholmny, his co-rulers Emund and Olaf. Emund's son Erik in 854 raided the east and taxed the Kurs, the Estonians and the Finns, but, as the list shows, he only acted along the shores of the Baltic Sea, while the Krivic, Merya (Cheremians) and Veps lived in the Eastern European woodlands. If any of the Swedish kings had subjugated such vast lands, it would have been noted at least in the sagas. The Catholic missionary St. Ansgar, who preached in Sweden in 849-852 and maintained relations with the Swedes until his death in 865, does not mention it either. [60, с. 165-173]. So there is something else here.
Let us compare the facts. In 848 Gentile Normans sacked and burned Bordeaux thanks to the treachery of the Jews there (9, vol. V, p. 489]. Since the latter were not harmed by the Vikings, we must assume that there was a connection between them and the others. And the text of the "Tale of Bygone Years" explains what it was. It is a treaty on the division of spheres of influence, not the countries conquered, but those that were to be conquered. That is why data about the existence of an independent Russian Kaganate, intended to become a victim of the two predators, is omitted. Indeed, the century that followed was rich in events, both in the West and in the East.
The history of Varangian penetration into Slavic lands is rather dark. According to the annalistic tradition, the Varangian konung Rurik became the ruler of Novgorod in 862. We will not discuss this question, because we adhere to a generally accepted point of view. For us it suffices that long before that, the Russ living around Kiev, made the campaigns recorded by foreign historians. Till 842 "Scythian people of Russ" ruined Amastrada (in Paphlagonia, on coast of Black Sea), and in 860 the fleet of Russ almost did take Constantinople. To Rurik and his Vikings these dews had no attitude.
Russ was at war with Bulgarian in 864, with Polochak's in 865, with Pechenegian in 867, with Krivichi in 869. However, with such an active foreign policy had no clashes with the Khazars: the mission of St. Cyril to Khazaria in 860, I repeat, took place in a peaceful environment. This speaks not about the peaceful nature of the Khazar government, but about the power of Kiev, the alliance of Ruses with the Magyars and the complexity of the situation on the Caspian Sea, which is discussed below.
But everything changed in 882, when the power in Kiev was seized by Varangian konung, whose name in the chronicles is Oleg (Helgi). Since that time up to 944 i.e. murder of konung named [308-309] Igor (Ingvar), Russian land has suffered a lot, caused - in our deep belief - by constant failures of untalented foreign rulers.
The change of power in Kiev entailed a change of policy. Oleg subdued Drevlyans in 883, Northerners in 884, and Radimichs in 885, and the latter were paying tribute to the Khazars before that. This could not but cause a war with the Khazars... and the annals fell silent for a full 80 years. It cannot be accidental.
The lacuna is partially filled by a brief note of Masudi that "Ruses and Slavs are servants of the Khazar king" [3, p. 383]. And, as we shall soon see, so it was.
No! The complete conquest of Kiev by the Khazar Jews did not happen. In "Cambridge Anonymus" the enemies of the Khazar Judean community are listed: "Asiya (Ases-Ossetians). Bab al-Abvab (Derbent), Zibukh (Zikhi-Circassians), Turks (Hungarians), Luznia - the Ladoga people, i.e. Oleg's Varyagian friends, who quickly lost the war with the Khazar Jews [27], but were kept in Kiev, because they were covered by Magyars from the steppe. However soon Magyar had it hard, because against them and Vikings Khazarian Jews have lifted Slavic tribes Tivers and Ulic. When in 895 the Magyars were attacked by the Bulgars and Pechenegs, who slaughtered their wives and children, the Magyars left Leveda and went to Pannonia, and the steppes they had left were occupied by the victorious Pechenegs. And Byzantium could not interfere in this war, because its forces were bound by King Simeon's Bulgarians, marching across the Balkan Peninsula from victory to victory. Then the isolated principality of the Kiev Vikings became a vassal of the Khazar Jewish community, which used Russ and Slavs in wars with Christians and Shiite Muslims, suppressing outrages against pagans at the hands of mercenary Sunni Muslims.
The Wrath of the Elements
A rigid system is only as good as its creation, because it is adjusted to the local conditions in the best possible way. But when the environment changes, it is difficult to rebuild the system. Conversely, a discrete system is elastic but does not allow for the complete coordination of forces for foreign policy objectives. Therefore, rigid systems win under stable conditions, while discrete systems survive even under constantly changing habitat and ethnic environment. [309- 310]
p138
Judean Khazaria is an example of a rigid system, the Eurasian ethnic groups surrounding Khazaria are discrete systems. In the ninth and tenth centuries, changes in the geographical environment (due to the transfer of cyclones to the north, in the forest zone of Eurasia) could be either useful or harmful, but not neutral, for the ethno-economic systems. And since the interests of the Jews and Khazars in the chimerical integrity of the Kaganate were opposite, the climatic fluctuations were reflected in the history of Eastern Europe and the Great Steppe.
As long as the steppes were moistening and the marshes in the Volga-Oka interfluves were drying out, the Caspian Sea was behaving quietly. It stood at an absolute mark - minus 36 m, due to which vast areas of fertile land in the lower reaches of the Volga were inhabited by farmers. By the beginning of the 10th century, when the Volga turned from a quiet river into a turbulent stream that collected the moisture of the rains that fell over a vast area from the Valday to the Urals, the level of the Caspian Sea rose to a mark of - 29 m (7 meters) [20, 21,22].
For the inhabitants of the southern edge of the Caspian Sea, this did not matter much. The coasts there are steep, surrounded by mountains, the sea rose, flooded the coastal fortress... So be it. However, the sea level rise was of great importance for the gentle northern shore. Fields, orchards and vineyards were under the water of the Volga, which stood on the backwater. It was impossible to use the flooded lands, so people started to settle on the tops of the Baer knolls, waiting for the water to recede. But the water kept rising. They had to move to the steppe.
But in the coastal tracts there was no salvation for the Khazars. The steppe devoid of rain turned into a semi-desert, and this latter was a desert in which even nomads could not live. In the 10th 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 Black Sea, and the Oguzes moved to the Urals and Emba. Only the Kumans (Polovtsians), who inhabited the western slopes of Altai and the southern strip of Western Siberia, where at that time there were pine forests, were not affected by the drought. They were saved by the high-water rivers that surrounded the Barabinsk steppe from the east and west.
It was easier on the western edge of the Great Steppe, on the banks of the Dnieper, Donets and Don, because the meridional currents in the atmosphere contributed to the normal moisture in this area. Therefore, the Pechenegs, having broken into the Dnieper, restored their livestock, including horses, and thereby [310-311] also their military power, thanks to which they could keep themselves independent.
Since the eastern steppes proved to be very inhospitable, the Khazars rushed to the northwest and from the second half of the IX century settled the terraces of the Lower Don, where they brought with them the culture of the Terek grape. The four over floodplain terraces of the Don River smoothly pass into watershed steppes, but already on the second terrace the traits of azonality are manifested - forest boles, willow thickets, etc., which conditioned the way of life of Alans, Khazars and Cossacks. In 1965 the author managed to find a small settlement in the Middle Don, containing ceramics of all epochs - from X to XII century, which indicates the cultural continuity of the population of the Don valley, regardless of the introduction of foreign ethnic elements.
Of course, this branch of the Khazars was lucky compared with others. In 860 they adopted Orthodoxy from St. Cyril and thanks to that entered the Christian community, and consequently 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 were not affected by the drought and floods at all. They lived in cities, in comfortable wooden houses, warm in winter and cool in summer. They bought their food at the bazaar. Caravan drivers passing through Itil paid for everything without haggling, as they passed the rising costs on to buyers in China and Provence. Therefore, social relations within the Judean community were not affected by natural phenomena: their impact was amortized in the Khazar ethnos that housed the community. The weakening of the nomads, whose herds were dying of starvation, was only to the benefit of the Jews: and the meat could be bought cheaply, and a weak enemy was not dangerous. Therefore, in the X century. the activity of the Khazar government had not decreased but increased. Consequently, brutal wars had to begin... and they did break out in the south and west.
But not in the north! The transfer of the Atlantic cyclones' path to the forest zone was associated with heavy snowfalls, prolonged summer and autumn rains and, accordingly, swamping of forest glades, i.e. places most promising for primitive farming. The economy of the Volga-Oka interfluves was undermined. And hence the strength of their resistance to foreign invaders weakened. [311-312] If in the middle of IX century Khazar Jews negotiated with Normans about division of Eastern Europe, then by the beginning of X century they captured almost all of it. Khazaria included: the Burtas (the Khazars entered: Burtases (in the Middle Volga), Bulgars1 (in the Lower Kama), Suvazy (Chuvashes in the Upper Volga) [Ibid, p.139 and footnote 599], Irisu (Mordva-Erzya), Cheremisu (Mari, in Transvaugie), Vyatichi (on Oka), Northerners (on Desna) and Slavs, "by which one means the other Slavic tribes" [3,385]. [3, с. 385].
p139
The turn of the IX-X centuries. - is the culmination of Judeo-Khazar power and catastrophe for the native aborigines of Eastern Europe, who were faced with the alternatives: slavery or ruin?
Around the Caspian Sea
Trade routes were the nerves of Judeo-Khazaria, but the Caspian Sea is too often turbulent, the channels of the Volga delta in the estuaries are shallow and impassable for large ships, and the eastern shores are waterless and deserted. Therefore, the government did not start its own fleet, preferring to use the 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 the Great Perm. The second way went through Merv, Bukhara and Khorezm on the bank of the Amu Darya, through the Ustyurt Plateau - the gateway to the country of the Turks, then crossed the Emba, Yaik, Sakmara and further went along the left bank of the Volga to Bulgar. The disadvantage of this route was that it passed through the nomads of the Oguzes, Pechenegs and Bashkirs, the latter being considered terrible thugs, and the former, during Ibn-Fadlan's passage through their lands, decided whether to cut the Caliph ambassadors in half, or, having stripped them naked, to let them go back, or to give the ambassadors to the Khazars in exchange for their captives; but then Ibn-Fadlan was allowed on [37, p. 129].
Another road from the Muslim countries of Central Asia went through the Lower Emba and the lower reaches of the Yaik straight 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 (normal caravan crossing). But despite all the measures taken, the eastern route [312-313] was longer and more difficult than the western, Caucasian one. And it was used only when there was no other way out.
But the sea also did not remain empty: on it sailed the ships of Russ from Itil to Gurgan where they reloaded the goods on camels for sending to Bagdad. Of course, and this way was under the control of the Khazar king, who had vested interest in the merchants by these routes passed freely and the income flowed into his treasury regularly.
Even the collapse of the Caliphate did not interfere with trade operations, when emirs ceased to obey the Caliph and kept the collected taxes for themselves. In 866 Turkic mercenaries took Baghdad and replaced the caliph with their protégé. It was the end of Arabian domination in the state created by their ancestors [45, vol. II, p. 223].
The changes have touched also the Caucasus. In 859, Ganja was restored, where Arab rulers of the Shaiban tribe strengthened. In 869 in Derbent came to power the Hashemids, Arabs of the Sulaim tribe. But both, being righteous Sunnis, did not break relations with Baghdad and the Sajid viceroys of Azerbaijan [44, p. 40]. Therefore, the Khazar king had no reason to worry.
The response to the Shi`a movement of the Iranian peoples living on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea, however, was quite different. In 867 the highlanders of Tabaristan, who rebelled under the banner of the Alids, separated from the Caliphate.
The areas of the southern Caspian Sea, protected from the north by the sea and from the south by the mighty Elburz range, were a reliable refuge for the ancient ethnic groups, who retained their actual independence under the Seleucids and even the Sassanids. The Arab conquest, too, did not disturb the flow of life of the Highlanders of Elburz, as well as of the Highlanders of Asturias, Basconia and Cilicia, though it aroused 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 highlanders willingly went to fight not for the Alids and against the Abbasids. And the weaker was the Caliphate of Baghdad, the more formidable became the power of the Deylemites, a relic, which had not squandered its strength, like the Arabs and the Persians, and a worthy opponent of the steppe Turks, the only combat-ready army of the Sunni rulers
The region, which supplied the Khazar kings with mercenaries, was Gurgan2 - "the wolf country", located on the southeast [313-314] coast 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, ruled by the descendants of the Persian aristocrats, the Tahirids, who were Sunni rightists.
In 872 Hassan, leader of the rebellious Shiites of Tabaristan, invaded and conquered Gurgan, and then captured the rich cities of Qazvin and Ray (Tehran). The Khazar Jews immediately lost both their convenient caravan route and their brave mercenaries, who stopped coming to Itil. The era of peace came to an end.
1 The son of Bulgarian elteber was a hostage of Khazars, and "daughters Khazar tsar demanded in harem" [37, p. 141].
2 Gurgan - from the Persian word "gurt" - wolf; it is the ancient Hyrkania, in Arabic it is Jurjan.
p140
War with the Shi'ites became an urgent necessity for the Khazar Jews.
The war with the Muslims required Gentile warriors, i.e., Scandinavian Vikings. King of Khazaria invited a party of Helga (Oleg), promising the Vikings a partition of Eastern Europe and support for the destruction of the Russian Kaganate and Askold.
In 882 Oleg conquered Smolensk and Kiev, and by 885 he subjugated the Norse and Radimichi, who had been tributaries of the Khazaria.
The silence of the chronicler Nestor shows that in subsequent years Oleg was not defeated, and in the early 10th century the Russian fleet was operating on the Caspian Sea against the enemies of the Khazar king. Apparently, the Vikings of Kiev began to supply the Khazar king "tribute in blood. They sent their subordinate Slavic-Russes to die for the trade routes of the Rahdonites.
Favorable for the Khazar king went to Central Asia, where power fell into the hands of the enlightened Samanids, patrons of cities, and thus of international trade.
In 900 Ismail Samani defeated the Shiite state of the Alids in the southern Caspian Sea. But the local populations of Gilan, Deylem and Mazenderan, who had never submitted to outsiders, took refuge in mountain castles, and Samanid power in Tabaristan was elusive. As long as deilemits were covered by the Elbrus mountains from the south and the Caspian Sea from the north, they could hold out, because "neither Samanids, nor Khazars had a fleet" [Masudi, quoted from: 44, p. 198-201].
But in 909 on sea there were ships of Russ which have crushed island Abaskun. The next year Russ has attacked Mazenderan, but was defeated and has left. In 913 the huge fleet - 500 ships - with the permission Hazard tsar Benjamin has entered Caspian Sea and has plundered coast of Gilan. Tabaristan and [314-315] Shirvan. It is natural to assume, that Russ simply invited tsar Benjamin for reprisal against robbers Girs1. Russ have battled with Gilanian and Deylemian, apparently, without big successes, and then have attacked Shirvan and Baku where sat Sajid's, governors were put in by the Caliph, Sunni and, hence, friends Khazarian, and here they have developed with fierceness peculiar to their Scandinavian chiefs.
Having gathered a lot of extracted spoils, Russ has returned to Itil, and had sent the Khazarian tsar the agreed share and has stopped to rest. Then the Muslim guards of Khazarian tsar have demanded from it the permission to revenge Russ for blood of Moslems and for plunder of women and children. Tsar has allowed it, and in a three-day-campaign with exhausted Russ, they suffered defeat. Numbers of victims is estimated in 30 thousand persons. Prisoners were not taken. The rest of Russ ran on the Volga to the north, but have been exterminated by the Burtasian and Bulgarian. Obviously, Vikings inappropriate initiative has caused reprisal on the part of Khazar Muslims, especially as defeat of the enemies Daylam has so facilitated position of Shiites that in 913 they were released from authority of Samanids and have forced out the last from Gilan and Tabaristan [48, p. 249].
Throughout the first half of the 10th century the Deylemites developed success. Part of them moved to the south, captured Fars, Kirman, Khuzistan, and finally, in 945 in Baghdad, where their leaders for 110 years have kept under their patronage the caliphs. The other part was subjugated in 914. Azerbaijan and reached Derbent [44, p. 215]. The Caspian trade was controlled by enemies of Khazaria, or rather, by enemies of Khazar trade.
The damage was great, but repairable, because there was a caravan road east of the Caspian Sea. In 913 the Khazars in alliance with the Oguzes defeated the eastern Pechenegs, who were roaming between the Volga and Yaik [66, p. 238]. This partly compensated for the loss of their allies in Transcaucasia - the Sajids, but the domination of the rude and fierce Deylemites in Iran and Azerbaijan poisoned the life of the Khazar Jews.
And the most unfortunate thing is that against them could not be sent the faithful Sunni mercenaries from Gurgan, for the lord of the faithful - Baghdad Caliph gave orders through the Deylem emirs, and they did not allow them to order the killing of their brothers by Muslim hands. Hence, it was necessary to raise again Russ on war for trading interests of the Jewish [315-316] community, and Russ after treachery 913 did not aspire to repeat campaigns on Caspian Sea.
Certainly, it would be possible to mobilize Khazars, at least that part of them, which was converted to Orthodoxy in VIII century, but on it the government did not dare, we must think, not without reason. Native Khazars did not have any benefits from trade, and they had nothing to fight for. Therefore, events had a different course.
The enemies of a renewed Khazaria
It has always been known that war is hard and unpleasant business. But there are worse things than war: enslavement, the insult of revered shrines, plunder of property and, finally, abusive neglect.
All of this fell to the peoples of Eastern Europe after they fell under the influence of the Judean Khazaria. But ethnic differences between them prevented them from uniting. But the Itil government could easily set them against each other, using the old, but not forgotten inter-tribal scores. Back in the 9th century, King Benjamin waged war against the Asses (Ossetians), "Turks" (Magyars), "Paynils" (Pechenegs), and "Macedonians" (Byzantines). Benjamin defeated the coalition of adversaries with the help of the Alans.
1 They are called "ajam", i.e. "non-Muslims" [see: 44, p. 199]
p141
Then King Aaron defeated the Alans with the help of the Oguzes (Torks) in the beginning of the 10th c. 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 accepted Islam and separated his state from the Khazaria, hoping for help from the Caliph of Baghdad, who was to forbid the Muslim mercenaries to fight against 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 property of the executed vizier and give money to the ambassador Ibn-Fadlan, but a buyer "could not" catch up to the embassy caravan [37, p. 133], and the fortress in Bulgar was not built, and the Khorezmians in X century already did not pay attention to orders of the weakened Baghdad caliphs, as they were concerned not with spiritual, but secular affairs.
The apostasy weakened rather than strengthened the Great Bulgar. One of three Bulgarian tribes - Suvaz (ancestors [316-317] Chuvash) - has refused to accept Islam and has strengthened in the woods of the Trans-Volga region. The split in Bulgarian power could not compete with the Judean Khazaria [Ibid, p. 139].
The situation of the Oguzes was similar. In 921 one of their leaders accepted Islam, but his countrymen offered him to renounce either the new faith, or his power [Ibid, p.127]. Guz returned to the ancient gods.
Thus, attempts to get rid of the Jews with the help of Muslims were doomed to failure. Jews and Slavs (Polonians), placed the Varangian invaders in an unfavorable situation, that was assiduously obscured by chronicler Nestor. Fortunately, we have an opportunity to make up for the omitted information.
Khazars had no coins of their own, using the Arabian dirgems. Some part of this money, of course, remained with the subjects of the Khazar king. In 883 - 900 years the range of diargems with Kufic inscriptions reached the eastern border of Rus lands, i.e. they were used by northerners, who were under the influence of Khazaria [64, p. 203-206]. After 900 AD the Dirgems appear in the hordes of Rus lands, which shows their inclusion in the Khazarian economic system. These dirgems are not war booty, because victories are always reflected in the annals. This is payment for the services on the Caspian Sea in 909-910, i.e. for the blood of the Slavic-Russian heroes spilled for the sake of foreign interests, for the suppression of Drevlyans in 914, for the war with the Pechenegs in 920, for the treason committed by Tsar Benjamin in 913, which remained unpunished, and for many things that contemporaries tried not to notice, and posterity will forget. There is no reason to praise Oleg the Prophetic.
It is self-evident that the Viking government could not be popular among the Slavic population of the Dnieper area. It was noted by S.M. Soloviev, though he did not have the information, now included in the arsenal of science. He regards Oleg not as a brave warrior, but as a cunning politician and a collector of tribute from the defenseless Slavic tribes1. So it was.
If to believe the annals not marking with 920 for 941 any event of a domestic history, it is necessary to recognize Rusichi as the cowards and the philistines, not capable neither to revenge for the betrayed and killed compatriots, nor to defend the goods from collectors of a tribute, forwarding looted [317-318] property to Itil. But it is necessary to believe not annals, but a set of data: that last show that Khazar Jews had to suppress national movements all time and Russ has given them many troubles. In addition, the international situation was changing, and it had a great impact on the fate of the Jews not only in Khazaria, but also the neighboring. And this, in turn, affected the foreign policy of Khazaria.
Khazar Jews could not fear the Muslims fragmented 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 numbers were growing thanks to the activities of Cyril and Methodius. In 867 the first christening of Russia has taken place [34, volume II, p. 229], and hardly it will be erroneous to assume, that the Vikings’ conquest has stopped Russian converts to Orthodoxy. And who benefited from it? Only the Khazar Jews!
Of course, the Greeks could not rejoice at such an event, especially since the Khazar trade fed Baghdad, and the Khazar diplomacy was pitting the Bulgarians against Constantinople. On the other hand, Byzantine Jews showed no affection for countries where they were disliked and abused. 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 reigned now (in 943) and who bears the name of Armanus (Romanus), converted the Jews of his country to Christianity by force and did not like them ... And a large number of Jews fled from Rum into the country of the Khazars. [quoted from: 44, p. 193].
It is quite understandable that relations between Christians and Jews aggravated, and... were strained.
1 Solovyov S.M. History of Russia from the most ancient times.
p142
Feats of Commander Pesach
The Greek-Khazar conflict, which reflected the Armenian-Jewish rivalry1, could not go unnoticed in Russia2. In Kiev there should be a hope to get rid of onerous union with Khazaria by the union with far [318-319] Byzantium. Therefore, Roman Lekapin's emissaries were able to "incite" [38, p. 117] Kiev prince to participate in the war of Byzantium against Khazaria, which began in 939.
The war was unleashed by the Khazar king Joseph, who "overthrew many uncircumcised", ie killed many Christians. Unfortunately, the source does not mention where the executions were carried out, but apparently Christians who lived inside Khazaria suffered, because there is no mention of the campaign. These executions were seen as a response to persecution of Jews in Byzantium, but it is impossible not to notice that the Khazar Christians were not guilty of the actions of the Byzantine emperor.
Then came the Russians. Their leader in the source is called Helgu (Helgu, i.e. Oleg), although by "The Tale of Bygone Years" at this time ruled Igor Stary. If Helgu is a proper name, it was a namesake of Prophetic Oleg, but, rather, it is a title of a Scandinavian leader, i.e. Igor himself is meant, for Helgu is named as "Tsar of Russia". [38, с. 117].
In 939 (or in the beginning of 940) Helgu by sudden night attack has taken a city S-m-rai (Samkerz, on coast of Kerch strait), "because there was no chief, Rebbe Hashmonay". Apparently, the attack Russ was for the Khazar tsar surprising.
At the same time another Russian army, led by voivode Sveneld, subdued the Ulii tribe, which inhabited the lower reaches of Dniester and Bug. The Uliches fought against the Kiev prince as early as 885 [42, vol. II, p.254] and, naturally, were in league with the Khazars. Then they managed to defend their independence from Kiev. At last armies Russ after three-year blockage which has terminated in 940, have taken a stronghold Ulyrian - the city of Peresechen and have laid upon them a tribute for the benefit of colonel Sveneld [62, p. 102-103].
From that, one can see that the war was waged on a vast territory in a very deliberate and purposeful manner. It does not look like a random border incident or a robbery raid of the Varangian warriors.
The Khazar king responded to the blow. Commander Venerable Pesach has released Samkerz, has thrown back Russ from coast of Sea of Azov, has intruded into Crimea, has taken there three Greek cities where " he has beaten men and women ", but has been stopped [319-320] at the walls Chersonese where the survived Christian population of Crimea had escaped. Then Pesach went to Helga, i.e., approached Kiev, devastated the country, and forced Helga, against his will, to fight with his former Byzantine allies for the triumph of the merchant Jewish community of Itil.
All these events are omitted in the Russian annals, with the exception of the campaign against Byzantium that followed. It is understandable: it is sad to write about a defeat of the country, but this defeat is confirmed by the new indirect data.
Around 940 the Left-bank of Dnieper fell away from the Kiev princedom (Northern and Radimich later had to subdue anew) [32, p.67-68]. Russ gave to the winner the best weapon - swords [27] and, apparently, undertook to pay tribute collected from Right-bank tribes, i.e. from Drevlyans (see below). The conquered lands of Uliches and Tivers - in the lower reaches of Dniester and Danube - fell into the hands of Pechenegs [5, p. 147-149] - Kriviches have released and created an independent Polotsk princedom. A fragment of the Varangian Rus turned from an unequal ally of Khazar Khaganate into a vassal, forced to pay tribute by blood of his warriors.
Russ had absolutely nothing to fight with the Greeks over. Nestor could not think up a suitable motive for a campaign and has limited it to a naked statement of the facts. But the Jewish anonymous has opened the reasons of the tragedy occurred. Not without pride he has attributed it to pressure of "venerable Pesach" on Russian prince Helgu (to Greeks the name of Igor also is unknown) which "was at war against Kustandin on the sea for four months. And there his bogatyrs have fallen, because Macedonians have overpowered them by fire. And they ran, and were ashamed to return in the country, and have gone by sea to Persia, and there has fallen all remnants of it. Then Russ began submitting to authority Khazar ". [38, с. 120].
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 gloriously. Ten thousand ships landed on the northern coast of Asia Minor, and such atrocities began, which were unaccustomed even in those times. Prisoners of Rus were crucified (sic), shot with onions, drove nails into their skulls; burned monasteries and churches [42, vol. I, p. 33, 230], despite the fact that many Rus adopted Orthodoxy back in 867.
1 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 government.
2 Russia in the narrow sense included three cities: Kiev, Chernigov, and Pereyaslavl.
3 This war is told in detail by the Cambridge anonymous Jewish author of the XII century. Despite the amorphous narration, the authenticity of the events is confirmed by the historical analysis [see: 27, p. 168].
p143
All this points to a war of a quite different character from the other wars of the 10th century. Apparently, Russian soldiers had [320-321] experienced and influential instructors, and not only Scandinavians.
Greeks have pulled up forces, have dropped landing in the sea and have burnt Russian boats by Greek fire. Who of Russ did not burn, was drowned. Khazar Jews got rid of both possible opponents.
According to Stories of time years, the campaign to Byzantium was repeated in 944. A.A. Shakhmatov considers the story about this campaign a fiction, but, apparently, he is wrong [see: 62, p. 72]1. In 943-944 the surviving Rus soldiers were thrown by the Khazar Jews into Arran (Azerbaijan), where the Deylem Shiites settled.
Russ at a landing has defeated armies of the governor of Arran Marzuban ibn Mohammed and has taken the city of Berda on coast of Kura. Marzuban blockaded the fortress, and in constant skirmishes both parties sustained heavy losses. But dysentery was more frightening than the arrows and sabers of Deilem. The epidemic broke out in camp Russ. After in one of skirmishes the leader Russ has been killed, they have made to coast and have sailed back to Khazaria2.
So, for three years of the union with tsar Joseph, Russ has suffered two heavy defeats and lost many brave soldiers. But even if they won, the victory would give them nothing, because it was impossible to gain a foothold in Asia Minor or Transcaucasia, and it was not necessary. Both wars were waged solely in the interests of the merchant community of Itil. It seemed that the Slavic-Russians had to share the bitter fate of the Turkic-Khazars.
Who was to blame?
It can seem, that the aggression in interests of the merchant top of the Jewish community, made by hands Khoresmian mercenaries and bellicose Russ, was a fruit of malicious will of the Khazar tsars Benjamin, Aaron and Joseph with connivance Khazar Khagans which names history [321-322] has not kept. Indeed, a lot of blood was shed, innocent inhabitants of the Black and Caspian seashores were killed, the Russian heroes laid down their heads for a foreign cause, the Khazars were robbed and insulted daily, the Alans lost their Christian shrines, the Slavs paid tribute by squirrel smoke, if only they were not touched by the Pechenegs, the Huzes did not sleep a wink, protecting their tents from a sudden attack. This permanent outrage was hard for all the peoples, except the merchant on top of Itil and the mercenaries who served it, but the latter paid for a decent living with their blood.
But if we try to condemn the Jewish community of Khazaria for this situation, the question immediately arises: what was there to expect? Jews came to Khazaria as a result of persecution, to which they were subjected in Iran for their closeness to the Mazdakites, and in Byzantium for their cooperation with the Arabs, caused by trade rivalry with the Greeks and Armenians. Both were no less skillful than the Jews in trading operations, and in addition had the support of their government. The Jews, in order to get ahead of the competition, took advantage of the support of a foreign government, the Arab government, but the Caliphs also demanded their help in military operations, such as the surrender of Christian fortresses, which entailed selling into slavery all Christians not killed in the capture of the city, and the desecration of Christian shrines. Naturally, the relatives and co-religionists of those killed were not thrilled.
Pagan allies of the Khazars did the same with the Muslim cities, with the only exception that Khazar Judaizers have sacrificed to war the Deylem Shiites - mountaineers who were not able to trade. But in 945, the leader of the Deylemites entered Baghdad and began to rule on behalf of the Caliph, with the title of "Amir al-Umar" (Emir of Emirs - the commander in chief). This meant that the Khazar Judeans lost the war for the Caspian Sea. They were left to focus on the allied Central Asia and the newly conquered Eastern Europe.
The Judean community received the military force it needed from Central Asia and paid for it with tribute from Eastern Europe. But could it have done otherwise?
After all, by letting go of power, it was losing both its accumulated wealth and its control over the transit trade, and consequently all its livelihood. The townspeople and merchants could not [322-323] return to farming and herding because they did not have the skills necessary for these occupations. When they lost their power, they lost their wealth, and with it their lives. That is why they had to stick to it and be victorious.
1 Likhachev D.S. disputes this opinion, based on the conclusion in 945 of a treaty, profitable for Rus'. However, according to his own specification, Igor was assassinated in autumn 944. [See: 42, vol. II, pp. 288, 295], hence, the contract was concluded already with Olga's government after the steep turn in political orientation.
2 Analysis of hypotheses about campaigns Russ on Caspian Sea see: Artamonov M.I. History Khazar, page. 374-380. For a critique of the proposed hypotheses see: Gumilev L.N. The Tale of the Khazar Tribute.
p144
But victories and expansion of power do not always lead to prosperity and sustainability. The conquest of a strong ethnic group is sometimes more expensive than the revenues that can be obtained. This was first demonstrated by the Kama Bulgarians, who liberated themselves from the Khazar hegemony. After the Bulgarians, under uncertain circumstances, achieved independence from the Oguzes and Pechenegs. They all became enemies of the Judeo-Khazars.
Pesach's victories allowed the Khazar king to shift the tax burden onto the Russian population of the Dnieper region, because the Varangian konungs were willing to pay their peace with tribute, collected from the Slavs, less organized and therefore less dangerous. And from this arose further events.
So, if to apply the human ethical norms to the historical process, then we can blame the Vikings for the misfortunes of the Russian land, of course, not for the fact that they captured Kiev by deception, because deception in war - is not betrayal of trust, and not for the fact that they robbed the subdued Slavic tribes, because they did not defend their freedom, preferring to pay the tribute, but because, leading the tribe of Polans, then called Rusey, these conungs "brilliantly lost" all the wars: with the Greeks, the Pechenegs, the Deilemites, and the Khazar Jews. It is disgusting that they, seizing the initiative from the Russians, brought the country to complete ruin, and turned it into a vassal of the Khazar kings. But worse than that, giving the Khazar Jews swords as tribute, that is, essentially disarming their army, these usurpers threw their bogatyrs at the opponents, armed with Greek fire or light curved sabers. This is such irresponsibility, such disregard for the duties of a ruler, that any excuse is inappropriate.
However, the small number of Varangian troops could not have held their own in a foreign country without the support of some groups of local people. These pro-Varagian "Gostomys"1, perhaps, are more guilty than all others, as they sacrificed their homeland and lives of their countrymen for their [323-324] selfish interests. And the resistance to the Vikings took place even in Novgorod, though an account of it is preserved only in the later, Nikonov's Chronicle2.
But in addition to an emotional attitude to the facts of the past, an objective analysis of them is necessary. Friends of the Varangians, whether they wanted it or not, contributed to the inclusion of the Russian land in the world market, which at that time was under the control of the Judean Khazaria. Russia was supplying the world market with furs, tin and slaves, but received nothing in return, because it was supplying these goods that were free tribute.
That's why Prince Igor the Old, collecting tribute in the country of Drevlyan, was forced to let go part of his squadron, after which he was killed by the Drevlyans3. Igor had to pay for his troops with the tribute he collected, but he also had to send tribute to Khazaria, so that the commander Pesach would not repeat his campaign. Igor was more afraid of the Khazars and decided to collect the required amount at the lowest cost. So he began saving on "safety" and ruined not only himself but also his supporters. But we should not feel sorry for him. Thanks to Igor's blunder, Russia regained its freedom and glory.
Coup in Kiev
As long as the Khazar government subjugated the nations as numerous as the Black Bulgarians, as cultured as the Alans, as brave as the Pechenegs, and freedom-loving as the Oguzes, it was able to govern them. It was always possible to bribe a leader, or hire daredevils from the people, or seduce powerful women, or recruit traitors. It was important that the ethno-psychological reaction could be calculated, [324-325] as creative elements in psychology were superseded by traditional, teachable elements.
But the ancient Slavic-Russians in X century, unlike the listed nations, were a passionary ethnos. Overkill, i.e. the transition from the acmatic phase to the inertial phase, associated with the Varangian usurpation, took many victims and brought a lot of shame, but did not completely destroy the passionate gene pool in the country.
In a benign landscape, in a stable life, not disturbed either by technical improvements or by European methods of education, orphans grew up, children of bogatyrs who died on the Black Sea from the Greek fire and on the Caspian Sea from epidemics. They knew who had sent their fathers to their doom, having previously taken away their cherished swords. They saw where the skins of squirrels went and of martens, and from what their mothers and sisters froze.
1 In the later chronicles this word is personified in a proper name, "the elder Gostomysl". [see: 42, vol. II, p. 2 The meaning of the term is sympathetic to foreigners.
2 ... The Novgorodians were offended, saying that they were our slaves and suffered many evils from Rurik and for his sake... The same summer Rurik killed Vadim the Brave and many other Novgorod tribesmen conspired with him. However, it is credible. To the "Westerner" Nestor would have had no reason to compose the "Norman theory" of the origin of Rus' and to gloss over the ancient, free, glorious period in the history of the Russian Kaganate, if not for the need to change the minds of those who were skeptical about the stories of the feats of Varangian konungs. And such people in Ancient Russia were, apparently, quite a few.
3 According to Nestor's dry report, "Drevlyans killed Igor and his retinue". Leo Deacon informs that Igor captured "was tied to two trees and torn in two parts". [41 a), p.66]. Year of Igor's death is confused by the chronicler: instead of 945 it should be 944. [see: 42, vol. II, p. 295).
p145
They heard menacing shouts from Kiev, where the prince was securely protected from the people by the union with the Khazar king, whose army was always on hand.
In this environment grew up... coevals of Prince Svyatoslav.
According to the authentic source - annals - prince Svyatoslav was born in 942. His official father Igor in 879 was "dyteisk velmi", but even in this case in 942 he was more than 66 years old, and his wife Olga - 49-50. Svyatoslav was their first-born, and he really was Olga's son, and as for Igor Rurikovich, it's on the conscience of the author of the authentic source, as well as the age of Olga, who up to her death in 969 behaved more actively than an old woman of 76 years old could do1.
It's interesting, that Olga and her son lived not in Kiev, but in Vyshgorod where the "breadwinner" Svyatoslav, i.e. a teacher, was Asmud, and a governor of his father – Sveneld. Sveneld had a tribute from the Drevlyan and Ulychi to feed his troops. Igor's retinue thought it too luxurious for him. Igor had to pay tribute to the Khazars and feed his retinue. In 941 and 943 the prince of Kiev paid off the Khazar king by participating in his campaigns, but in 944. "Igor, encouraged by his cohorts, goes on a campaign to Derevskaya land [325-326] (to collect for himself a tribute due to Sveneld and his cohorts), but Sveneld does not refuse the rights given to him - there is a clash of Igor's cohorts with Sveneld and with Drevlyans - subjects of Sveneld; in this clash Igor is killed by Mstislav Lut, the son of Sveneld". [62, с. 365].
A.A. Shakhmatov's version removes one of the absurdities of Nestor's version, according to which Igor's selfishness was associated with thoughtlessness. In fact, how can he let his retinue go, staying in a plundered country! Another thing is, if Igor and his advisers were sure of the powerlessness of Drevlyan but still fell victim to the conspiracy organized in Vyshgorod. But even then, it remains unclear, why the Kiev team didn't avenge Mstislav Lutu for treason and death, even if not the prince, but his companions? And how did they dare to do it in Vyshgorod, when Kiev's forces outnumbered theirs twice? And finally, why the plot succeeded, but the revenge to Mstislav Lutu occurred only in 975, when he was killed by Oleg Svyatoslavich, or rather his entourage? In both versions something is missing: in our opinion, the influence of the Khazar king Joseph was not taken into account.
After the campaign of Pesach, the prince of Kiev became a vassal of the Khazar king, and therefore was confident in his support. Therefore, he ceased to reckon with the treaties and conditions he had made with his subjects, believing that they valued their lives more than their possessions. This is a typically Jewish way of putting things, where other people's emotions are not taken into account. Sveneldich and his cohorts took offense: they perceived the deprivation of their share of the tribute, which they could not do without, as insulting disregard, to which they responded by murdering the prince. But as Igor and Vikings surrounding him after two heavy defeats were unpopular in Russia, the conspirators were supported by broad masses of Drevlyans, thanks to that the coup succeeded, for the princely team appeared in isolation.
Then has come short inter-principality [62, p. 109] after which juvenile Svyatoslav became Prince, regent - his mother, Pskov Olga, and the head of the government - voevoda Sveneld, father Mstislav Lyut. The composition of the new government speaks for itself. Note only that the older generation carries Scandinavian, and the younger one Slavic names. In short, all the actual power was concentrated in the hands of either the Slavs, or the weakened Russians.
It is not yet clear and, probably, unsolvable one question: whether Svyatoslav was the son of Igor the Old? The annals do not [326-327] doubt it2, we do not have confidence in it3. But in terms of ethnological it is not that important. Olga and Sveneld restored the Slavic-Russian tradition and put Russia back on the path it was on before the Varangian usurpation. And the consequences were most favorable to the Russian land and very difficult for the Jewish community in Khazaria. The Slavic element triumphed over both the Norman and the Rossoman, preserving from the latter only the name itself: "Polians, I now rekomaya Rus'". The change of the faith in 988 gave up the northern overseas traditions, and Rus entered the inertial period of ethnogenesis, in which the conditions for the accumulation of cultural values were optimal.
Face to face.
Russia, having got rid of the Varangian leadership, recovered quickly, though not without some difficulties.
1 Nestor has erred against the truth. In 946 prince Mal wooed Olga, who was 54 years old. Ridiculous, but this is not a description of a dynastic marriage, but an inserted didactic novel. In 955 at the reception of Constantine Porphyrogenitus she was, according to Nestorius, so "beautiful a face" that Basileus fell in love... with an old woman of 62 years? One of two: either Olga's age or everything else is wrong [see: 27].
2 See texts of the Kiev code of 1039 and the Novgorod code of 1050 restored by A.A.Shakhmatov [62, p. 543, 613].
3 Fictitious genealogies are too frequent a phenomenon to give them much importance. For example, the real surname of the Russian Tsar Paul I is Gothorp.
p146
In 946 Svenel'd has subdued Drevlyanian and imposed on them " a tribute kick ", two thirds of which went to Kiev, and the rest - to Vyshgorod, the city belonging to Olga [42, vol. I, p. 143]. In 947 Olga went north and levied tribute on the Mete and Luga pogosts. But the left bank of Dnieper remained independent of Kiev1 and, apparently, in alliance with the Khazar government [63, pp. 51-54].
It is unlikely that the Khazar King Joseph was happy with the transfer of power in Kiev from the hands of the Varangian konung to the Russian prince, but he did not repeat the Pesach campaign. Over the past five years the external situation of the community of Itil became more difficult. Not only did trade with Baghdad cease because of the victory of the Bund, but the Chinese trade also suffered a loss. In 946 Kidans took Kaifeng, the Chinese capital and a caravan trade junction, then gave it to the Shato Turks, and they were at enmity with Kidans, and with Chinese [see: 25, p.78-79]. Trade suffered greatly from these troubles. In France, too, there was a bitter war between the last Carolingians and the Ile-de-France dukes. As has already been said, the Carolingians gave protection [327-328] for money to the French Jews; so, their defeat and the imminent fall of the Western Empire did not bode well for the Jews.
On the basis of these circumstances, the Khazar king Joseph considered it for the good to refrain from a campaign into Russia, but the postponement did not do him any good. Olga went to Constantinople and on September 9, 957 was baptized there, which meant a close alliance with Byzantium, a natural enemy of the Judean Khazaria. The attempt to draw Olga over to Catholicism, i.e. to the side of Germany, made by bishop Adalbert, who arrived in Kiev in 961 at the request of emperor Otto I, was not successful [12, p. 458-459]. From that moment King Joseph lost hope for peace with Russia, and it was natural. The war began, apparently, immediately after Olga's baptism.
The fact that the war between Khazaria and Rus was going on in the 50s of the 10th century is definitely confirmed by a letter of tsar Joseph to Hasdai ibn-Shafrut, a minister of Abdarrahman III - the Umayyad Caliph of Spain, written before 960: "I live at the entrance of the river and I do not allow Russ, arriving by ships, to penetrate to them (Muslims). In the same way I do not allow all enemies of them, coming by a dry way, to penetrate into their country. I wage a stubborn war with them (the enemies of the Muslims. -L.G.). If I had left them (alone. - L.G.), they would have destroyed the whole country of the Ishmaelites up to Baghdad". [38, с. 83-84].
This, of course, is an exaggeration. The Buids in Iran, Baghdad and Azerbaijan held strong. Apparently, Joseph wanted to win over the Caliph of Spain in order to try to create an anti-Byzantine block on the Mediterranean Sea, where just at this time the Greeks, with the support of the Ruses, were conquering Crete, the base of the Arab-Spanish pirates. In 960 Nicephorus Phocas was victorious. King Joseph's hopes for help from Western Muslims were shattered.
Nevertheless, Byzantium could not actively help the renewed Russia. Forces of Greeks have been constrained by attack on Silicia and Syria. In the decisive years of 965-966. Nicephorus Phocas took Mopsuestia, Tare, conquered Cyprus and reached the walls of the "great city of God" – Antioch.
These victories came at a high price. There was a famine in Constantinople in 965-969, as the price of bread rose 8 times. The popularity of the government was falling.
However, the friendship with Byzantium secured Russia an alliance with the Pechenegs, important in the war with the Khazars. Badjanaks, coming to the western edge of the Steppe, found themselves in a very difficult situation: between the Greeks, Bulgarians and Russians. In order not to be [328-329] crushed, the Badjanaks concluded alliance treaties with the Rus and Greeks, ensured safety of trade between Kiev and Chersonesos, and supplied the Rus with sabers instead of heavy swords. This alliance lasted up to 968. [42, vol. II, p.312; 34, vol. P, pp. 231-233], i.e. up to the next Russ-Byzantium conflict. But at the turning point of the war with Khazaria Pechenegian were on the side of the Kievan prince.
Supporters of the Khazar king at this time were Yasses (Ossetians) and Kasgs (Circassians), who occupied in the 10th century the steppes of the Northern Caucasus. However, their loyalty to the Judean government was doubtful, and their zeal approached zero. During the war they behaved very sluggishly. Vyatichi, the tributaries of the Khazars, and the Bulgarians generally refused to help the Khazars and befriended the Oguzes, enemies of the Khazar king, behaved about the same way. The latter could only hope for help from Central Asian Muslims.
Sincerity and Benefit
It would seem natural that in the east, an ally of the Judean Khazaria was the Tajik state of the Samanids, known for its active foreign trade and brilliant culture. However, the situation in this power was complicated. During the 150 years of the Abbasids domination in Central Asia and Iran, the descendants of Arabs, Persians, Sogdians and part of Parthians were able to adapt to the new conditions and merged into the monolithic Tajik ethnos by the 10th century. The Tajiks were led by the local Samanid dynasty, and the culture they created shone like a diamond, compared to which all others were now setting.
1 This is evident from the fact that the Radimichs were conquered anew by Vladimir's voivode Wolf's Tail in 984.
p147
Here, in a brief sketch, there is no way to describe this rich era, but... the crystals appear when magma cools. In a single century alone, the valor of the dehkans who had enthroned Ismail Samani melted away in the charm of the gardens, the cheerful noise of the bazaars, and the pomp of the Sunni mosques. The descendants of the warriors became cheerful and educated philistines.
Soon the Samanids, in order to preserve their power, began to buy Turkic slaves (gulams) and make up an army of them. Those, remaining de jure slaves, could make a career (sometimes dizzying, up to the viceroys of provinces), because, in fact, the goulams were much stronger than free dekhkans and merchants. They had swords in their hands, and all of them were professional warriors. Any militia was much afraid of them.
And abroad there were Turks who became Muslims. In 960 they have accepted an Islam Karluks, after them - militant [329-330] Chigili and brave Jagma. This won them the sympathy of the powerful Sunni church, which feared the free-thinking of the Samanids. The Shi'ites seemed to the Muslim clergy to be greater enemies than foreigners. By 999 the Samanids were betrayed by literally everyone: the Turkic mercenaries, the clergy, the townspeople of Bukhara, but even before that they could not help the Khazar Jews.
The lonely oasis of Khorezm, not far from the Aral Sea was in a different situation. Khorezm was like a green island in a yellow desert, and its ancient population, the khorasmians, or khvalisses, escaped the Arab pogrom that had transformed the cities of Sogdiana. Khwarezm shah submitted to the Arabs as early as 712, agreed to pay tribute and undertook to provide military aid. In this way he saved his people, which had grown old and tired1.
In the 10th century there were two states in the Khorezm oasis: Khorezmshah ruled over the old inhabitants of Kyat, and Emir ruled over the Turks settled in Urgench. They united in 996, and then Khorezm became an Turkic-speaking settled independent ethnic entity. The descendants of Khorasmians preserved the tradition necessary for this, while Turks, mainly Turkmens, brought in passions. Over the 10th century, thanks to exceptionally favorable conditions, the symbiosis has turned into a systemic integrity - an ethnos in the Muslim super-ethnos.
It is possible to ponder on where the passionarity of the Aral Sea nomads came from. These descendants of the Sarmatians must have squandered it simultaneously with the Chorasmians, Sogdians and Parthians. Yes, so, but in the 6th-7th centuries, during the epoch of the Western Türkic Kaganate, there was a genetic drift from the Orkhon shores, spreading the trait to the outskirts of the population range2. Simply put, the steppe bogatyrs, during the campaigns to the west, rewarded the local beauties with their favor, and the emerging descendants inherited the passionarity of their fathers. [330-331]
Contemporaries characterized the Khorezmians as follows: "They fight bravely with the Oguzes and are inaccessible to them" (Istahri); "they are hospitable people, lovers of food, brave and strong in battle" (Makdisi); "The people of the city of Qat are fighters for the faith and militant", "its population (Urgench) is famous for its militancy and the ability to throw arrows" (Hudud al-Elam); "every autumn with the onset of cold weather the king of Khorezm campaigned against the Oguzes" (Biruni) [cited: 55: 244]. from: 55, p. 244].
And since in the 10th century the Oguzes became enemies of the Khazar kingdom, King Joseph had every reason to hope for help from Khorezm. After all, the economic welfare of Urgench and Kyat in the first half of the 10th century was based on trade with Khazaria, which went through Ustyurt and Mangyshlak, bypassing the Gooz pastures [Ibid, p. 242]. If King Joseph or any other Jew had been the ruler of Urgench, he would have supported the Khazar Jewish community, because it was beneficial not only to him, but also to his country. But in Urgench ruled by a Turk, who for the sake of faith went to a less favorable alliance with Bulgar, which was freed from Khazaria. The Oguzes, fighting the Khorezmians, let merchants through their lands, charging a duty. This trade was less profitable for Khorezm, but the Turk's conscience was clear.
The concept of "benefit" is different for different ethnic groups and at different times. For the Urgench emir, money meant a lot, but not everything. He could not use it to buy the favor of the mullahs and ulems, the enthusiasm of his horse riders, the sympathy of neighboring nomads, or even the love of his wives. In Asia, not everything is sold, but much is given for free, for the sake of sincere sympathy, which the emir must acquire if he is not to exchange his throne for his grave. Since the public opinion of the Khorezmians of the tenth century was formed in a constant war for Islam, their ruler had to act in accordance with the established stereotype of behavior. He did so.
Makdisi says: "The cities of Khazaria sometimes take possession of the ruler of Jurjania. And in another place: "I heard that al-Mamun invaded them (Khazars) from Djurdjaniya, and defeated them and converted them to Islam. Then I heard that a tribe from Rum, which is called Rus, invaded them and seized their country.” [quoted from: 55, p.252-253]. Both Ibn Miskaveikh and Ibn al-Asir inform about the attack in 965 on khagan of Khazaria of some Turkic people.
1 Horasmians are close relatives of Parthians, hence, the initial date of their ethnogenesis is IV-III centuries BC, but it was preceded by incubation period, the duration of which is still difficult to determine. So by the 10th c. AD the Horasmians passed all phases of ethnogenesis, and were in homeostasis, which allowed them to unhesitatingly accept into their environment passionate Turks, who tried to coexist with them. And this made possible full assimilation on a peaceful basis.
2 Н. I. Vavilov proved that recessive mutations are gradually pushed to the outskirts of species and racial ranges (letter to Academician V.I. Vernadsky; quoted from: 61, p.47-148).
p148
Khwarezm gave help on condition of the Khazars' conversion to Islam, and then "the Khagan himself also converted". [Ibid]. Let us compare this information with what we already know. [331-332] In 943 the Khazar Jews and Khorezmians, according to Masudi, were in alliance. In 965 the Khazar power fell. Consequently, the fluctuations of the policy of Khwarezm took place in the interval between these dates. It is logical to think, that chances of tsar Joseph have fallen after the trip of Olga to Constantinople in 957. So, during these years (957-964) Khoresmian under the pretext of protection Khazarian from Oguzes and Russ, and have turned the pagan population of delta Volga to an Islam. Those have gone on it readily, because they did not see from their governors anything good. Thus, Svyatoslav the road to Itil has been opened, and preparation for war is finished1.
The fifth act of the tragedy
The year 964 found Svyatoslav on Oka, in the land of Vyatichi. The war between Russ and Khazar Jews was already in full swing, but the Kievan prince did not dare to launch an attack across the Don steppes, controlled by the Khazar cavalry2. The strength of Russ in the 10th century was in the rooks, (boats) and the Volga was wide. Without superfluous collisions with Vyatichi, Russ cut down and adjusted the ships, and in the spring of 965 descended the Oka and Volga to Itil [see: 3, pp. 426-429], to the rear of the Khazar regular armies, expecting an enemy between the Don and Dnepr3.
The campaign was irreproachably thought over. Russ, choosing a convenient moment, went ashore, replenished the food supply, not disdaining to plunder, returned to the ships and sailed on Volga, without fear of a sudden attack Bulgarian, Burtasian and Khazarian. What happened next can only be guessed.
At the confluence of the Sarysu River, the Volga forms two channels: the western - the Volga proper and the eastern - the Akhtuba. Between them lies a green island, on which stood Itil, the heart [332-333] of Judean Khazaria [see: 21, p. 26]. The right bank of the Volga is a loamy plain; probably, the Pechenegs approached there. The left bank of the Akhtuba is sand dunes, where the Oguzes were the masters. If part of the Russian ladis descended the Volga and Akhtuba below Itil, the capital of Khazaria became a trap for defenders with no hope of salvation.
Advancement Russ down the Volga was self-swimming and therefore so slow that the local people (Khazars) had time to flee into the impassable thickets of the delta, where Russ could not find them, even if they thought to look. But descendants of Jews and Turks have shown ancient courage. Resistance Russ was headed not by tsar Joseph, but unnamed Hagan. Reporter is laconic: "And having been in fights, he defeated Svyatoslav kozarom and their city... he took". [42, vol. I, p. 47] 4. It is unlikely that any of the defeated survived. It is unknown where did the Jewish king and his closest tribesmen escape.
This victory decided the fate of the war and the fate of Khazaria. The center of a complex system has disappeared, and the system collapsed. Numerous Khazars did not put their heads under the Russian swords. They did not need it at all. They knew that the Russ had nothing to do in the delta of the Volga, and the fact that the Russians got rid of their oppressive power, they were only pleased. Therefore, further campaign of Svyatoslav - on the travelled road of the Turkic-Khazar Khan's annual migrations, through the "black lands" to the Middle Terek, i.e. to Semender, then through the Kuban steppes to Don and, after capturing Sarkel, to Kiev - passed without hindrance.
The Russian men, hungry from the long march across the semi-desert, plundered the lush gardens and vineyards around Semender, but the inhabitants of these unprotected settlements could easily find shelter in the dense forest on the Terek bank. The inhabitants of Sarkel probably fled in advance, for there was nothing left to fight for and no purpose. The death of the Judean community of Itil gave freedom to the Khazars and all the surrounding peoples. The zigzag was smoothed out, and history began to flow normally.
Khazar Jews, who survived in 965, dispersed to the outskirts of their former power. Some of them settled in Dagestan (mountain Jews), others - in the Crimea (the Karaites). Having lost touch with the leading community, these small ethnoses turned into relics coexisting with numerous neighbors. The disintegration of the Judeo-Khazar chimera brought them, like the Khazars, peace. [333-334]
1 С. P.P. Tolstov supposes, contrary to Makdisi, that the gain of Khazaria by Russ before the Khazarian entry of Khoresmians; he tries to compare the invasion of Rus with Vladimir's campaign to Bulgar in 985. [see: 55, p. 255]. For such opinion there is no basis.
2 It is an answer to A.A.Shakhmatov's doubts [see: 62, p.118-119].
3 С. P. Tolstov [55, p. 256] supposes that Russ has met Oguzes about Verkhnedonsky Volok (i.e. above Itil) and have moved upwards across Volga. However current on Volga so strong that to rise against a current it was possible only with the help of flounders. In military conditions it is too dangerous. Therefore it is necessary to consider that Russ went down Oka and Volga by self-swallowing at which soldiers do not get tired and can be ready for fight with the opponent.
4 There it is told: "And hailstones them and Belu Vezha have taken". Thus, "hailstones" are not Bila Vezha [see: 3, p. 427. Footnote 9].
p149
.