6. Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe, Gumilev

Part Two. The zigzag of history, section V. Princes of Exile. This section explains the silk trade routes, the Rahdonites. And the Khazar Jewish coup of Obadia, about 960.

26. VISITING THE KHAZARS

Persian Jews, once companions of Mazdak, after the death of Mazdak and fleeing to the Caucasus, lived 200 years in lowland Dagestan, between Terek and Sulak, in the neighborhood of the Khazars. The two ethnic groups lived in peace and friendship, not imposing their customs on one another. When the Arabs began to attack the Caucasus, the Jews and the Khazars were deflecting their onslaught together, because both faced the same fate: when defeated - the death of husbands and the sale of women and children into slavery, and when victorious - preparing for another war.

We must pay tribute to both small ethnic groups, who retained their courage and steadfastness in this unequal war. And an important role was played here by a form of ethnic contact, a symbiosis, when neighboring ethnic groups live side by side, without reeducating each other, and therefore do not interfere with each other. Both were in a phase of homeostasis, although for different reasons: the Khazars reached this phase by natural means, because they lived through their cycle of ethnogenesis and survived; the Jews - by artificial selection, because most of their passionaries were killed by the Persians and the tension of the ethnosystem was reduced. However, it was still enough to withstand the invaders.

When the power of the Caliphate temporarily fractured because of the constant uprisings, and the Khazars, led by the Turkic khans, transferred the military action against the Arabs, first in Azerbaijan, then in Armenia (721-722), they were helped by the surviving fire-worshippers Persians and worshippers of Musa - the Jews. The leader of the Jews, who had a Turkic name Bulan (Elk), distinguished himself in this campaign, so that he behaved independently: he restored the Jewish rituals for his people[1].

"Conversion of the Khazars" to Judaism was not, and could not be, as the proselytizing religions - Christianity and Islam - were sharply opposed to the ancient religions, where only family members were allowed to perform the cult, even if the clan grew into an ethnos. One had to be born a Persian or a Hindu, a member of a higher caste, but could not become one. If, however, it became necessary to accept a foreigner into one's milieu or to incorporate a different tribe, false genealogies were invented to justify the violation of the principle. So, Shah Ezdgerd, having decided to increase the horse army, offered the Armenian Nahrars to become Zoroastrians, on the grounds that these noblemen were descended from Parthians, the Arshakids. When they refused to renounce Christianity, the matter stalled.

Judaism is the cult of a people "chosen by Yahweh," and thus the rare converts were considered "the leprosy of Israel”. The Jews peacefully neighbored the Khazars, went on campaigns together, but prayed separately, rightly believing that there was no need to make them look like themselves or, conversely, to hypocritically imitate them in order to have good relations with their neighbors. Even forgetting most of the complex precepts of the Talmud, which was inevitable for a pastoral tribe with nowhere and no time for young men to learn even simple literacy, the descendants of the Mazdakite Jews did not melt into the environment of the surrounding tribes of Dagestan. They did not aspire to it, and they would not accept them in their environment. Bulan's merit was of another kind: he removed from his country idolaters and convinced other princes and the supreme prince of Jews to restore the forgotten faith; he has constructed a tent, an ark, a lampstand, an altar-table and sacred vessels[2], i.e. has restored the Jewish rites for his people. In the work of Jehub. Barzilai, the 11th c. Jewish author, translated this message as follows: "Khazars became proselytes and had proselyte kings (of Judaism)"[3]. However, S. Shishman points out that the word ‘ger’ in the Bible means a foreigner, incorporated by another people and received the rights of a member of the tribe that sheltered him[4]. The meaning of "proselyte" came later. Judging from the general course of events, the ancient meaning in this case is preferable, for Bulan did not embrace rabbinism, but Karaism[5].

And let it not confuse the reader that the Jews living in Khazaria are called Khazars. This is a common ethnonymic generalization, when a sub-ethnos in a foreign country is called an ethnos. Thus, a Breton in Russia will call himself a Frenchman, and a Karelian in France - a Russian. For foreigners, the Khazars are people who live in Khazaria, and submit to the authority of the Khazar Kaganate. But for the inhabitants themselves, as well as for the historical fate of the country, the differences at the sub-ethnic level are noticeable. Sometimes they are not important, but in some circumstances, their role increases. This happened in Khazaria in the second half of the 8th century, when the Jewish rabbis from Byzantium began to arrive there.

Bulan's reform was also significant in that it severed ties with the Mazdakite traditions. The ideological ties between the free-thinking members of the Jewish community and a group of free-thinking Persians proved elusive. As soon as life posed other problems, the chimera disintegrated. What for the Persian-Mazdakites had been an organic part of the established worldview, the Jews discarded as dried husks. The Mazdakites, or more precisely the Hurramites, subsequently tried to block with the Christian iconoclasts,[6] for in the deadly struggle (815-837) with the Arabs and Persian Muslims, the Khazar Jews did not help their former comrades-in-arms and associates.

But intra-ethnic ties were not affected by ideological differences. On the contrary, the emigration of Byzantine Jews to Khazaria was facilitated by the fact that the escapees were met by co-religionists and helped them to settle in. And since the rabbinic Jews of the 7th-8th centuries were city dwellers, they settled in the cities: Itil, Semender, Samkerz, Belenjer - and were engaged in trade, to which the Khazars themselves did not show this ability.

Khazar Jews greeted the Byzantine emigrants with ancient hospitality, but they paid them for their hospitality with insulting contempt. A merger of the two communities into one was out of the question. The rabbis treated the Karaites the way the Germans under Biron treated their Russian compatriots. Not that the two communities did not feel any affinity. No, they remained an integrity, but at the level of super-ethnos. They did not perceive themselves as one ethnos, and they behaved accordingly.

And the historical role of immigrant Jews was much more grandiose than that of the local ones. It was they who turned Khazaria from a small khanate to the leading power of the early Middle Ages. Whether this brought joy to the Khazars is another question. But the ethnic chimera that emerged began to function in the early ninth century. Its birth was preceded by the following events.

27. THE ANNALS DO NOT CONTAIN EVERYTHING

The chain of events began with an unexpected war. The Khazars were sharing the Crimean peninsula with the Greeks. Khazars belonged to the Steppe Crimea, the eastern part of the Southern coast, from Kerch to Sudak (Surozha), and sometimes the Crimean Gothia on the Yaila with its capital Theodoro (Mangup), sometimes this country expressed its desire to submit to Byzantium.

The mainstay of Byzantine power in the Crimea was Korsun (Chersonesos, near Sevastopol), a rich city, famous for the stubbornness of its inhabitants, who remained independent of the Constantinople government, but never broke away from the empire. From the Crimea went the spread of Orthodoxy in Khazaria, which met with no resistance. It seemed that everything was so well that no reason for the aggravation of relations could arise. And suddenly. "The militant and strong prince of Russian Novgorod... Bravlin... ...with a large army devastated places from Korsun to Kerch, came with great force to Surozh... ...broke down the iron gates, entered the city with a sword in his hand, and entered St. Sophia... Sofia... And has plundered everything, that was on a coffin ... "[8]. Further in the text there is a description of a miracle and conversion of prince [9] to Christianity but for the history other stories are more important.

In the resulted text is not clear on most everything. Who were the Russians mentioned here? What is this strange name - Bravlin, because understanding it as an epithet "branliv" (i.e. belligerent) is strained and unconvincing? Where did this Bravlin come from, what "Novgorod"? In fact, the known Novgorod at the beginning of IX century did not exist yet[10]. When did this campaign take place - in 755. [11] or in 790[12]? What were the reasons for this intervention in the Khazar affairs? Who was the initiator of the sudden raid, the consequences of which were so grandiose? One thing is clear: the campaign was directed against the Khazars, and the Crimean Christians suffered, which caused a decline of Christian bishoprics in the Great Steppe up to Khorezm [13] and lasted until the turn of X-XI centuries. But this observation alone justifies the interest in Bravlin's campaign.

We have no right to reproach the author of a source that he has left us in ignorance of so many burning questions, because before us is not the annals, but a hagiography. A chronicler as a historian is interested in events, a hagiographer - in miracles. Therefore, in accordance with the genre, the hagiographer does not pay attention to earthly affairs, while the chronicler, as we can see, writes far from everything that he should know and should not gloss over. Therefore let us be grateful to the hagiographer for a simple mention of the event, which helps shed light on the beginning of the great upheaval in Khazaria[14]. As for the interpretation of events and criticism of sources, let's not repeat the work already done by G.V. Vernadsky in the already cited text.

G.V. Vernadsky notes that there are two versions of the life of St. Stephen of Sourozh: short - Greek and long - Russian, attributed by V.G. Vasilievsky to the 16th century, but known in Russia since the early 15th century. After criticizing the versions G.V. Vernadsky points out that the mentioned in them "Novgorod" is Scythian Naples (Simferopol) and that the Rus came to the Crimea from the Don-Donets area. Before reaching Surozha, Russ plundered the whole coast of Crimea, from Chersonesos to Kerch, and the churches were especially affected. And in Surozh their leader has accepted a christening and has returned military extraction to the churches.

The motives of the campaign are unclear. It is possible that the attack was a business of the Byzantine diplomats, quarreling with the Khazars about Gothia, which the Khazars subdued in 787. But the benefit in it was for Greeks: in 790 Gothia returned to Byzantium[15].

M.I.Artamonov[16] came to similar conclusions about the homeland, and, that is very important, independently of G.V.Vernadsky. Hence, they were descendants of Rossomonks, who fought against Goths, being allies of the Huns[17]. They have been repeatedly described by the Arabian and Greek authors as ethnos, living near to Slavs, but differing from the last language and customs. Russ and Slavs have merged only at Vladimir Sacred, in X century. Till then Russ were independent people, well-known in Germany. German chroniclers named them Russ, and Olga - Regina rugorum. The process of merge began in IX century[18], but was long and thorny[19].

It is always difficult to calculate the consequences of a political action. It may be unfair to condemn the decision of the Byzantine diplomats to weaken the Khazars by contrasting them with the Russians, and at the expense of their war to join the empire with the Crimean Gothia. But the logic of events took effect. Russ has got access to Black Sea, and their attacks devastated coast of Asia Minor for 200 years. Too high a price for political intrigue. And the intrigue has given the result, return to the conceived. From robberies that Russ suffered Christian churches and orthodox influence in Khazaria has been weakened. A political vacuum was formed, which was immediately filled by Judaism. So instead of a free ally, the Greeks got two strong and cruel enemies in addition to the Arabs and Bulgarians. But we can hardly blame the diplomats for this. In 786-790 there was a fierce struggle between the Empress Irene and her son Constantine VI in Constantinople. Irene blinded her son in 797, but the monk-chroniclers lauded her as a pious empress. And probably that is why the political error was suppressed in the chronicles, but fortunately it was mentioned in the Vita Stefanos, which makes it possible to understand the sudden turn of the political balance of power, in that zigzag history, which was straightened only in the XI century. This story did not get into the "Tale of Bygone Years", and if we do not restore the course of events in the Crimea, the whole history of Eurasia remains unclear. And very important events took place there during that same epoch.

28. RAHDONITES

In the middle of VIII century the events that took place all over the Eurasian continent changed the world in a way no one could have foreseen. The demoralized Frankish power was squeezed into a steel hoop by Charles Martel, whose son Pepin the Short deprived the "lazy kings" of the Merovingian dynasty of the throne in 751.

In the same year the Arabs met with the Chinese in the Talas River valley and defeated them by a head. Two other Chinese armies, one in Manchuria and the other in Yunnan, were defeated by local tribal militias, and the dream of Chinese hegemony over Asia, which had been the guiding idea of Tang policy, evaporated.

Six years before, in 745, the second Türkiyut kaganat fell, and its bogatyrs were killed in the fights or were killed while fleeing. In its place arose the Uigur Khaganate, not at all aggressive and open to the cultural influences of Iran, but not to China.

The biggest shift was the accession of the Abbasids to Baghdad and the beginning of the collapse of the Caliphate, for this opened up roads from the West to the East for those enterprising merchants who had explored these roads. A road in Persian is “rah”, the root of the verb "to know" is don; those who knew the roads are Rahdonites. This was the name given to the Jewish merchants who had seized the monopoly of the caravan trade between China and Europe.

Trade was fabulously profitable, because they did not trade in consumer goods, but only in luxury goods. Translated into 20th century terms, this trade corresponded to currency transactions and resale of drugs. Only super-profits covered the cost of transportation and maintenance of the route, where domes were built over springs and ponds, milestones were placed to indicate the direction of the road, and caravanserais were built for overnight stays or daytime stays on especially hot days.

From the Red Sea to China there were about 200 day marches, and around the northern shore of the Caspian Sea even more. But the northern route was also used, because in the Abbasid Caliphate rebellions were an uncommon occurrence, and the Khazars strictly monitored the safety of the steppe roads. Therefore, the importance of Itil as a staging post on the long route was growing. Resting on the Volga was not only convenient, but also pleasant.

The fact that the traveling Jews of the 8th century are called by the Persian word "Rahdonits" shows that the core of this trading company was formed by the natives of the Babylonian, i.e. Iranian community, who escaped from the caliph Abd al-Melik in 690. When these wars stopped, and China after the revolt of An Lushan (756-763) was in ruins and sold silk cheaply, rakhdonits turned around. They mastered not only the eastern route, along which silk was exchanged for gold, but also the northern route - from Iran to the Kama, along which silver flowed in exchange for furs. Khazaria lay just at the crossroads of both these routes.

In ancient times, the caravan route from China to Europe ran farther south: through Khotan, Pamir and Wakhan to Persia and further west. This route was difficult and inconvenient. Therefore, after the defeat of the Huns, it shifted to the north of the Takla-Makan desert, i.e. through Karashar, Kucha, Kashgar and the Fergana Valley.

Even more convenient was the route via Turfan to Semirechye; this route was used in Turkic times, in the 6th-7th centuries. However, at that time the Turkic Turks conquered the North Caucasus, and it turned out that one could transport silk directly to Europe without paying duties to the Shah of Iran. But for that they had to make stops on the way, dig wells, put milestones, etc., and that was very difficult. Therefore, the northern route was not used until the Khorezmians were involved in the trade. However, with the conquest of Central Asia by the Arabs, the means to build roads appeared, and constant revolts in Eastern Iran revived the route from Gurgandj to the Volga, i.e. through Ustyurt to Khazaria.

For a long time, the Khazars lived in the lower reaches of the Volga, in its delta and floodplain, expecting no trouble. They were not so much engaged in cattle breeding as in viticulture and fishing. Beautiful blue channels among green meadows and dense thickets fed the capital Itil, located on an island formed by the Volga and its eastern channel Akhtuba[20]. Having a luxurious economic base, they dominated the population of dry steppes surrounding the oasis that stretched almost to the Buzachi peninsula[21].

At the same time, the Khazars believed that nothing threatened them from outside, because even the victorious Mervan did not consider their country worthy of conquest. In the VIII century, the fish wealth of the Volga could not be exported. Subsistence farming created certain habits. Those who were used to eating dates or olives had no need for "herring and wobble". Therefore, the Khazars ate red fish, not causing envy of the Arabs and Greeks. And no wonder that the authors describing Mervan's campaign noted as his main prey 20 thousand families of "sakalib", i.e. people who could be converted into slaves.

For a long time there was a dispute about the meaning of the word "sakaliba". At first they were considered Slavs,[22] although the Arabic word for Slavs is "Slavia"[23]. When it was found out, that these captives have been captured in the land of Burtasian[24], there was an opinion, that "Sakaliba" - Turkic-Finnic mix[25]. However, medieval geographers gave the term "sakaliba" a different meaning. Al-Ku-fi includes in this concept all "infidels" of Eastern Europe. Al-Khwarizmi in 836-847 wrote: "Germany, aka the country of the Sakalib". Masudi counts "Namchins" (Germans) and "Turks" (Hungarians) among Sakalibs[26]. Of course, Slavs also were among the sold slaves, but Massoudy calls them "valinana" (Volynians), from what one can see, that the terms "Slavs" and "Sakaliba" are not the same. It seems that such a unanimous opinion of medieval geographers deserves preference. The term "sakaliba" was well known not only in Eastern Europe, but also in Spain, where at the court of the Umayyad caliphs it was the name of the guards-slaves. In addition to Slavs, this guard included Germans, Frenchmen, Turks, Magyars, Pechenegs... in short, all the slaves bought in the European markets. And one should hardly see this term as an ethnonym, just as one should not see the terms "zindzhi" (black slaves from East Africa) and "mamluks" (in Egypt, slaves from Turkmens, Polovtsians, Circassians and even Russians).

A.P. Novoseltsev suggests another version: to consider the name "Slavic Guard" conventional, just as in Baghdad the "Turkic" Guard did not consist only of Turks, and in Egypt the "Circassian" Guard also included Kipchaks and Georgians[27]. Examples suggest otherwise.  The Abbasids, as Sunnis, refused the services of the Maghribi Ishmaelites and the Deilemites-Shia, as a consequence of which the Berbers took Egypt and Syria, and the Deilemites took Baghdad and Western Iran. In Egypt, the Kipchak-Bahrits and Caucasian-Burjits did not mix, and the dynasties of their sultans alternated, although they were all called Mamluks.

In the upper Don at this time lived "Chiks" - ethnos not at all Slavic, which later merged with the Khopyor Cossacks[28] , and between Don and Slavic Dnieper lived Savirs, who till XVII century distinguished themselves from the Russians. Therefore the appeal of the Transcaucasian Christians-Sanarians to the "Sahib Assakhalib" in 853. [29] can be attributed to any strong leader of any tribal union.

And is there a need to consider the words "Slav" and "slave" as synonyms? No, still M.I.Artamonov was right[30].

The main subject of the export from Khazaria in VIII-IX c. was slaves. That is why the Jewish slave-traders from Iran and Byzantium came here.

Of course, the Jews themselves did not make expeditions for "live goods", especially at the beginning of the IX century. "Hungarians are fire-worshippers and they go to the Oguzes, Slavs and Ruses and take captives from there, take them to Rum and sell them"[31]. After Hungarian-Khazarian conflict this impure business passed to Rus'; but according to the composition of Ibn-Rusta, in X century prisoners were sold to Khazars and Bulgars[32], this time the victims of slave-trade were just Slavs[33]. And what a shame: the captures of slaves in Eastern Europe were carried out not by aliens, but by aborigines, the locals. This suggests that the majority of the population there were ancient, or rather - old ethnic groups (pre-Slavic), which lost their former passionarity, like their peers - the Khazars, but in contrast with the latter, they were not able to import the young or mature passionarity, which the Slavs or Turkuits could bring them. But valiant Turkuits, who saved Khazaria from Arab conquest, made a fatal mistake.

Turkic khans of the Ashin dynasty, due to religious tolerance and complacency characteristic of steppe people, believed that their power was getting hard-working and intelligent subjects, which could be used for diplomatic and economic assignments. Wealthy Jews gave the Khazar Khans and beks sumptuous gifts, and beautiful Jewish women filled up the Khan's harems. So there was a Jewish-Khazar chimera.

For the Jews-Khazars it was probably a shame that Bulan's attempt to achieve hegemony in the political life of Khazaria was crushed by the Arab courage and the military power remained in the hands of the Turkic-Khazar nobility, to get along with which was not always easy.

The formation of Chimera took the second half of VIII century. During this time, the Khazars moved military operations against the Arabs in the Caucasus and in revenge for the destruction of Semender and Belenjer, devastated Azerbaijan. There is no information about participation of the Jews in these operations, both old, Bulan's comrades-in-arms, and new, the Rahdonites.

29. INDEPENDENT

Not having succeeded militarily, the Khazar Jews made up for their losses with love, (children). At the end of the VIII century there were many children of mixed, Jewish-Khazar marriages between Terek and Volga. However, their fate was different depending on who was the father of the child and who was the mother. And here's why.

All Eurasian tribes considered the child a member of the father's family. A legitimate child had a share in the clan property, the right to protection and mutual assistance and participation in clan cults. The clan was an element of ethnicity and culture, hence clan membership determined ethnicity; the mother's origin was not taken into account.

For Jews, ethnicity coincided with community membership. The right to be a member of the community, and therefore to be a Jew, was determined by being descended from a Jewish woman. In the 2nd century BC this right enabled the Semitic tribes of the Idumeans and Galileans (see I 20) to join the Jews, but in the Middle Ages it led to the isolation of Jewish ethnic groups, especially in Europe and Eurasia, where marriages to Jewish women were forbidden by the Christian and Muslim religions. In Khazaria, there were no such restrictions.

It turned out that the son of a Khazar and a Jew had all the rights of his father and the capabilities of his mother. He was taught by Jewish rabbis, community members helped to make a career or take part in trade, his father's clan protected him from enemies and insured him against poverty in case of misfortune. But the son of a Jew and a Khazar woman was a stranger to all. He had no rights to inherit his father's share of the family property, could not study the Talmud in a Jewish spiritual school, received no support from anyone but his parents, and even that was limited by the tribal customs and religious Jewish laws. These poor people had no place in life. So they lived on the outskirts of Khazaria, in the Crimea, and practiced Karaism, which did not require the study of the Talmud, and to read the Pentateuch they could be taught by their loving parents, but powerless against the dictates of the law.  Their descendants formed a tiny ethnos of the Crimean Karaites, whose anthropological features combine Turkic and Middle Eastern types[34]. Their sympathies were turned to the aborigines: Khazars, Bulgars, Goths, Alans, but not to their cousins, those making in the rich Itil "career and fortune".

The Rakhdonites and the Khazar Karaites not only had different practices of everyday life, but also different theology. The teachings of the Torah, that is, the Old Testament, although not intended for dissemination among non-believers, but also not classified. It is an integral part of Christian and Muslim theology, and so its bearers were entitled to speak in disputes and defend their concept without sinning against the law.

Not so Talmudic Judaism, created in the second century by Jews transformed by a pasionary push. The Talmud itself is a subject of study only for rabbis and theologians, while other Jews study the outline, Shulhan Arukh, a collection of laws of everyday life and law, civil and criminal[35].

The difference between the Jewish descendants of the Mazdakites and their Talmudic guests is obvious. The former inhabited the barren steppe, lived off the landscape and were in symbiosis with their Khazar neighbors. In other words, they became a Eurasian ethnos, which later became a relic. As such, it survived until the 20th century. And no one was confused by religious features of the Karaites, because it was their own business.

But if so, the Karaites fell out of the Jewish super-ethnos. They were rejected by their former co-religionists and tribesmen. Unfortunately, neither Bulan nor his followers could even imagine this. For a time, they sincerely believed that they were helping their kinsmen, and the Jews who came from Byzantium kept them honest and did not reveal the truth. When it became clear what was going on, it was too late to do anything about it, and things began to take a natural course of events that had arisen because of the banal nature of those events. One always pays dearly for this mistake.

The affinity between the Jewish companions of Mazdak in the 6th century and the Karaites in the 8th century cannot be understood as an ideological continuity. It is more correct to see a psychological affinity here, but that is enough. The survivors of the 690 defeat of the Jewish academies of Sura and Pumbadits managed to find a common platform with the Arab Caliphs, while their opponents joined the Shi'ites. During the Abu Muslim Revolt of 748, Abu-Isa, a Jewish tailor from Isfahan, led more than 10,000 Jews in a revolt against the tenets of the Talmud. Abu-Isa declared himself the harbinger of the Messiah and recognized Jesus Christ and Mohammed as "true prophets." The revolt was suppressed in 755, but the movement received a new leader, Anan ben-David, whose preaching began in 767 and lasted until the end of the eighth century.

This was an era of popular uprisings with religious slogans. In 755 the Persians, led by Sumbad Magh, rose; in 767 the inhabitants of Khorasan rebelled; in 778-779 the red banner of the Kharijites was raised in Gurgan, and in 776-783 in Maverannahr the "clothed in white" shook the Arab power. Against this formidable background, Karaism, which apparently matured for two centuries as a protest against the change of faith, developed and strengthened.

Indeed, Talmudism and Kabbalah are so little like the religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - the veneration of Eloim - and the teachings of Moses - the cult of the fiery spirit Yahweh, that a strict distinction between them is necessary for understanding the processes under study. In the book of the Zohar (radiance) the personal God of the Old Testament is replaced by the Ensof - the Infinite, devoid of attributes and any connection with the world, which is, however, realized through the ten sefirot - the creating powers of God[36]. This doctrine is further from Old Testament doctrine than Christianity and Islam. The Karaites realized this and rejected Talmudism, which reconciled them with Christianity and Islam, but brought much grief.

In the twentieth century scholars rejected the classical view of the formation of Karaites as a result of Anan ben-David's sermon in the eighth century, considering it "naive."[37] Well, theologically they are probably right, because elements of the views of the ancient Yeseis, the authors of the Qumran texts, can be traced in Karaism quite clearly. But we are interested in something else: why did ancient and, worse, outdated views find new life in the eighth century? In other words, what is the natural cause of this fluctuation?

Let us remember that the Yeseis took part in two Jewish wars, 67-70 and 132-135. - and suffered tremendous losses by passional warriors who fell in battle and by genocidal women who were sold into slavery. The only survivors were those who fled to Parthia and initiated the Gnostic branch of Judaism, and those who fled to Arabia and settled in the oasis of Yathrib.  These latter were defeated by Muhammad and forced to leave Arabia. However, let us note that these Jews were in the zone of a passionate push, the same push that brought to life first the Islamic consortium (community) and then the Arab-Muslim ethnos. (Our former post #3) Apparently, this shock should have affected the Arab Jews as well, and it affected them, but the defeat forced them to leave the country and because of this they fell behind in the process of ethnogenesis.

But when the pressure of the Arabs was relieved, the passionate Jews said their word, or rather, repeated what had already been said and forgotten, because a slogan is valuable to the passionaries only insofar as it gives a reason for action and indicates the goal - "who to beat".

In this situation, it made no sense to "hit" Muslims or Christians, neither in terms of theological doctrine, which offered a synthesis of world religions, nor in terms of the real balance of power, because Anan bin David was not a second Mohammed. It was not necessary to quarrel with the pagan Khazars, because Bulan tried to make a second Galilee out of Khazaria, but was not successful. The real opponent of the new teachings was the already established Talmudic Judaism. How fierce fighting took place within the Jewish communities in the Middle East, can only be guessed from the tone of the fragments of texts published in the cited book by P.K. Kokovtsov. Only one thing is clear - the Jews defeated the Karaites in the Muslim and Catholic world, and the Karaites survived only in the Byzantine possessions in the Crimea as a fragment of Khazar-Jewish mestizo community. As for Khazaria itself, this issue is so complex that it will be the subject of a further narrative.

To begin with, we note that Bulan, even turning into Sabriel, could not claim the honorary title of "prince of exile," which the Jews of the Diaspora retained as a memory of their destroyed kingdom. The Jewish state tradition included a monarchy, which could not exist in the Diaspora. Therefore, as long as the Jews had no subordinate territory, their head wore the title "prince. But poor Bulan and his tribe were outcasts of Israel, descendants of the Mazdakite Jews. And even if they themselves had forgotten it for 300 years, the learned Jews remembered it well. So another man was promoted to the position of "prince of exile," who obtained the title and left it to his descendants.

30. AND THUNDER RANG OUT...

In the decade when the patrician Nicephorus ascended the throne in Constantinople (31.X.802 ), and when the Caliph Harun ar-Rashid executed his best associates and true friends - Barmekid (27.1.803), in the Khazar Kaganate some influential Jew Obadiah took power into his own hands, turned the Khan of the Ashina dynasty (by father) into a puppet and made the rabbinic Judaism the state religion of Khazaria.

The circumstances under which this not so much religious as state coup took place are covered with many legends,[38] all of which, without exception, appear to be invented with one purpose - to conceal the true state of affairs from the people and history. It is not even known who Obadiah was. Apparently, he did not belong to the number of local Jews, the descendants of Mazdak's companions, illiterate and brave warriors - Karaites like Bulan. It is said of Obadiah: "He was a righteous and just man. He corrected (renewed) the kingdom and strengthened the assemblies (synagogues) and houses of scholars (schools) and gathered a lot of wise men of Israel, giving them a lot of silver and gold, and they explained to him 24 books (holy writings) the Mishnah, the Talmud and the whole order of prayer adopted by the Chazzans. He feared God and loved the law and the commandments."[39] Already from this alone it is clear that Obadiah was neither a Karaites nor a Khazar[40].

No, this characterization shows that Obadiah was an intelligent man with connections in the Jewish diaspora. For the "wise men of Israel" he did not spare the Khazar "silver and gold", so that only these wise men agreed to welcome in Itil. And if we compare with this fact, the well-known fact that a political coup requires money and organization, it is clear with what circles Obadia was connected. It was not the Khazars and not the Khazar Jews who benefited from the change of power, but the visiting Jews and the Jewish community as a whole. And if so, then they organized the coup, while maintaining the legitimate principle. The rightful khan of the Ashina clan became a Jew, i.e., he accepted his mother's faith and was accepted into the community. All state posts were distributed among the Jews, and Obadiah himself took the title "peh" (bek), translated in Arabic as "malik," i.e., king. This means that he headed the government under the nominal khan (Kagan), who from that time was in custody (house arrest) and released to the people once a year. And for the people of Khazaria the significance of the coup was defined by King Joseph, head of the Jewish community of Itil, writing: "And from that day, when our ancestors have entered under the cover of Shokhina (presence of deity)[41], he submitted us all our enemies and overthrew all the peoples and tribes who lived around us, so that none has stood against us until this day (about 960 - L.G.).   They all serve and pay tribute to us - the kings of Edom (pagans) and the kings of Ishmael (Muslims)."[42] Yes, it was a profitable business.

And now let us take a moment away from describing the course of history to try to understand its meaning. Obadiah's coup is not an extraordinary phenomenon, moreover, it is still exceptional. It does not fit into the normal pattern of ethnogenesis, neither Türkic-Khazars, nor Jewish. The Türkic-Khazars were at the end of the inertial phase of the Hunno-Syanbi steppe super-ethnos, which absorbed in itself Ugric, Hionites, Dinlins, Kumans, and developed a certain stereotype of behavior and worldview, i.e. a culture. The Jews were younger. They had just passed the phase of fracture and division of the “ethnic field”. They were the same age as the Byzantines and Slavic-Russians, but they differed from them in that they had developed not a natural but a man-made landscape - cities from Chang'ani to Toulouse and caravan routes. The inevitable relationship between the landscape and the ethnos was slightly distorted, and this was enough to turn the ethnic system into a rigid, or rather semi-rigid one. This meant that the ethnos turned into a social layer, without which the coup of Obadiah and the subsequent prosperity of Judeo-Khazaria would have been unthinkable.

Rigid systems, however, are automatically excluded from natural self-development. Their activity grows due to constant meetings with the environment, and it is even greater than that of natural ethnoses, but such systems have no "age". Therefore, their appearance among natural ethnogenesis deforms or, more precisely, distorts the usual course of ethnogenesis of the region, i.e. it creates "zigzags" not foreseen by either nature or science. But this makes the problem worthy of special attention.

We should not assume that the creation of chimeras is an exceptional phenomenon and that the Jews played a unique role here. No, similar consequences occur wherever inorganic contacts occur on a super-ethnic level. Thus, in the 3rd century B.C. the descendants of the Diadochians and epigones settled in the cities of Bactria and Syria, and the heirs of the heroes of Turan, the Parthians, became the dominant class in a tattered Iran.

Both the Macedonian dynasties, the Ptolemies and Seleucids, and the Parthian shahs, the Arshakids, remained for three centuries outsiders to their subjects. The antipathy to the Macedonians then spread to the Romans. Therefore, before the passionate explosion of the first and second centuries, the population of Syria and Egypt was an ethnic chimera. We could give a few more equally striking examples, but we have no time... We need to go back to the Lower Volga.

NOTES

[1] The basis of the dating, given by M.I.Artamonov, is contradictory. In the description of the raid of Khazars in Transcaucasia under Bulan's leadership was mentioned a route to Dr Alam, "under which they see Daryal", and a town Ard-vil, i.e. Ardebil (History of Khazars. P.269). M.I.Artamonov compared this raid with the invasion of Khazars to Azerbaijan in 731, when Khazars, after some successes, were defeated by Arabs. This is inconsistent with the account of Bulan's success. Then the Arabs captured from the Khazars "banner in the form of a copper image" (Ibid., p. 215), which the Jews could not have. Finally, the leader of the Khazars was a son of Kagan Barjil, and not a Jew, as well as his mother, khan Parsbit ("tiger face", see: Ancient Turkic Dictionary. L., 1969). Apparently, it should be preferred an earlier date of 718, which does not contradict the known and established facts. Equally, Bulan's way is interpreted inaccurately. Dar alam - literally "gate of the world" (Pers. Arabic) is not Daryal, and Derbent - literally "locked door" (Pers.). In 718 the fortress was liberated by the Khazars from the Arabs.

[2] See: Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars. С.269.

[3] Jeschurun. Vol.XI, № 9110.Berlin, 1924. P.113.

[4] Szyszman S.Ou la conversion du roi Khazar Bulan-a-t-elle eu lieu? Hominage a Andre Dupon - Sommer. Paris, 1971. P. 327.

[5] Szyszman S. Le roi Bulan et probleme de la conversion des Khazars //Ephemerides Teological Loranienses. T. 33. Bruges, 1957. P. 68-76.

[6] Babek, the leader of the Hurramites, allied himself with the emperor Theophilus about 830 (see: Muller A. History of Islam, vol. II, p. 199). The attempt to unite Mazdakism with iconoclastic orthodoxy made at that time was unsuccessful.

[7] The literature on medieval Crimea is enormous. For a necessary bibliography see: Artamonov I.I. History of the Khazars.

[8] Life of St. Stephen, Bishop of Surozh. Quoted from: Gumilevsky F. History of the Russian Church. М.,1888. С. 21;Cf.:Vasilievsky V.G. Works: In 4 vols. of Pb.; Pg.; L.. 1908 - 1930. T.III. C.95-96; Vernadsky G. The Origins of Russia. P. 180-182.

[9] The name of this prince Bravlin is sometimes read as "branliv", i.e. "bellicose" (Vernadsky G. The Origins... P. 182).

[10] See: Artamonov M.I. History of Khazars. С.336.

[11] See: Gumilevsky F. Ibid, p.23.

[12] Vernadsky G. The Origins... P180-183. This date is preferable because of the new literature on this question (see also P 320)

[13] Emperor Constantine says about the steppes of the Black Sea region: "Here are found among the ruins of towns the traces of Christianity and crosses carved from well stone" (quoted from: Gumilevsky F. Ibid, p. 22).

[14] See: Kliuchevskij V.O. Ancient Russian hagiographies of the saints as a historical source. М., 1871.

[15] Vernadsky G. The Origins...P. 182-183.

[16] See: Artamonov M.I. History of Khazars. С.366.

[17] Jordanes. С. 91, 279.

[18] See: Novoseltsev A.P. Eastern sources on the East Slavs and Rus VI-IX centuries // Ancient Russian state and its international importance. MD 1965. С.355- 419.

[19] To a conclusion about identity of ethnonyms Russ and Russ simultaneously with us has come A.G. Kuzmin. He has picked up a lot of fragmentary information, which merge in the coherent concept about wide distribution of Russ, already in 307 denoted among federates of Roman empire. The homeland of Rigans was the southern Baltic, from where they were driven out by the Goths, and then spread across the Eastern Europe from the Adriatic to the Dnieper and Lake Ilmen. Their wide dispersion led to the instability of the spelling of their ethnonym: Rugs (Horns), Russ, Roses, Rutsi, Ruians, Ruten, and in a few centuries the ethnic relationship might have been forgotten by the descendants of the ancient Rugs themselves. A.G. Kuzmin considers Russ not Germans, as it was accepted up to now, and not Slavs, but "northern Illyrians", opponents of Goths. See: Kuzmin A.G. The fall of Perun. Formation of Christianity in Russia. М., 1988. С. 133-139.

[20] See: Gumilev L.N. Khazar burial and the place where Itil stood / / Reports of the State Hermitage Museum. VOL. XX. Л.. 1962. С. 56-58.

[21] See: Gumilev L.N. The origins of the rhythm of nomadic culture // Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1966. № 4. С. 85-94.

[22] See: Shakhmatov A.A. Ancient Fates of the Russian Tribe. Pg., 1919. С. 34- 37; Tretiakov P.N. East Slavic tribes. М., 1953. С. 252.

[23] Garkavi A.Ya. Tales of Muslim writers about Slavs and Russians. SPb, 1870. С. 41-43, 162; Kovalevsky A.P. op. cit. p. 159.

[24] See: Artamonov M.I. History of Khazars. С.220.

[25] Zeki Valldi Togan A. lbn Fadlan'n Reisebericht//Abhandlugen fur die Kunde des Morgenlandes. Bd XXIV. Leipzig. 1939. S. 365-369.

[26] See: Novoseltsev A.P. op. cit. p.368-370.

[27] See: Novoseltsev A.P. op. cit.

[28] See: Shennikov A.A. Chervleniy Yar. Л., 1987.

[29] See: Novoseltsev A.P. Op. cit. P 371.

[30] See: Artamonov M.I. History of Khazars. С.220.

[31] Novoseltsev A.P. Ibid: P 389.

[32] See: Ibid. С. 397.

[33] N.G.Pashuto interprets this period somewhat differently (Foreign policy of Ancient Rus. Moscow, 1968. P.91); but cf.; Novoseltsev A.P. Ibid p. 415, where there is an opinion about the winning of Kievan Slavic town by Rus' Askold (Haskuld of Scandinavian sagas).

[34] See: Alekseev V.P. In search of ancestors. М., 1972. С. 184-285, cf. the correction and interpretations: Gumilev L.N. On anthropology for non-anthropologists / / Nature. 1973. № 1 .С. 112.

[35] Schulchan Aruch, oder vier judischen Gedelzbucher, ubersetzt von Heinrich George. Lowe. Hamburg, 1837-1841.

[36] Hertz G. History of the Jews. Т. 8. Odessa, 1 907. С. 62.

[37] Naphlali Wieder. The Judean Scrolls and Karaism. London, 1962; Revuede l'histoire de religions. T. 168. № 451. P. 62-74.

[38] For the critical analysis of the Khazar "conversion" see: Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars. С. 268-273.

[39] Kokovtsov P.K. Jewish-Khazar correspondence in the 10th century. С.80, 97.

[40] M.I.Artamonov's assumption that Obadia belonged to the Khazar nobility of the Judean confession contradicts all the facts cited by M.I.Artamonov himself (see: History of Khazars. P.280ff).

[41] The philosophical interpretation of the term goes back to Philo of Alexandria. In the Talmud Shekhinah is identified with a deity. Dressed in dark robes, she wanders the earth, lamenting the Temple in Jerusalem and the grief of her children, scattered among the nations. Josephus was referring to the mythological rather than the philosophical meaning of the word "Shechinah."

[42] Kokovtsov P.K. op. cit.

page 172 / 800 (follow in the table of contents at the bottom of the Index file.)

.