PDA

View Full Version : Lost civilizations : Khazaria



RollingWave
07-31-2012, 03:14 AM
There are a few Dark Age / Medieval states that really cought my fancy, states that today people mostly forgotten but were really fabulously wealthy in their own right, I'll start with one of them here, the Dark age state of Khazaria.

To give a brief intro:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Chasaren.jpg/250px-Chasaren.jpg
Khazaria was the most dominant Dark Age period state in the Russian Steppes, it emerged after the chaotic mess after the disentergration of the Hunnic Empire. It's core regions were the northern and western coast of the Caspian Sea, espeically in the Volga Delta region.

It is most interesting because it was quiet different from most nomadic confederations in the history of many kind, most of them formed rapidly under the leadership of a powerful ruler, they were maintained mostly through raiding and plundering neighboring civilziations, and as their success grew their size grew as well until they could no longer expand their conquest, then they suddenly implode.

However, Khazaria was not like that, it was like most other nomadic states, a confederation where most of the population were allied tribes who's loyalty hinged almost entirely on the profitiability of the Khazar's alliance, but unlike other nomaid states, it's chief means of profit was not raids and plunder, which was most likely why it also sustained it self far longer than most . (it started around the 7th century and lated till the early 11th C.)

The Khazars' on the other hand, was in fact primarily a merchentile state, it's chief profit was through the maintainese and control of the Northern Trade route, which through its' power became far more accessable (since your not as likely to die to the attack of a million nomads). They also took advantage of the fact that Silk Road was primarily controlled by the Perisans, but amongst their biggest end consumers, the (eastern) Romans, were usually in a hostile situation with them. Thus the Romans had signfiicant incentives to seek an alternate source and route to access the goods of the Silk Road that isn't held by hostile nations.

That route was developed by the Khazars, which created an alterate route where you go north beyond the Greater Persian zone, into the steppes, eventually down the Don River and into the Black Sea and then from there sail to Constantinople. it is a fast route really, as there are far less terrains barriers (in the summers anyway) and far more navigable rivers. the only real problem that kepted it from operating before was the simple fact that it was dominated by Nomads.

The Khazars managed to built a system where the nomads now instead of plundering the travelling merchnts. would instead actively protect and assist their travel, and in exchange the Merchants would obviously pay a toll which the Khazars would eventualy split up amongst all the tribes, it was a simple but effective system that created immense wealth, aided further by the fact that once such route open, a flood of high quality furs could now be shipped to both Persia and Byzantium, which further fueled their vast wealth. it was said that the Khazar Khagans often paraded through the streets of their capital in Atil (near modern day Astrakhan) and just throw silver coins from a basket at the bystanders.


As their wealth grew, so too did their involvement in the politics in the rest of the World, predominatnely the (Eastern) Roman and Persian (later Arab) wars. as you can probably see from the basis of their economy, they were obviously more likely to have sided with their customers (the Byznatiums) than their commercial competitors ( the Persian / Arabs) thus most of the conflict involved Byzantium / Khazar cooperation , the Byzantiums even sent a huge team into the middle of the steppes and erectected a huge fortress for the Khazars as a return favor. the famed fortress of Sarkel which was located around where the Don river flows the closest to the Volga (which should give you a good hint as to how importantly the Khazars view theses river as part of their interest)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Sarkel.jpg/400px-Sarkel.jpg

The Khazars sent armies into Persia in coordiation with the Byzantiums on several occasion, and later on they fought a series of wars with the Arabs, with one Khazar attack going as far as Mosul (Iraq) and an Arab attack up to the western Caspian coast beyond the Caucasus, however genereally speaking most of these wars didn't do much in the greater picture of things.


The other thing the Khazars are prehaps most interesting was the fact that.....


They were the only state in the entire history of man kind that converted to ....... Judaism :shocked:

That's right, after the Rise of the Arabs the Khazars apprently sees the need to have a monothesis religion on their side as well, to strenghten their internal unity, but they decided to choose one that was neither Christianity nor Islam...



However, soon after the Converstion the Khazars began to decline, part of it was the convertion to Judaism caused rifts within the allied tribes, some tribes (most notablly, the Magyar tribes) decided to simply pack up and leave (which would become the events that lead to the foundation of Hungary). these events cause the Khazar's confederation to become destablized, but perhaps the more influential event was the arrival of the Viking Age.


While in Western Europe, the Viking rage is mostly remembered for the plunders along the North Sea (particularly the British Isles) and the founding of Normandy, but it's effect was arguablly far larger in Eastern Europe, where Vikings began founding new trade colonies in modern day Russia, the most famous of which was Novgorod being founded by one Rurik, from that point on the Vikings in the East (called the Varagians by the Byzantiums) would become known as the "Rus" the term that would eventually become "Russia"


At the start, the Rus people mostly traded along the upper Volga, bringing furs down stream for Persian Coins from Khazaria back to the North Sea region (which is why digs of the era as far as Norway often finds substaintial amount of Silver Persian Coins). however, they eventually began to expand their influence, partly to get out from under the Khazar yoke, as obviously the Volga trade was almost entirely under their control and thus profits were often limited. The new trade route they opened was the one along the less navigable (but not for the Maritime based Vikings) Dneiper river that also leads into the Black sea.

With the weakening of the Khazars and the departure of a lot of their western Tribes, the Rus moved south to fill he void, here they founded a new city along the Dneiper that would become the center fo their operation and realm for centuries to come.....Kiev.

The Rus moved their center of operation to Kiev in the early parts of the 10th C, most likely under Igor I (who is said to be the son of Rurik). when Igor died he left the throne to his 3 year old son, but his son Sviatoslav I would end up as a huge player and one of the most important figures in Europe at the end of the Dark age period.

Under Sviatoslav I (a really legendary men himself in many rights) the Rus began a series of offensive agains the khazars, and in 967 AD basically destroyed them by burning their capital to the ground, while the Khazars clung on for a few more decades it was never the same again. and finaly in the early11th C it disappeared altogther.

Trinnity
07-31-2012, 03:22 AM
Oh, that is SO interesting. How come I've never heard of them? :angry:

RollingWave
07-31-2012, 03:46 AM
I guess it's primarily because there are no clear successor state to them today, not even within the Russian Repbulics. Though most people would be facinated simply by the fact that they coverted to Judaism. so...

During that period Khazaria became a prime destination for the Jews along with Andalusia (Southern Spain). this is also probably why Russia would eventually end up with a rather large Jewish population until WW2.

RollingWave
07-31-2012, 04:10 AM
Another interesting side note, while the Khazars themself are forgotten, their late fall caused a wide series of events that had great reprucussion to the events in the early medieval era and really effects that last until today, as meantioned the Magyar were one of the dominant branch of their alliance in Ukrain, their departure into modern day Hungary was obviously huge. the other part was that after the sack of Atil by the Rus, their eastern tribes began a series of massive shift as well, coinciding with the Abbasid Caliph's own decline, this caused a massie wave of Turksish tribes to began migrating southward into the Greater Persian zone, including one particular Tribe that established itself as and independent tribe right around this time... the Seljuks. this massive wave of immigration would basically last until the Mongol Invasion, and it's effects and influence are of course well documented.


(The Seljuks was named after the grandfather of Tughril, the first Great Seljuq Sultan, who died in early 11th C, was said to have been an officer in Khazaria in his early career before migrating southward)

MMC
07-31-2012, 06:14 AM
Hmmmm RW wasn't the Khazars tho Truthfully Turks? . Especially their Core Ruling Tribes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Viking_Expansion.svg/793px-Viking_Expansion.svg.png

Here is the Map during the Viking Expansion. The Khazars also acted as a buffer or hinderance to the Arabs. Kept them in check and from entering Europe thru this this way. While also acting as a Buffer for Byzantium.

MMC
07-31-2012, 06:23 AM
Oh, that is SO interesting. How come I've never heard of them? :angry:


Perhaps you might know them by the name of the Uyghurs or as RW mentioned the Maygars. The Rus would be those that would create the rest of Russia.

RollingWave
07-31-2012, 12:52 PM
Yes The Khazars themself were a Turkic people that's not too distantly related to the Seljuqs as well, the Oghuz turks were probably relatively closer to the core of the Khazar ruling class and it was probably because of that the fall of Khazaria caused them to migrate south in masses. as later on the dominant Kipchack - Cumans were somewhat more distant Turks (at least in terms of language.)

MMC
07-31-2012, 03:34 PM
Well they were the Cause of the Bulgars being split apart. Technically that is. I was just thinking did that cause the difference in dialects.

RollingWave
07-31-2012, 09:40 PM
Yes, the other Bulgar (Volga Bulgar) is the probable subject of my next writing on this ...

RollingWave
08-01-2012, 02:20 AM
Another very interesting state that had a lot to do with Khazaria as well.

Volga Bulgaria:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/VolgaBulgaria.jpg/300px-VolgaBulgaria.jpg

The Bulgars, not unlike the Khazars, emerged in the aftermath of the Hunnic implosion, in the 7th century AD they became the dominant forces in modern day Ukrain, for a time they were the primary rivals of the Khazars, especially during the rule of Kubrat, due to their vincity to the Byznatium Crimea, they had a lot of contact with the Romans and in fact Kubrat even spent a good portion of his youth in Constantinople and was Baptized there. after he returned to the Steppes he united the Tribes of Ukrain into Great Bulgaria.

However toward the end of his long live he already saw clearly that the Bulgars were on the losing end of the struggle for domination on the steppes with the Khazars, thus he urged his children to stay united and face a common foe, however his children did not heed his advice, and soon Great Bulgaria began to crumble. in it's final act, the sons (there were at least 5, possibly more) sons of Kubrat split up all their tribes men and headed in all directions. as was the custom of the steppe people.

they REALLY went all different directions, as some ended up as far as Italy, while others in Anatolia, and some in Hungary, but those branches did not really survive the test of time, however, two of the exodus branches survived.. and infact flurished.

The best known of which of course, would be the onces that became the Bulgarians, crossing the Danube River into modern day Bulgaria, they couldn't have arrived at a better time... since just check out this timeline..

632 AD : death of Mohammad, Arabia united under the Rashidun Caliphate

637 AD : fall of Jerusalem and Roman Syria to the Arabs

642 AD : fall of Egypt to the Arabs

665 AD: death of Kubrat, beginning of the Bulgar exodus. full arab invasion of Tunisia commence.

674-678 AD : Arabs sieged Constantinople Asparukh of Bulgaria leads 50,000 followers across the Danube.

681 AD : official establishment of the First Bulgarian Empire.


In short, the Bulgars arrived in modern day Bulgaria in the most favorable circumstances possible, as the Byzantiums were literally fighting for their lives at Cosntantinople and had zero capacity to deal with any events elsewhere. by the time the siege was finally lifte they realized their backyard now suddenly have some new guest... oops..

The Bulgars would permenantly establish themself in the Balkan region and the region would become known as Bulgaria, though they themself were generally Slavicnized in the insuing century.

However, there was another lesser known branch of the Bulgars and also survived the Flourished, that is the Volga Bulgars.

The Brother of Aspharuk, Kutarg, also lead a large host of follower up the Volga and reached the area of modern day Tatarstan, where the Kama river flows into the Volga, and soon they settled there and dominated over the relatively primitive Finnic people of the region. This was the beginning of Volga Bulgaria.


The Volga Bulgars, being just upstream from the Khazar heartland, obvsiously still had to deal with the Khazars, and for most of it's early existence it was something of a tributory state of the Khazars, as they also hold a key section of the Volga where most of the Furs would have to meet up from the sources. and also it was pretty much the main route of the vikings . so they also became prosperous along side the Khazars.

As the Volga flows into the Caspian sea, naturally the Volga Bulgar and their travelling merchents had a great deal of contact with the Persian world, and thus by the early 10th C a good number of their population had already converted to Islam, at that point their ruler decided to offically make it a state religion, thus allying themself with the Abbasid Caliph against the Khazars. The Abbasid Caliph even send a large emmisary mission to Volga Bulgaria, though it was not really a success, seeing tha tthey had initially intended to bring a large sum of fund and knowhow over to help them establish a fortress not unlike the Byzantiums helping the Khazars establishing Sarkel, but ummm... they were robbed along the way ;) so instead of a big donor, the Volgas got a bunch of beggers that they had to fund to return home. But never the less in the 10th century Volga Bulgaria rapidly became an Islamic state, though it remained very multi cultured throuhgout it's existence.

When the Khazars weakened, the Volga Bulgars probably played a serious role in it's final demise, as Sviatoslav's sack of Khazaria did not happen in a vaccum, it was more than likely that the Volga Bulgars along with the Pechengs actively plotted against their overlords as well. When the dust settled, a new balance was reached on the Russia/ Ukrainian Region, between the Rus (who held north western Russia and Ukrain along the major rivers, the Pechengs (who overran much of the lower Volga and held most of Ukrain away from the main rivers.) and the Volga Bulgars (who held the middle and possiblly lower stretch of the Volga).

Initially the Volga trade declined with the destruction of Khazaria and the end of order on the Steppes, merchant could no longer safely travel in the region again, however the Volga Bulgar were instrucmental in restoring the order mostly through the 11th century, where they reached a good degree of mutual understanding with both the Cuman-Kipchaks (which had replaced the Pechengs) and also with the Rus. thus the Volga Bulgars paid tribute to both side but in return both side would try to maintain a degree of restriant against merchants travelling through the area. a rather amazing accomplishment seeing how both the Steppe Nomads and the Viking were pretty much the poster child of a Pirate civilization.

By the 12th century, the Northern Trade had mostly been restored and Volga Bulgaria became the center of it's commercial activies, it became the only place north of Persia to have a silver mint. as it now not only imported silver coins from the Persians, but actively made their own. thus silver coins flow in the region, and the Bulgars became known as the "Silver" Bulgars.

in this period, the Bulgar capital at Bilyar and Bolghar were the largest cities in modern day Russia by a substantial degree, it was much bigger than Kiev and Novgorod at the time, in fact it may have been bigger than Paris, making it possibbly the largest European city outside of Constantinople. The cities had huge buildings with built in heating, and even large public bathhouses. Bolghar hosted merchant quoters for Persians / Rus / Arabs / Jews ... and even Chinese(!!) (though that may have only came during the Mongol period)

Amazing to think that at this time, in a place deep inside Russia and beyond the Steppes, where civilization should have long died out, there was an incrediablly thriving Islamic Emirate, with Jews / Persian / Scandinavians / Finns / Turks all living side by side.

With the decay in central authority of the Rus after the death of Yaroslav the Wise, the Rus began to occasionally raid and attack the Bulgars again. who's huge wealthy cities in a place with super connected rivers made them the most ideal Viking targets possible. though the Vogla were hit by frequent raids, the now ununified Rus Princes were not very threatening as a whole to them, merely annoying that they often launched raid via river boats disguised as a merchants, something that the open trading state of Volga Bulgaria had little defense against. The Rus on the other hand, while often able to take the easy plunder of Volga Bulgaria, still needed them to access the trade to Persia. and more over they continue to struggle in Ukrain, where once away from the main rivers they stood little chance against the nomadic hordes.

Of course, this balance was eventually broken by the Mongols, who pretty much conquered all 3 sides, ironically it was the least militaristic Volga Bulgars that put up the most valiant stand against the Mongols. actually defeating them in the first battle.

Though Volga Bulgaria as a state was destroyed by the Mongols, the Middle to lower Volga region remained the center of the Golden Horde for centuries to come, and Bolghar remained one of it's most prominent city (alongside the new capital of Sarai Batu) graudally a new city was founded in the region, that of Kazan, and eventually the power and population shifted over to there, and when the Golden horde imploded the Khanate of Kazan became it's most wealthy successor state. until it was finally destroyed by Ivan the Terrible.

Today, as Russia become relatively less authoritarian, the Bulgar identity is seeing a rivival in Tartarstan. and a huge deal of progress is being made on Volga Bulgar ruins .

Carygrant
08-01-2012, 03:22 AM
With the weakening of the Khazars and the departure of a lot of their western Tribes, the Rus moved south to fill he void, here they founded a new city along the Dneiper that would become the center fo their operation and realm for centuries to come.....Kiev.



Most interesting and largely a perspective that's new to me .
However I can't fit the statement I have isolated above from previous history I thought I knew .
Namely that Kyiv ( Kiev) was founded around 2000 BC or even before that and mainly by Scandinavian tribes that had come down the Baltic to around modern Lithuania and then cut inland .
What we call western Russia was barely inhabited in any civilised way and Moscow only really dates back to around 1300AD . In fact Moscow was essentially first inhabited by Kyiv rejects -- be they over exuberant Cossacks or the criminal rejects /outcasts / wandering gypsy like peoples .
Any ideas how the two apparently different views can be reconciled ?

RollingWave
08-01-2012, 04:48 AM
Most interesting and largely a perspective that's new to me .
However I can't fit the statement I have isolated above from previous history I thought I knew .
Namely that Kyiv ( Kiev) was founded around 2000 BC or even before that and mainly by Scandinavian tribes that had come down the Baltic to around modern Lithuania and then cut inland .
What we call western Russia was barely inhabited in any civilised way and Moscow only really dates back to around 1300AD . In fact Moscow was essentially first inhabited by Kyiv rejects -- be they over exuberant Cossacks or the criminal rejects /outcasts / wandering gypsy like peoples .
Any ideas how the two apparently different views can be reconciled ?

Yes, Moscow wasn't on the map until the very late 12th C and only became signifcant later on. mostly after the Mongols overran the Southern cities.

Kiev area was inhabited for a long time, but archaeology digs don't find much evidence of anything more than a small town at best in the area until roughly close to the period where the Rus came into the region. the Khazars did buil a hill fort called Sambat around the area but it was not clear that there was a city here.

The Viking age coincided with the start of the Medieval warm period, which made places like Russia (and Norway) more inhabitable than before. the Viking have founded some towns in the Russian region quiet early, Rostov (Sarskoye Gorodishche) , Ladoga etc were possibly founded as early as the 7th century. however these were SMALL towns, they were really just a big trade outpost where Vikings can rest and gather before they head down the Volga or back towards the North Sea. And eventually became an indepedent seat of operation. The majority of the population remained to be relatively primitive slavic and finnic (Chude) Tribesmen. the Vikings began to rule over them slowly because they clearly held a clear military advantage (equipment and tactic wise ) and also because they brought in trade to the area that previously didn't exist.

Gradually they began to spread this sytem further down to Ukrain along the Dneiper river. and eventually Kiev became the center of their operation . However, the Rus civlization (really until after the rise of the Muscovy empire) was one that was more or less limited to the towns and cities along the Dneiper / Upper Volga and it's tributories, one you leave the river and into the steppes nomads continue to rule. even though the Rus princes and their Druzhinas (military retinues, something like knights but not as feudal in nature). adopted Nomadic cavalry practice, they were simply too few to really do much against the Nomads in general

(a POWERFUL prince probably had only a hundred such armed men or so, even the great Kievan Prince would rarely put more than a thousand such men in the field which was usually the combined forces of many Prince... they did ofcourse relied a lot on Town militias and more importantly in Ukrain.. allied nomads.)

However the Nomads themself other than the Nomad in name only Volga Bulgar and Khazars, were not really civilized folks, they can not operate trades with Persia and the Byzantiums on their own (unlike popular believe, the Nomads were not truely self sufficient, they still relied a lot on goods from the settled civilzation, rather through plunder or trade or tribute). So the Rus still remained useful for them to som extend, and really the later Kievan Rus history they really kinda just mingled with the Cumans anyway, it was very common for the chieftans of nomads to have Russian princess as wifes and vice versa, and Russian princes where involed in the infighting of the various clans on the steppe as well as vice versa. so they were pretty much all mixed up later on. until the Mongols came in and swepted them all away.

So the two view does not really collide, Russia was largely unpopulated and uncilvized even in this period.. however there were concentration of towns along the major rivers that was both pretty significantly populated (at least no less than most other western European towns in this period. aka a few thousand people). and hosted a real civilziation.

MMC
08-01-2012, 01:05 PM
So RW how would you view the interaction between the Vikings and the Arabs? :undecided: Meaning were they into Raiding Arabs towns and villages or just seeking to trade at that point in time.

RollingWave
08-01-2012, 11:46 PM
A bit of both obviously, they were opportunist, if the odds don't look great they'll just trade, if it looks like a easy picking they might consider also "trading" ... aka trading an axe in your skull for all your goods kinda trade ;)

It was like that with the Nomads as well most of the time, when their neighbors are strong and/or times are good they'll just do normal trading, but when they don't have much to offer and/or their neighbors look weak they'll take their chances.

In the case of China, managing the trade (or war) with nomads was basically amongst the top 3 priority of all dynasties. (others being building flood prevention projects and building irrigation projects)

At the end of the day. both looks to bring goods they need back home, HOW they acquire them is not a huge concern to them or their folks back home.

RollingWave
08-03-2012, 03:39 AM
Archealogy on Khazaria and Volga Bulgaria is more or less an on going process, it is an area where we really don't know much about compare to other cultures, partly due to the problem that their written records didn't survive (they probably had them but were destroyed by the various invasions). and that the cold war kinda complicated things a bit (though Soviet achaeologist did do a lot of digs themself, but the information is not fully shared ) .

Still, some interesting tibts.

Amongst the finds in Sarkel and elsewhere, there were...

A. An comb made from the ivory of an Indian elephant.

B. A full chess set made from indian ivory

C. A Sea Shell only found in the Indian sea.

D. Paper probably made in central asia.

E. Chinese Silk

F. Chinese Mirror

G. A Chinese copper coin

H. A note written in Chinese listing trade inventories.


Likewise, there have been findings of what appears most likely to be Khazar graves in.... Sweden(!!) showing that the Viking trade route probably went both ways. (that or the Vikings who settled in Russia took on a lot of Khazar charactoristics.)

The Khazars also minted their own silver coins, though some are amusing since they try to miminc the Persian onces but often had spelling errors or had wrong dates (most islamic coins have the year it was minted and which caliph ruled at that time, not unlike modern coins in a sense , so the error here would be that they had the wrong caliph in the wrong year.), but since they were almost all used in trading with the Rus... who can't read Arabic anyway. it didn't matter ;)

Though one set of Khazar coin was found with the term "Moses, messenger of god" struck on it , instead of the usual islamic "Mohammad, messenger of god" which was obviously quite cool.