The Khazar Conversion to Judaism and Reflections on the Khazar State

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

n00bypl4y3r

Tarkhan
88 Badges
Mar 8, 2012
2.085
3.740
  • Semper Fi
  • Gettysburg
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Rome Gold
  • March of the Eagles
  • Supreme Ruler: Cold War
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • For the Motherland
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Stellaris: Nemesis
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
This is a topic I've been interested in for a very long time, and I've been spending some time recently refreshing my understanding. While I was getting my master's degree, I researched the topic of slavery in Khazaria in which the topic of the conversion was largely unimportant so I didn't look into it too much.

The short version of this history goes like this: At some point in the 9th or 10th centuries, the Khazar leadership converted to Judaism. It isn't known exactly why they did so, but theories abound. Contemporary sources had a remarkably similar story with some notable differences, but the gist is that there was a Khazar leader (most likely the Bek, the supreme military and temporal ruler of Khazaria) named Bulan. Bulan was a monotheist with either Jewish sympathies, a Jewish wife, or a Jewish family, depending on the version of the story. Bulan was visited by an angel who directed him to convert to Judaism. Bulan is swayed but needs to get the supreme spiritual ruler of Khazaria, the Khagan, onto his side, so he tells the angel to speak to the Khagan as well. The Khagan was influenced by this enough to allow Bulan to invite representatives from the Christian Byzantine Empire and the Islamic Abbasid Caliphate to debate religion to determine which monotheist religion to choose and introduced a Jewish scholar when the two couldn't come to a consensus. Bulan either intentionally manipulated or otherwise convinced the Christian and Muslim representatives to admit the positive qualities of Judaism, at which point Bulan, the Khazar aristocracy, and the Khagan converted to Judaism. Bulan sent for Jewish scholars from Mesopotamia who instructed them in the faith. The conversion was ultimately completed by a later ruler named Obadiah.

This is a fanciful story in multiple ways, but, remarkably, so many independent sources from the period repeated something similar to it. Modern theories about the conversion tend to emphasize the geopolitics of Khazaria: Khazaria was the third most powerful of the region's powers, next to the Islamic Abbasids and the Christian Byzantines, and missionaries from those two frequented Khazaria. It may have been a political decision to convert as a demonstration of independence from these two powers, possibly related to the Khazar defeat and brief forced conversion to Islam after the end of the Second Arab-Khazar War in 737 CE.

So this brings us back to refreshing my understanding of the scholarship. While digging around on JSTOR today, I found an article from 2013 that I was not aware of: "Coup d'état, Coronation and Conversion: Some Reflections on the Adoption of Judaism by the Khazar Khaganate" by J. T. Olsson. Now, I am having a hard time finding information about the author online, but they are engaging with the most important scholarship on the Khazars that I am aware of and even mention correspondence with the likes of Peter Golden and Constantin Zuckerman, so I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

The point of Olsson's article is to try to ground this earlier conversion myth in a semblance of reality, based on three important facts: The one-time mint of Khazar coins with Jewish symbols in the early 830s, the unclear power structure of Khazaria in the 9th century based on outside accounts, and the evidence of unrest, famine, and invasion in Khazaria during this period. Olsson essentially argues that the conversion myth about Bulan is a true story, so far as any story started by angels speaking to a warlord is true. In Olsson's proposal, Bulan was a Jewish military leader in Khazaria (most likely from the large pre-existing Jewish population in Crimea or from the refugee communities that arrived in Khazaria from the Byzantine Empire east of the Sea of Azov in the early 9th century) who rose to prominence during their ultimately successful wars against the migratory Magyars (who are known to have been migrating west towards the Black Sea during this time, prompting the construction of a large array of fortresses along the northern border of Khazaria such as the one at Sarkel).

Bulan's successful military career fighting the Magyars resulted in his rise to the status of Bek. During this time, Khazaria was plagued by numerous problems: The Magyars disrupted trade and damaged border communities, the Byzantines were hostile and encouraged attacks on Khazaria by nearby groups, and there is at least one Armenian source that alleges a famine in Caucasian Albania that came from locusts surging out of Khazaria. The sum total of these problems would have meant that the spiritual leader of the Khazars, the Khagan, would have been discredited in the eyes of his people, an event that usually prompted the murder of the Khagan either at the hands of the people or the Bek according to Arab sources.

Olsson alleges that Bulan used this opportunity to essentially usurp the Khagan in a coup in the 830s, leaving the Khagan as a necessary figurehead to secure the loyalty of the large Turkic Tengriist population. Bulan attempted to vigorously assert Judaism among the Khazar aristocracy but was rebuffed, hence the single minting of the Moses Coins in the 830s.

In 861, Bulan used the arrival of a Byzantine missionary group led by the future Saint Cyril (then-Constantine) as a pretext to secure the conversion of the Khagan to Judaism to further his own power. Thus, Olsson proposes that the conversion story about the Khazars is tied to the Life of Constantine accounts. The Vita Constantii alleges that Constantine was successful in converting the Khazars to Christianity to the point that the Khazar leader promised to convert and exterminate the Jewish and Muslim populations of the Khaganate. Olsson argues that this is an unreliable account due to the story being one of hagiography and that the students of Cyril wouldn't have started his life of mission work with failure even with his clear hostility to the Khazar leader in the story (he compares the Khazar military leader to a slave).

During this meeting with the Christian delegation, Bulan brought forward the Jewish rabbis and used his power to orchestrate events towards one that ended in his success. Bulan and his preachers discredited the Christians and possibly the Muslims and established the supremacy of Jewish theology within the Khazar court. Bulan secured the conversion of the Khazar aristocracy and Khagan to Judaism and secured his place and dynasty as hereditary kings. The power of the Byzantine and Abbasid preachers in Khazaria was curtailed, incorporating that modern interpretation of events as one of geopolitics as much as it was about religion. The Khagan remained as a vestigial office to both secure the loyalty of Khazaria's people and also to protect the Jewish monarchy from blowback from military defeats or unrest - After all, the traditional recourse for these was to kill or depose the Khagan, not the Bek.

So to summarize, Bulan was a Jewish military leader who became Bek due to his victorious campaigns against the Magyars. He attempted to assert Judaism as the state religion of Khazaria in the 830s but failed. He built up his powerbase and later used a meeting with Christian missionaries in 861 to discredit Christianity (and most likely Islam) to establish the prestige and dominance of Jewish theology, securing the conversion of the Khagan and of the Khazar aristocracy. Bulan kept the Khagan around due to his political usefulness as both a figurehead with enormous spiritual authority and as a scapegoat for any problems facing the Khaganate.

For my part, I find its claims of a mid-9th century conversion to be convincing. It is hard to poke holes in the rest of the article because, by its admission, a lot of this conjecture is rather flimsy: It is an attempt to recontextualize a small corpus of evidence from the era ranging from hagiography and numismatics to conversion myths into one coherent narrative that 'make sense' politically (and thus, the article is built with holes in it by design). I think it is rather impressive for its attempt to make something out of the unclear status of the Bulanids - The question long plaguing the people who study Khazaria, the fact that King Joseph never mentioned a Khagan in his own account of Khazaria. Were they Khagans or Beks? This article says definitively that they were Beks. I also think its incorporation of the Magyars into the narrative to be rather important, since during the era of the Pax Khazarica genuine threats to the interior of Khazaria and its trade dominance along the Volga and Don Rivers was rather unprecedented but the construction of forts along the north suggest there was such a threat.

It's also a useful example of the way Khazar scholarship has shifted in the past few decades. Go back to the 50s and 70s and the Khazars were still being studied as just another example of a fully nomadic, tribal society, lacking completely in industry and agriculture and notable only for their conversion. After this point, there is an enormous reassessment of Khazaria as an imperial bureaucratic state, with sedentary agriculture, a powerful military bureaucracy, and courtly politics. The most recent work on Khazaria I read (I believe it was published last year, I got access to it in the late editing stage) used accounts of Khazar slave soldiers in the Abbasid bureaucracy to argue that Khazaria had a similar bureaucratic structure that allowed Khazars in the Caliphate to assimilate to their circumstances rather quickly. This article is similar in that it tries to reconcile the theological tale of the Khazar conversion with the realities of court politics and bureaucracy, the story of a military leader who usurps the role of his superior in a coup. It's interesting, if still problematic in its reaches. I think ascribing all of this to the work of a single man is a reach, but the argument presented is at least convincing. It certainly won't end any arguments on these events, in all likelihood they never will end due to the lack of evidence.

In any event, I hope someone out there thinks that this is interesting stuff. The article is available on JSTOR, if you don't have an institutional account this is available for a free account to read.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
Reactions:
Very interesting. How certain is that dating? Wikipedia (for example) dates Bulan to the 8th century, not the 9th; I assume your source is the better informed but I also think Wikipedia wouldn't make such a big mistake if there wasn't at least some uncertainty. Also, how much is known about the rites or traditions practiced in Khazaria, i.c. did they follow the customs of Iraqi Jews or Byzantine Jews or something else?
 
The dates are based on a small number of sources from the period, while the Wikipedia version is more conjecture. Joseph is the only Khazar ruler whose reign is relatively well recorded, and that's because he's the one who responded to Hasdai ibn Shaprut's correspondence between 950 and the mid 960s, before Svyatoslav of Kyiv's invasion. The Wikipedia dates are based on a reading of the Khazar Correspondence (written by Joseph) which makes a generous assumption based on the sheer number of rulers listed between Bulan and Joseph:
  1. Bulan
  2. Unclear how many are between Bulan and...
  3. Obadiah, who completed the conversion.
  4. Hezekiah
  5. Manasseh
  6. Hanukkah (brother of Obadiah)
  7. Isaac
  8. Zebulun
  9. Manassah II/Moses
  10. Nisi
  11. Aaron
  12. Menahem
  13. Benjamin
  14. Aaron II
  15. Joseph
The problem is that how true any of this is has come under debate by historians. Was Joseph telling the truth as he understood it, or was he embellishing the story to make it seem like Judaism had deeper roots in Khazaria than it did in reality (similar to the Schechter Letter, which portrays the conversion as a return to Judaism and not necessarily as something altogether new)? Obadiah in particular is outright rejected by some historians, although I need to do more reading to understand exactly why that is (it has something to do with differing accounts of the dynasty, some of which exclude Obadiah). For my part, I think the biggest hole in Olsson's argument is that after Obadiah, basically none of these rulers factor into his assessment of the sources. Saying Bulan was both the initiator and the one who completed the conversion with a ~30-year gap in between is a large stretch.

If we do accept that this list is genuine and not embellished, it stands to reason that Bulan would have lived somewhere in the late 8th century in order for Joseph to rule in the mid-10th century with all of these rulers in between, especially with Bulan's relationship to Obadiah being blurry, to say the least. Putting Bulan at the end of the 8th century also puts his life closer in proximity to the Arab-Khazar Wars, since by the 9th century the Khazars and Abbasids were more or less at peace, at least as far as these sorts of medieval states went.

The problem with putting any dates for the conversion in the 8th century is that there simply is no evidence to support that, neither written nor numismatic. The first external sources talking about the conversion of the Khazars date to the mid-9th century, and the Moses coinage found in Northern Europe dating to the 830s really complicates things (ultimately the entire reason this article was written). The Life of St. Constantine and the writings of Christian of Stavelot from around the time both suggest an early to mid-9th century conversion, leaning more towards the 860s than the 830s.

All of this is to say it's complicated. I don't think Wikipedia's chronology is wrong, but it is a hotly debated subject with little scholarly consensus. The small but dedicated field of Khazar studies is shockingly dynamic and interdisciplinary, it isn't plagued by dogmatism in the same way some larger academic fields are.

Also, how much is known about the rites or traditions practiced in Khazaria, i.c. did they follow the customs of Iraqi Jews or Byzantine Jews or something else?
Very little. Mainstream scholars are generally unanimous in saying that they weren't Karaite, but beyond that, it's hard to say. Khazaria was a common destination for Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in Byzantium well before the conversion, and some of the Medieval sources allege that the king who led the conversion may have had ties to them. However, later Khazar sources specifically mention Iraqi Jews as the source of Khazaria's earliest rabbis who helped establish a 'proper' Judaism. There were also Mountain Jewish communities in the Caucasus which were mentioned in the Schechter Letter version of the conversion myth.

All we can be reasonably sure of is that it was a form of Rabbinical Judaism more or less in line with mainstream Judaism in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. There are a handful of Sephardic sources from the 11th and 12th centuries that mention Khazar Jews integrating into Jewish learning institutions in Iberia. There is also the fascinating example of the Kyivan Letter written in the 9th century that mentions a "Kiabar Kohen," mixing a Turkic name with the patrilineal Kohen name. That has itself sparked discussion about whether this was a Semitic Jew living in the area who adopted a vernacular name from their community, a Khazar Jew who adopted the name, or potentially even an entire caste of Khazar priests who adopted the title after the conversion.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
The dates are based on a small number of sources from the period, while the Wikipedia version is more conjecture. Joseph is the only Khazar ruler whose reign is relatively well recorded, and that's because he's the one who responded to Hasdai ibn Shaprut's correspondence between 950 and the mid 960s, before Svyatoslav of Kyiv's invasion. The Wikipedia dates are based on a reading of the Khazar Correspondence (written by Joseph) which makes a generous assumption based on the sheer number of rulers listed between Bulan and Joseph:
  1. Bulan
  2. Unclear how many are between Bulan and...
  3. Obadiah, who completed the conversion.
  4. Hezekiah
  5. Manasseh
  6. Hanukkah (brother of Obadiah)
  7. Isaac
  8. Zebulun
  9. Manassah II/Moses
  10. Nisi
  11. Aaron
  12. Menahem
  13. Benjamin
  14. Aaron II
  15. Joseph
The problem is that how true any of this is has come under debate by historians. Was Joseph telling the truth as he understood it, or was he embellishing the story to make it seem like Judaism had deeper roots in Khazaria than it did in reality (similar to the Schechter Letter, which portrays the conversion as a return to Judaism and not necessarily as something altogether new)? Obadiah in particular is outright rejected by some historians, although I need to do more reading to understand exactly why that is (it has something to do with differing accounts of the dynasty, some of which exclude Obadiah). For my part, I think the biggest hole in Olsson's argument is that after Obadiah, basically none of these rulers factor into his assessment of the sources. Saying Bulan was both the initiator and the one who completed the conversion with a ~30-year gap in between is a large stretch.

If we do accept that this list is genuine and not embellished, it stands to reason that Bulan would have lived somewhere in the late 8th century in order for Joseph to rule in the mid-10th century with all of these rulers in between, especially with Bulan's relationship to Obadiah being blurry, to say the least. Putting Bulan at the end of the 8th century also puts his life closer in proximity to the Arab-Khazar Wars, since by the 9th century the Khazars and Abbasids were more or less at peace, at least as far as these sorts of medieval states went.

The problem with putting any dates for the conversion in the 8th century is that there simply is no evidence to support that, neither written nor numismatic. The first external sources talking about the conversion of the Khazars date to the mid-9th century, and the Moses coinage found in Northern Europe dating to the 830s really complicates things (ultimately the entire reason this article was written). The Life of St. Constantine and the writings of Christian of Stavelot from around the time both suggest an early to mid-9th century conversion, leaning more towards the 860s than the 830s.

All of this is to say it's complicated. I don't think Wikipedia's chronology is wrong, but it is a hotly debated subject with little scholarly consensus. The small but dedicated field of Khazar studies is shockingly dynamic and interdisciplinary, it isn't plagued by dogmatism in the same way some larger academic fields are.
Thank you, that's very helpful.

Very little. Mainstream scholars are generally unanimous in saying that they weren't Karaite, but beyond that, it's hard to say. Khazaria was a common destination for Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in Byzantium well before the conversion, and some of the Medieval sources allege that the king who led the conversion may have had ties to them. However, later Khazar sources specifically mention Iraqi Jews as the source of Khazaria's earliest rabbis who helped establish a 'proper' Judaism. There were also Mountain Jewish communities in the Caucasus which were mentioned in the Schechter Letter version of the conversion myth.

All we can be reasonably sure of is that it was a form of Rabbinical Judaism more or less in line with mainstream Judaism in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. There are a handful of Sephardic sources from the 11th and 12th centuries that mention Khazar Jews integrating into Jewish learning institutions in Iberia. There is also the fascinating example of the Kyivan Letter written in the 9th century that mentions a "Kiabar Kohen," mixing a Turkic name with the patrilineal Kohen name. That has itself sparked discussion about whether this was a Semitic Jew living in the area who adopted a vernacular name from their community, a Khazar Jew who adopted the name, or potentially even an entire caste of Khazar priests who adopted the title after the conversion.
Yes, the sources definitely suggest Rabbinical Judaism. (As far as I've read. I don't want to pretend to any kind of expertise, I'm interested and I've read various histories that connect with this but I've never delved into Khazaria specifically. As for terminology, I think it's anachronistic to properly speak of Sephardic or Mizrahi in this time period, so I use Byzantine and Iraqi Jews instead.)

The reason I asked is because I'm interested in the vector of conversion. The Mountain Jews seem too small a community and too isolated to have led that process. My guess is that the Byzantine Jews are the largest group, both from refugees and from the Black Sea cities under Khazar control. On the other hand, Iraqi Jews might have had a higher status in religious terms, as descendants of the influential rabbis who created the Babylonian Talmud. It's possible that they were both involved, e.g. if Bulan came from the Byzantine side but wanted Iraqi support either for its prestige or to assert independence from Byzantium.

As I understand it, this was a case of elite conversion in a state that was already multi-ethnic and multi-religious and remained so afterwards. If it was primarily at the elite level, the geopolitical dimension could be more important than usual. Both Byzantium and the Abbasids (and later Kiev), despite bouts of antisemitism, considered Judaism as a step up from paganism, giving more weight to treaties with Jewish rulers.

Final question for now, isn't the possibility in your last sentence of a non-Jewish caste converting en masse highly controversial? I mean, it would make sense for Khazar priests to the elite to convert along with them but AFAIK DNA testing shows the Cohen lines to be remarkably stable across time and place.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I have nothing to contribute except to say thanks for this facinating insight.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
All we can be reasonably sure of is that it was a form of Rabbinical Judaism more or less in line with mainstream Judaism in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. There are a handful of Sephardic sources from the 11th and 12th centuries that mention Khazar Jews integrating into Jewish learning institutions in Iberia. There is also the fascinating example of the Kyivan Letter written in the 9th century that mentions a "Kiabar Kohen," mixing a Turkic name with the patrilineal Kohen name. That has itself sparked discussion about whether this was a Semitic Jew living in the area who adopted a vernacular name from their community, a Khazar Jew who adopted the name, or potentially even an entire caste of Khazar priests who adopted the title after the conversion.



There probably aren't sources to say one way or the other,but I have always wondered whether or not the Khazarians tried to implement some version of the Jubilee and the related tribal based land apportionment spelled out in the Hebrew Scriptures.

If they were taking their direction from existing Jewish communities of the 9th century and later, then they probably didn't bother , but if they had their own revivalist reading of the scriptures then maybe, and I've always been curious how converts with political power who are unquestionably not of the twelve tribes nor living in the statutory land of Israel would try to make that work.
 
There probably aren't sources to say one way or the other,but I have always wondered whether or not the Khazarians tried to implement some version of the Jubilee and the related tribal based land apportionment spelled out in the Hebrew Scriptures.

If they were taking their direction from existing Jewish communities of the 9th century and later, then they probably didn't bother , but if they had their own revivalist reading of the scriptures then maybe, and I've always been curious how converts with political power who are unquestionably not of the twelve tribes nor living in the statutory land of Israel would try to make that work.
I haven't read anything on this before, but like you said there likely is no way to know with the sources available. Medieval Jewish sources including some from the Khazars themselves tended to agree that they were descendants of Japheth through Togarmah, who was reckoned as the father of the steppe peoples. So the Khazars never tried to pose themselves as Hebrews, although it gets murkier when you consider the sources that allege that Bulan was a descendant of Jews.

Realistically, I highly doubt the Khazars would have implemented these sorts of biblical laws. They drew on biblical imagery and ideas when describing their society within the Khazar Correspondence, but never to that level of detail. The Jewish communities living in and around Khazaria didn't maintain these traditions and hadn't for centuries. They were also a semi-nomadic society composed mostly of pagans, ruled by a Jewish aristocracy that still maintained institutions such as that of the Khaganate with traditional importance within Turkic governance, so it was kind of complicated.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Final question for now, isn't the possibility in your last sentence of a non-Jewish caste converting en masse highly controversial? I mean, it would make sense for Khazar priests to the elite to convert along with them but AFAIK DNA testing shows the Cohen lines to be remarkably stable across time and place.
Sorry I missed this. I'm far from an expert on the Cohens so I can only really speak to the dimensions of this within Khazaria. We don't have an enormous amount of information on what happened to the Khazars after the Khaganate collapsed. Some Khazars probably ended up joining European Jewish communities, although DNA testing suggests that if they did, their numbers would have been very low (i.e. not a substantial contributor to the Ashkenazi population, as some theories and conspiracy theories have alleged). Some sources talk about a group of Khazars who fled to modern-day Azerbaijan and converted to Islam after being welcomed by the Khazar-descendant Islamic governor of the region. There are scattered references to Khazars in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe in the next century or two, but they never go into detail. There are a handful of references to Khazars studying at Jewish institutions in Al-Andalus.

It is likely that most Khazars stayed in the region and assimilated into other groups, abandoning Judaism if they ever embraced it in the first place given the small numbers involved. It is possible that if it was a caste of Khazar priests they may have similarly abandoned Judaism for the religions of their conquerors or hosts, or if they weren't a large group to begin with they may have been wiped out with the destruction of Khazaria's largest cities. It is equally possible, perhaps more so, that these Khazar Cohens were descendants of Black Sea or Byzantine Jewish communities that fled to Khazaria.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Sorry I missed this. I'm far from an expert on the Cohens so I can only really speak to the dimensions of this within Khazaria. We don't have an enormous amount of information on what happened to the Khazars after the Khaganate collapsed. Some Khazars probably ended up joining European Jewish communities, although DNA testing suggests that if they did, their numbers would have been very low (i.e. not a substantial contributor to the Ashkenazi population, as some theories and conspiracy theories have alleged). Some sources talk about a group of Khazars who fled to modern-day Azerbaijan and converted to Islam after being welcomed by the Khazar-descendant Islamic governor of the region. There are scattered references to Khazars in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe in the next century or two, but they never go into detail. There are a handful of references to Khazars studying at Jewish institutions in Al-Andalus.

It is likely that most Khazars stayed in the region and assimilated into other groups, abandoning Judaism if they ever embraced it in the first place given the small numbers involved. It is possible that if it was a caste of Khazar priests they may have similarly abandoned Judaism for the religions of their conquerors or hosts, or if they weren't a large group to begin with they may have been wiped out with the destruction of Khazaria's largest cities. It is equally possible, perhaps more so, that these Khazar Cohens were descendants of Black Sea or Byzantine Jewish communities that fled to Khazaria.
Yes, the reason I asked is because of those theories and conspiracy theories. Thank you for the nice phrase, I like how it suggests that some are serious while others are merely malicious. It's a controversial topic, so I better be clear beforehand that I agree that Yiddish-speaking Ashkenazis in the later Middle Ages were of majority German-Jewish descent. But I have been curious about some of the dates not lining up quite as nicely as some readings suggest. E.g. Wikipedia cites persecutions in the wake of the crusades as the main reason for the eastward migration of Ashkenazi Jews but also gives 10th century dates for their presence in Poland and Lithuania, i.e. before the crusades (and as early as there are sources for that area). I know Wikipedia isn't exactly top scholarship but it does reflect mainstream opinion. It suggests there were already some Jews in Eastern Europe who may have intermingled and eventually got assimilated by the Ashkenazim. AFAIK genetic studies focused on priestly lines (Cohen and Levite) which would have been more reluctant about intermarriage, the common folk could have mixed more. Not so much that we'd easily see genetic traces, though, the demographic balance between Germany and eastern Europe was such that German-Jewish migrations probably outnumbered such small populations of eastern European Jews as may have existed before. Still, considering the spread of Jews pretty much anywhere that promised to be free of persecutions, I wouldn't be surprised if Byzantine Jews moved there as well as to the Black Sea coastal cities, at least as soon as state formation began and a possible economic niche opened up. An admixture of Khazarian Jews wouldn't surprise me either.

I do wonder what happened to the Khazarian priestly class. If they were recruited from Byzantine Jews, they would probably be Kohanim, so assimilation with the Ashkenazim would not leave many traces. If there was a conversion event from pagan Khazarian beliefs to Judaism, there'd be a Turkish element. They may have gone with other Khazar remnants to the south or they could have joined subsequent steppe peoples, perhaps after reconverting as you suggest. If some did move northwestward, it's quite possible that Ashkenazi Kohanim wouldn't have accepted them. It's an interesting historical question anyway.

Having read a bit on steppe peoples generally, and Alans and Huns in particular (out of interest in the great migrations period), I'd say the fate of most steppe peoples after their defeat is a bit of a puzzle. They seem rather to fall apart with bits of them typically seeking refuge in the Caucasus mountains, which is one reason it's such an ethnic and linguistic hodgepodge there. Other bits equally typically turn up in the next wave. It suggests that steppe peoples were usually polyglot, multi-tribe and multi-ethnic coalitions, which gathered around a core tribe which could promise security and potential glory. Descent and legends about their ancestors played a role in this as well as more recent victories. Their ethnic composition did change over time, Turkish-speaking tribes slowly, gradually replaced Indo-European ones in the western steppes, but it's possible that some exceptionally prestigious royal clans such as the Ashina ruled over coalitions in both periods.

The Ashina clan is well attested as leaders of the Göktürk Khaganate, may have already been prominent among the Saka, certainly ruled a few successor states (Basmyl and Karluk Yabghu), and is theorized or speculated to have ruled over the Huns, Khazars and Kara-Khanids. It's a remarkable record in any case, a half millennium of rule over 3 to 6 peoples. The latter 3 are not certain by any means, though. The sources for the internal politics of steppe peoples are limited and usually distorted, e.g. Byzantine writers referring to steppe peoples as Scythians long after that particular identity had vanished, just so they could show off their knowledge of classical texts. As I understand it the Khazars are rather unusual in having left some primary documents, particularly in the form of correspondence with Andalusian Jews.

(I read a bit on Spanish history as well, being interested in the factors underlying the swift collapse of the Visigoths, possible assimilation to Arabs and Berbers and the tenuous resistance to them, as well as the beginnings of the Reconquista. What can I say, I like historical puzzles.)

AFAIK the Khazars fit the model quite nicely (whether connected to the Ashina or not). Different elements of their coalition could easily have joined the next wave, shedding their previous allegiance while maintaining their tribal identity. They wouldn't have used the name Khazar after the coalition fell apart, though; only the core tribes would have stuck to it. So the Khazars of later sources are likely to be much less numerous than the totality of their old coalition. I haven't read anything about the later Khazars other than Wikipedia but it seems that they stuck to their Judaism for quite a while (there's one reference in the 13th century even). The Kabars, a group of Khazar tribes who joined the Magyars in their conquest of the Pannonian basin, seems also to have practiced Judaism in their new homeland for some time, before eventually Christianizing along with the Hungarians.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Yes, the reason I asked is because of those theories and conspiracy theories. Thank you for the nice phrase, I like how it suggests that some are serious while others are merely malicious.
I read a good book called Defenders of the Race: Jewish Doctors and Race Science in Fin-de-Siècle Europe by John Efron which goes through a few different Jewish responses to the rise of race scientists and Social Darwinists, especially in Germany and Great Britain. A lot of it is from the perspective of Western European Jews and their disdain for "uncivilized" Eastern European Jews during the great migrations of the late 19th century.

In a chapter looking at this relationship from the other way around, the book talks about some notable Jewish figures from the Russian Empire who intentionally tried to tie their history to that of the Khazars as a positive trait which is something I thought to be very interesting. They weren't alone in that regard either, the Crimean Karaites also claim descent from the Khazars even though it's not thought to be true among academics.

By the 20th century, there was this distinct and I would argue very naive school of thought that supposed they could end antisemitism by proving that Ashkenazi Jews aren't Semitic. That's essentially where The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler came from, which has unintentionally added an enormous amount of fuel to the fire of antisemitic conspiracy theories.
But I have been curious about some of the dates not lining up quite as nicely as some readings suggest. E.g. Wikipedia cites persecutions in the wake of the crusades as the main reason for the eastward migration of Ashkenazi Jews but also gives 10th century dates for their presence in Poland and Lithuania, i.e. before the crusades (and as early as there are sources for that area). I know Wikipedia isn't exactly top scholarship but it does reflect mainstream opinion. It suggests there were already some Jews in Eastern Europe who may have intermingled and eventually got assimilated by the Ashkenazim. AFAIK genetic studies focused on priestly lines (Cohen and Levite) which would have been more reluctant about intermarriage, the common folk could have mixed more. Not so much that we'd easily see genetic traces, though, the demographic balance between Germany and eastern Europe was such that German-Jewish migrations probably outnumbered such small populations of eastern European Jews as may have existed before. Still, considering the spread of Jews pretty much anywhere that promised to be free of persecutions, I wouldn't be surprised if Byzantine Jews moved there as well as to the Black Sea coastal cities, at least as soon as state formation began and a possible economic niche opened up. An admixture of Khazarian Jews wouldn't surprise me either.
You're not alone in noting the discrepancy between dates. Kevin Alan Brook in The Jews of Khazaria, when discussing Jewish communities in Grodno and Brest, says this:
It remains an open question whether the East Slavic-speaking Jews who resided in the Belarusian cities of Grodno and Brest during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries are descendants, at least in part, of Jewish Khazars, but this possibility appears likely since they had lived in those cities prior to the arrival of Jews from central Europe.
So in this theory, Eastern European Jewish communities began to grow independent of eastward migrations, although they were likely small communities before that point. It's a fine line to tread because of course genetic testing has demonstrated that European Jews have very little Central Asian ancestry.

The most obvious location for a Khazar diaspora is the one place we know for sure they existed, Hungary. There are a few villages there today that are still called some variation of "Kozar," and even more named "Kozarvar" and "Kozard" existed or still exist in Transylvania. Some scholars have speculated a Kabar origin for the Szekelys as well. Now, the question of whether these Khazars were Jewish...

The Kabars, a group of Khazar tribes who joined the Magyars in their conquest of the Pannonian basin, seems also to have practiced Judaism in their new homeland for some time, before eventually Christianizing along with the Hungarians.
The best evidence we have is the Chelarevo burial finds in Vojvodina which contains large numbers of Avar, Turkic, or Mongolic artifacts alongside Jewish symbols such as Stars of David, menorahs, shofars, and Hebrew inscriptions, in addition to pagan burials, all interspersed among each other. The artifacts have been dated to the late 10th century, so they would generally line up with the Kabars containing Jews. There is also evidence of a 14th-century Catholic council in Pressburg that forbade Christians from marrying "Khazars." That said, there's still a lot of debate about the topic since the evidence isn't conclusive.

We know that Kyiv had a large Khazar population, but that's a given since it was at the edge of Khazaria. The Kyivan Jews also had numerous connections to Byzantine Jewish communities, so as we speculated earlier there were mostly likely Semitic Jewish refugees among the population living there. There are theories about Khazar communities in Poland based on toponyms similar to those in Hungary, but most historians reject them for a variety of linguistic reasons.

It seems if there was a Khazar Jewish diaspora, it was mostly situated in Hungary among the Kabars, and around the East Slavs of the Kyivan Rus', with smaller numbers of individuals scattered throughout the continent from Iberia to Central Asia.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions: