Ancient Russia and neighboring countries and peoples. Khazars and Russia

Khazar Khaganate and Russia

However, few people know the fact that for some time Russia was under the yoke of the Khazars, and the activities of the Kyiv prince were controlled by the Khazar tudun. No, the Khazars did not conquer Russia. Quite simply, the Kyiv merchants owed money to the Khazr usurers, and forced the prince to pay for them with the independence of the state. Kyiv paid tribute to the Khazars not only in money, but also tribute with swords i.e. warriors. The Slavs supplied the Khazars with fairly large military units, and if they were defeated, then the soldiers were executed.

The Tuduns were the actual rulers of Kyiv, just as in Khazaria itself, on behalf of a nominal Turkic-speaking kagan and the power was exercised by the Jewish kagal, in the face of a man called in Turkic back , but in Hebrew ha-melech . The first tudun was in 839 the Khazar governor Almus. One of these tuduns was the famous Dir, who was killed by the Prophetic Oleg together with Prince Askold during the capture of Kyiv in 882. After that, Oleg fought with the Khazars for two more years and until the very year 939 he delivered Russia from their power.

However, in the same year 939, the Khazar governor Pesach ambushed the Russian army returning from the campaign, defeated it, after which he ravaged Kyiv and restored Khazar domination in Russia. The princes again became tributaries of the Kaganate. It was in order to pay tribute to the Kaganate that Igor arranged a polyudye - he collected tribute from the Slavic tribes subject to Kyiv.

And then the autumn of 945 came. Prince Igor had just paid another tribute to the Khazars, but this time the Khazars considered the amount of tribute insufficient. Igor had to go through the people again and re-extract honey and skins for the Khazar tribute. So he again appeared in the land of the Drevlyans, where he was killed.

This event has another version. According to this version, the Drevlyans killed Igor at the instigation of the Khazars. The fact is that a year before that, Igor, who from 941 to 944 fought with Byzantium at the request of the Kaganate, unexpectedly made peace with the Empire and concluded a non-aggression pact with it. This pact was supplemented by a secret protocol on the division between Russia and the Empire of the Crimea and the Northern Black Sea region.

At that time, Prince Mal ruled in the Drevlyansk land. Most likely, this is a Slavic distortion of the Jewish name Malch, meaning "king." The word is of the same root as the one already mentioned ha-melech. Probably his mother was a Khazarian. It was this same Malch who lured Igor's squad into an ambush.

The ancient Slavs had this custom: if someone kills a prince, he becomes a prince. This is what Malchus intended to do. Having killed the prince, he intended to take possession of everything that he had, including Igor's wife Olga, but she was not going to become the wife of some Malch, the man who killed her husband. Therefore, having played a comedy with a wedding, Olga killed all these Drevlyans along with their prince.

Subsequently, Olga tried to enlist the support of Byzantium in the fight against the Kaganate, but the Greeks made baptism a condition. Olga accepted it. She also advised Svyatoslav to accept Orthodoxy, but he answered her: “How do I want to adopt a new law? And my squad will start laughing at this. Translated into the current language, it sounds like this: “What are you, mother, my boys are pinning me up.”

Despite the baptism of Olga, help from Byzantium never came, and the matured Svyatoslav had to rely only on his own strength.

In the end, on July 3, 968, Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich defeated the Khazar army and wiped Itil, Semender and other Khazar cities off the face of the earth, and all the Khazar gold was thrown into the Volga, since Svyatoslav's warriors were, as they say, zapadno to take wealth for themselves, derived from human trafficking. The expression "money does not smell" was in those days, apparently, still unfamiliar to our ancestors.

From Russia to Muscovy

Russia and the Khazar Kaganate

Ancient Russia, and later the early feudal state, had active ties with the outside world. Relations with individual states either aggravated for a certain period, then improved. In many respects, the nature of foreign policy was determined by the consequences of military operations conducted by the ancient Russian state. Russia fought with enemy squads, Byzantium, Khazaria and other states. The fight against external danger was one of the important factors that contributed to the formation of an early feudal state with a center in Kyiv. On the other hand, during this period, the ancient Russian princes, in turn, also sought to expand the territory of the state and conquer new trade routes. This was of great importance for a young, developing state.

Kievan Rus

To the south of Kievan Rus, on the territory of the North Caucasus, the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov and the Don steppes, the possessions of the powerful Khazar Khaganate stretched, whose economic power was based on intermediary trade between East and West. The Khazar Khaganate in every possible way prevented the desire of Russian merchants to break into the markets of the East. In the era of the highest prosperity, Khazaria controlled a significant part of Eastern Europe, Russian princes paid tribute to the Khazars. But by the middle of the 10th century, the Khazar Khaganate had weakened. The Khazars did not have their own army, relying on the armed detachments of the tribes subject to them, for example, the Burtases (ancestors of the Mordovians), and Muslim mercenaries. The Kaganate could no longer control the Slavic lands as successfully as before. Russian princes entered into open confrontation with the once powerful Khazaria. Prince Oleg fought with the Khazars. But the winner of the kaganate was destined to be the Grand Duke Svyatoslav Igorevich.

About Svyatoslav, the historian Karamzin wrote that he “… had neither camps nor convoys; he ate horse meat, the meat of wild animals and roasted it himself on coals; despised the cold and bad weather of the northern climate; he didn’t know the tent and slept under the arch of the sky: the saddle felt served him instead of a soft bed, the saddle as a headboard ... he did not want to take advantage of an accidental attack, but he always declared war on the peoples in advance, commanding them to say: I’m coming at you! The young prince, who turned out to be an energetic commander, began his campaign in the summer of 964.

Svyatoslav did not dare to go from Kyiv to the Volga directly through the steppes. It was very dangerous, because the tribe of northerners, who lived on this path between Chernigov and Kursk, was a supporter of the Khazars. The Rus ascended the Dnieper to its upper reaches and dragged the boats to the Oka. Along the Oka and the Volga, Svyatoslav reached the capital of Khazaria - Itil. Allies of Svyatoslav in the campaign of 964-965. Pechenegs and Guzes came forward. The Pechenegs, supporters of Byzantium and natural enemies of the Khazars, came to the aid of Svyatoslav from the west. Their path, most likely, lay at the current village of Kalachinskaya, where the Don comes close to the Volga. The Guzes came from the Yaik River, crossing the expanses of the Caspian Sea covered with dunes. The allies met safely at Itil.

The young prince, who turned out to be an energetic commander, began his campaign in the summer of 964. Svyatoslav did not dare to go from Kyiv to the Volga directly through the steppes. It was very dangerous, because the tribe of northerners, who lived on this path between Chernigov and Kursk, was a supporter of the Khazars. The Rus ascended the Dnieper to its upper reaches and dragged the boats to the Oka. Along the Oka and the Volga, Svyatoslav reached the capital of Khazaria - Itil. Allies of Svyatoslav in the campaign of 964-965. Pechenegs and Guzes came forward. The Pechenegs, supporters of Byzantium and natural enemies of the Khazars, came to the aid of Svyatoslav from the west. Their path, most likely, lay at the current village of Kalachinskaya, where the Don comes close to the Volga. The Guzes came from the Yaik River, crossing the expanses of the Caspian Sea covered with dunes. The allies met safely at Itil.

Contemporaries often remember the Khazar Khaganate, or Khazaria, only thanks to the immortal Pushkin's "Prophetic Oleg", who was going to "take revenge on the unreasonable Khazars." But the "Khazar Khaganate" in the distant past was almost the most serious external enemy of Kievan Rus.

Formation of the Khazar Khaganate

The Khazars were an ancient Turkic people and were contemporaries of the Polovtsy and Pechenegs. The exact year of the formation of the Khazar Khaganate is unknown, but historians suggest that this could happen around the year 650. The heir to the Western Khaganate, fleeing from other pretenders to the throne, fled to Khazaria, where he founded his own Khaganate - the Khazar, conquering the scattered Khazar tribes.

In 958, the Western Khaganate finally disintegrated and, thus, the Khazar Khaganate became the largest state in all of Southeastern Europe. The Khazars, like most peoples of that time, professed paganism, and their main activity was cattle breeding and the slave trade.

Later, in order to establish trade relations, the Khazars converted to Judaism. However, on the territory of the Khazar Khaganate, people of various faiths coexisted: Christians, pagans, Muslims. But, at the same time, they were all excellent warriors, therefore, after all, the main source of income for the state was the conquest of foreign lands, and then the collection of tribute from the conquered territories.

So, the Khazars managed to subdue the Vyatichi, Radimichi, Glades, and also conquer the territories of the Volga Bulgaria. The accession of these lands to the Khazar Khaganate took place in the eighth century.

Relations between Kievan Rus and the Khazar Khaganate

Kievan Rus, like the Khazar Khaganate, and indeed most of the ancient states, lived by wars, and not by agriculture and trade. Therefore, one should not be surprised that the history of relations between Kievan Rus and the Khazar Khaganate is not the history of diplomatic cooperation, but the history of wars.

Many princes of Kievan Rus fought the Khazars, but without success. Only Prince Svyatoslav in 964 finally managed to tip the scales of confrontation in his favor. The prince went to war against the Khazar Khaganate not alone, but with allies: Pechenegs and Guzes.

Together with the allied tribes, Svyatoslav managed to reach the capital of the Khazar Khaganate - the city of Atil, where the prince managed to crush the Khazar army. Then Semender fell - the second most important city in the Khazar Khaganate, and after that the Sarkel fortress was conquered.

The collapse of the Khazar Khaganate

The military campaign of Prince Svyatoslav actually put an end to the existence of the Khazar Khaganate as a state. Since Svyatoslav was absolutely merciless towards the conquered peoples, many Khazars were forced to leave their native lands, fleeing inevitable death on the islands of the Caspian Sea.

Together with the Khazars, their ruler, the kagan, also managed to escape. Until 980, the Rus ruled on the former lands of the Khazars, but then the Khazars unexpectedly received help from one of the regions of Western Asia - Khorezm, thanks to which the kagan managed to return to his native lands himself and return his people home.

In exchange for this support, the Khazars, together with their ruler, converted to Islam. Already in 985, Prince Vladimir of Kyiv conquered the Khazars again, obliging them to pay tribute to him. But the final point in the history of the Khazar Khaganate was put in the eleventh century by nomads - the Polovtsians. It was after their invasion that the state of the Khazars disintegrated completely.

Subsequently, this people, already without a state, fought on the side of one of the sons of Prince Vladimir - Mstislav. This happened in 1024, when Mstislav fought with his brother Yaroslav. And the latest historical evidence about the Khazars refers to the years 1079 and 1083. At this time, Prince Oleg, who was nicknamed the Prophet, went against the Khazars on a military campaign, but lost, was captured and sent to Byzantium.

Khazars and Russia

In the 7th century in the lower interfluve of the Volga and Don, the Khazar state was formed, uniting many peoples under its rule: the Khazars proper, the Alans, the Bulgarians, the Burtases, the Magyars, the Pechenegs, and the Mari. Some East Slavic tribal unions, including the Polans, Severians, and Vyatichi, also fell into tributary dependence on the Khazars. At an early stage of the Khazar history, apparently, the Slavs-Antes were also in the sphere of interests of the Khaganate. During the heyday, which fell at the end of the 7th - beginning of the 9th century, the power of Khazaria extended to the North Caucasus, Crimea, Volga Bulgaria and some other adjacent lands. The main part of the Khazar state was the basin of the Middle and Lower Volga. Here, at the very mouth of the Volga, was the capital of Khazaria - the city of Atil.

Early medieval authors depict the Khazars of the 7th century. as semi-wild nomads, quite comparable with the Huns, with whom they were often identified. Byzantine and Arabic authors ranked the Khazars as part of the Turkic language family. The Khazars themselves considered themselves by origin relatives of the Ugrians, Avars, Guzes, Bulgarians and Savirs. In terms of language, the Khazars approached the Bulgarians. Al Istakhri, as well as Ibn Haukal wrote that "the language of the Bulgarians is similar to the language of the Khazars." According to al Biruni, "Bulgarians and Suvars speak a special language, a mixture of Turkic and Khazar".

According to contemporaries, the Khazars were born horsemen, with broad cheekbones and long hair. They ate meat, mare and camel milk. According to Ibn Rust, the Khazars lived in cities in winter and went to the steppe in summer. Gradually, the process of transition of the Khazars to agricultural occupations took place. Al Istakhri and Ibn Haukal note that there were arable fields in the vicinity of the Khazar capital Atil. Rice was predominantly grown there, which, along with fish, became the main food of the Khazars.

From the letter of the Khazar king Joseph to the vizier of the Cordoba Caliphate Khazdai Ibn Shaprut, written in 961, it is clear that the population of Khazaria is divided into nomads and settled people. Researchers classify the Pechenegs as nomads, and the Khazars as settled.

According to A.P. Novoseltsev, in the 9th–10th centuries. in the regions of Khazaria, where there were conditions for the development of agriculture, a significant part of the previously nomadic population switched to a settled (or semi-sedentary) life and farming.

An important, perhaps decisive place in the economy of Khazaria was occupied by trade. From the very beginning of its existence, the Khazar state asserted control over the most important routes of international trade. These primarily included the routes from Europe to the countries of Western Asia, as well as to the Black Sea markets. According to Arab geographers, Khazaria produced and exported fish glue from its own country. Honey, wax, furs, as well as slaves were transported through Khazaria from the countries of Burtases, Bulgars, Pechenegs, Russia.

The international trade of Khazaria was in the hands of trans-ethnic Jewish trading capital, but Muslim and Slavic-Russian merchants were also involved in it.

According to Ibn Khordadbeg, Russian merchants sailed not only on the Rum (Black) Sea, but also on the Jurjan (Caspian) Sea. Sometimes they carried goods on camels from Jurjan to Baghdad.

Within the limits of Khazaria itself and the territories that were in tributary relations with it, the Arab dirham was in circulation, which was minted in the states of Central Asia, Iran and North Africa. Jewish merchants called the dirham "sheleg", which meant "white" or "silver". This monetary unit is reflected in the Russian chronicle.

The Khazar state had a fairly structured system of government. There were two people at the top level of power: the khakan and his deputy, the bek. Formally, the title "khakan" meant among the Turkic peoples of the 6th-10th centuries. supreme ruler to whom other rulers were subject. Probably, at the first stage of the existence of the Khazar state, the supremacy of the khakan was not questioned. He remained the real ruler of the country. Later, the situation changed radically. Royal powers are gradually transferred to the bek. At the transitional stage, according to researchers, a kind of dual power between the khakan and the bek was established, then all real power finally passes to the bek, who is already called the title "king". Khakan is kept in the palace of the king, he is only a symbol of power, and completely unprotected from the arbitrariness of the king.

The Khazars, like other Turkic-Iranian-speaking peoples subject to them, were originally pagans. They worshiped various deities, the first among which was Kuar, the god of lightning. Another Khazar deity was named Tangri Khan, horses were sacrificed to him in sacred groves. The Khazars also worshiped fire, water, meadow. The cult of the horse, widespread among the Khazars, indisputably emphasizes their connection with the steppe nomads, and the worship of sacred trees was probably borrowed from neighboring settled peoples, it is possible that from the Eastern Slavs.

From the 40s-50s of the 8th century. in Khazaria there were tendencies towards the establishment of monotheism. At first it was Islam and Christianity, and already in the 9th century. Judaism gains predominance, mainly among the ruling and commercial elite of society. This ultimately played a fatal role in the historical fate of the Khazar state. The king and his entourage, who converted to Judaism, lost their spiritual connection with their subjects, who for the most part professed Islam, Christianity, and various pagan cults.

The peoples that were part of the Khazar Khaganate created in the 7th-10th centuries. a peculiar and vibrant culture, included in the scientific literature under the name Saltov-Mayatsky. Archaeologically, it is represented by seasonal camps, settlements, fortifications (consisting of earthen ramparts and stone walls), burial grounds, as well as the remains of cities. One of these cities was located on the Seversky Donets, near the modern village of Verkhny Saltov, which gave the culture its name. Samandar, Atil, Sarkel were also among the large cities of Khazaria.

Archaeological studies have shown that the Khazars were able to build stationary dwellings, which were built of wood and adobe and heated by heaters or open hearths. In the Don region, on the site of nomadic pastures, the remains of light dwellings such as yurts with open hearths have been preserved.

Handicraft production, in particular blacksmithing, jewelry, leather, and pottery, reached a high level in Khazaria. Throughout the territory of the Saltovo-Mayak culture, craft centers were identified that provided agriculture, military affairs, everyday life with the necessary sets of tools (axes, sickles, narials, hoes), weapons (sabers, chain mail, battle axes, stakes, arrows, helmets), horse harness (stirrups, saddles, bits, buckles), jewelry (earrings, beads, belt plaques, bracelets, brooches). The potters of the Saltovo-Mayak culture were famous for making a special type of tableware, mostly gray and black polished. Its range is extremely diverse. These are jugs, mugs, capsules, bowls, pots. Also known are small red-clay oinakhoi, huge pithoi pots for food storage.

Rice. 13. Jewelry.

A vivid idea of ​​the culture of the tribes and peoples that make up the Khazar state is provided by studies of burial grounds. The population of the Don and Seversky Donets is characterized by burials in catacombs and pits. Pit burial grounds have been discovered in the Crimea and the Sea of ​​Azov. Judging by the fact that ground signs of burials have not survived to this day, it can be assumed that they did not exist in the form of mounds. The researchers concluded that the people who buried their dead in the catacombs were Alans. The pit burial grounds were left by the Bulgarians.

On the outskirts of the Khazar dominion, a number of monuments of the 7th-8th centuries were discovered, the ethnicity of which is still the subject of heated discussions. We are talking mainly about the so-called burial treasures near the village of Malaya Pereshchepina, Poltava region, near the village of Gladosy, Kirovohrad region, near the village of Voznesenka, Zaporozhye region, near the village of Martynovka, Cherkasy region, and a number of similar monuments.

Some of these complexes consisted of a large number of gold and silver items. So, in the treasure near the village of Malaya Pereshchepina, about 21 kg of gold jewelry were found, in Glados - about 3 kg, in Voznesensky - 1.2 kg. Most of the products of these treasures were made in the workshops of Byzantium and Iran.

M. I. Artamonov believed that the so-called Pereshchepinskaya culture is associated with the Khazars and its appearance in the Dnieper region was the result of the invasion of this area by the Khazars. These complexes, found in burials with cremation, belonged to the Turkic leaders who led the Khazar military detachments.

D. T. Berezovets believed that the “treasures” of Martynovsky, Pereshchepinsky, Voznesensky and Gladossky were left in the Dnieper region by the people “growing up”, which was most directly related to the Khazars and the Saltov culture.

I. Werner, and more recently C. Badint attributed the complex in the village of Malaya Pereshchepina to the burial place of the prince of Great Bulgaria Kuvrat, who died in 668.

A. I. Aibabin, having analyzed the materials of the newly discovered nomadic burial with a horse near the village of Yasinovo in the Nikolaev region and found in them things similar to Voznesensky and Pereshchepinsky, came to the conclusion that this complex, like similar ones, should be associated with the Khazars.

Burials, the accompanying inventory of which has features similar to the complex of the Malopereshchepinsky treasure, were discovered in the Sivash region, as well as in the basin of the Molochnaya River. They date back to the 6th-7th centuries. These are inlet corpses with a horse. The inventory is characterized by finds of bows, quivers, broadswords, stirrups, bits, and arrowheads. According to the rite of burials and the typology of things, the burials are undeniably Turkic in nature. As for their specific ethnic attribution, significant difficulties arise here. Researchers associate them with the Bulgarians (Kutrigurs), Utrs and even Avars.

The assumption that the complexes of the Pereshchepinsky type are the inventory of the graves of nomadic leaders seems logical, but not unconditional. In particular, the question arises of how Kuvrat or other nomadic leaders ended up far to the north of their nomad camps in the region of settlement of the Eastern Slavs. The explanation according to which Kuvrat lost some battle to the Khazars, went to join the Kutrigurs and died on the way, looks somewhat artificial. The position that the nomads in these complexes are betrayed by the Iranian-Byzantine set of things allegedly stolen by them during the campaign together with the Sassanids in 626 to Constantinople does not stand up to criticism. Firstly, in the same way, Iranian-Byzantine things could also get to the Slavic leaders, who, with their squads, also carried out campaigns against Byzantium. And secondly, it is impossible to exclude the penetration of Sasanian and Byzantine things into the forest-steppe regions and through trade.

Analyzing the location and composition of the hoards of the Middle Dnieper region (Trubchevsky, Martynovsky, Malorzhavetsky, Vilkhovchiksky, Khapky - on the Right Bank; Kozievsky, Koloskovsky, Novoodessky, Sudzhansky, Tsyplyaevsky - on the Left Bank), O. M. Prikhodnyuk, V. A. Padin and N. G Tikhonov came to the conclusion that almost all of them are associated with the areas of Slavic cultures - Penkovsky and Kolochinsky. Consequently, there are no less grounds to consider the Antian nobility as the owners of things, having accumulated these riches, including as a result of military campaigns in the Balkans. Many things of these treasures, the prototypes of which were in the Danube, Crimea, Byzantium, were made by local Dnieper and Pridnestrovian jewelers. These include finger and zoomorphic brooches, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic sewn-on plates, plates with various heraldic signs, etc. After the discovery of large craft centers such as Pastyrsky in Cherkasy and Bernashivka in Vinnytsia, this assumption was documented.

According to a number of researchers, in particular O. Pritsak, Ch. Balint and others, the western border of the Khazar state passed along the Dnieper and the Southern Bug. There is no convincing evidence to support these claims. Judging by the information of the ancient Russian chronicle, only temporary Khazar jurisdiction, which consisted in the possession of the right to collect tribute from some East Slavic tribal unions, probably extended to these borders.

Actually, this is exactly what Hagan Joseph claimed in his famous letter to Khazdai Ibn Shaprut. According to him, the Vyatichi and northerners, respectively referred to as “v-n-n-tit” and “s-v-r”, live near the Atil (Volga) River in open areas and in walled cities, serve the kagan and pay tribute to him .

Some researchers considered this message an invention of Joseph, designed to create the strongest possible impression about his state. But there should be no doubt here. The same is reported in The Tale of Bygone Years. Another thing is when it was - in the time of Joseph or much earlier.

The opinions of researchers about the time of the assertion of Khazar domination over part of the Slavs are based on assumptions, and therefore they are contradictory and ambiguous. The most realistic conclusion seems to be M. S. Grushevsky, who believed that the information in The Tale of Bygone Years about the subordination of some East Slavic tribes to the Khazars most likely refers to the second half of the 7th - the first half of the 8th century. According to M. I. Artamonov, the left-bank Slavs were indeed under the rule of the Khazars, but already at the end of the 8th - beginning of the 9th century. some of them, namely the clearing, freed themselves from Khazar dependence. B. A. Rybakov is not inclined to see in the reports of the annals indications of the long-term subordination of the Eastern Slavs to the Khazars. The payment of tribute by the Slavs is considered by them as a "travel duty".

A special position in the Slavic-Khazar relations was taken by O. Pritsak, who essentially declared early Russia to be the Khazar Kaganate, the East Slavic Polyansky Union - the Khazars, and early Kyiv - the Khazar city on the Dnieper.

O. Pritsak came to these original conclusions as a result of the analysis of a found written document, the so-called Kyiv letter, written by a Khazar Jew in Kyiv at the beginning of the 10th century.

It seemed like a common thing. The Khazar-Jewish letter from Kyiv contains Khazar personal names. Adhering to the usual research logic, one can come to the conclusion that Kyiv during this period maintained relations with Khazaria and people from there (probably merchants) lived in it. But there is nothing unusual in this. On the basis of the evidence of The Tale of Bygone Years, which reported the presence of the Kazar tract in Kyiv, it has long been concluded that this is a trading colony of Khazar merchants. In the view of O. Pritsak, the Khazar names indicate that Kyiv was a Khazar city built on the western border of Khazaria.

The etymological search for the name "Kyiv" led O. Pritsak to assert that it comes from his own name "Kuya", which was worn by the "Minister of the Armed Forces" of Khazaria, the Khwarezmian Kuya. He also built a fortress near the village of Berestovo and placed there the Onogur garrison, allegedly hired by the Khazars to protect their western borders. From the old form of the name "ogrin" ("onogur"), O. Pritsak derived the name of the tract "Ugorskoe".

Thus, according to O. Pritsak, the name "Kyiv", in itself in its most ancient form of Khorezmian (Eastern Iranian) origin, politically and culturally should be recognized as Khazar.

As another argument, the researcher cites the name of the Kopyrevogo end of Kyiv, which supposedly came from the name of the Kabar people. In Slavic transcription, it could sound like "copy". This etymology, according to O. Pritsak, confirms that the Kyiv inner city was originally inhabited by the Khazar Kabirs (copiers).

In these constructions of the researcher, practically everything is based on artificial premises, starting from the construction of linguistic structures and ending with the actual historical topography of Kyiv. No traces of a fortress from the 9th century. in the area of ​​the Ugorsky tract, it has not been archaeologically identified. As for the Kopyrevo end, it is not only not an inner city, but not even a roundabout one. An even more significant argument against the version of the Khazar Kyiv is the archaeological material. For the most part, he is typically Slavic-Russian. Things of the Khazar circle (Saltovo-Mayak) in Kyiv are found in single copies. Does not stand the test of archeology and the statement about the construction of Kyiv by the Khazars not earlier than the first half of the IX century. Extensive research carried out in the historical core of the city convincingly testifies that Kyiv was originally formed as an East Slavic settlement center.

The Polans also fell victim to the etymological constructions of O. Pritsak, who turned from an annalistic East Slavic tribe into a Khazar one. Associating the name of the glades with the appellative “field” and assuming that there were no fields in the Kyiv region, only forests, O. Pritsak came to the conclusion that before the arrival of the Dnieper bank, the glades lived in the steppes to the east of it.

There are no other written sources in resolving the question of who the meadows are and where they came from, except for The Tale of Changes of Years. And it is no coincidence that it was her information that was attracted by O. Pritsak to substantiate the thesis about the Khazars of the Polyans. Having discovered that the chronicler in two cases mentioned the glades in the same group with the northerners and Vyatichi, he concluded that they were the left-bank southern neighbors of the northerners and Vyatichi, therefore, the Khazars. To draw such a responsible historical conclusion on the basis of such a dubious observation is at least not serious. In addition, the meadows are much more likely to be neighbors of the Drevlyans and Northerners than the Vyatichi. The chronicler in a number of places quite definitely combines the Polyans and Drevlyans into one group, opposing it to another, which was made up of Radimichi and Vyatichi. “The meadows are living especially?, as if rekohom, existing from the kind of words? radimichi and vyatichi from the lyakhs.

O. Pritsak, proceeding from the conviction that the Polans were the Khazar people, also questioned the message of the chronicle that they were tributaries of the Khazars. According to the historian, this is a later invention of the editor of The Tale of Bygone Years.

The Khazar tribute to the glades is reported three times in the annals: in the undated part of the Tale of Bygone Years and in articles 859 and 862. An unbiased analysis of these messages does not provide grounds for accusing the chronicler of fiction.

Here is the text from the undated part: sowing (Kiya, Cheek and Horeb. - P.T.) bysha offended by ancients and other roundabout ones. And I found the Khazars?, descending on the mountains now in l? Having pondered over the clearing, and vdash a sword from the smoke, and carrying the Khazars to their prince and to their elders.

The elders saw in this tribute an evil sign, which indicated that over time, not the glade to the Khazars, but the Khazars to the glades would pay tribute. And so it happened, the chronicler summed up the article: “Volod? Yut are the barracks of the Russian princes to this day.”

In an article of 858 it is reported that “the Khazars imach in the glade? x and in the north, and in the Vyatich? and in? verits? from the smoke." Here O. Pritsak seemed suspicious to mention squirrel skins as a tribute - squirrels, they say, were not found in this part of Europe. This is a basic misunderstanding. In the words of the chronicler, we can say that they are found here until the outer day.

To prove the identity of the Khazars and the Polyans, O. Pritsak had to read the article of 862 in a new way, which states that the inhabitants of Kyiv in the 60s of the IX century. were in tributary dependence on the Khazars. “And we will have a family of theirs (Kia, Cheka and Khoriva. - P.T.), a paying tribute to the Khazars. O. Pritsak contrasted this message of the Tale of Bygone Years, which was later included in the Ipatiev Chronicle, with the article of 862 of the Laurentian Chronicle. It says: “And we will eat, paying tribute to their kindred, goats.” This edition is indeed not entirely clear, but the researchers of the chronicles have long come to the conclusion that the correct reading of the article of 862 is contained in the Ipatiev Chronicle. A. A. Shakhmatov proposed an updated version of it: “And we sit, their family, and pay tribute to the Khazars.”

Summing up the plot of the early Khazar-Slavic contacts, it should be noted that, despite attempts to cast doubt on the information of The Tale of Bygone Years, they correctly reflect historical realities. The Khazars had nothing to do with the glades or Kyiv, except that at a certain stage in history, probably in the second half of the 8th century, they extended tributary dependence to them.

In the literature, one can often find the assertion that the Khazar Khaganate had an exceptionally beneficial effect on the cultural and state-political development of the Eastern Slavs.

As for the cultural influence, it was not at all significant. The excavations of Kyiv and other Polyana centers show that their layers contain only a few items of Khazar origin, which did not have a noticeable impact on the development of local material culture. The Khazar presence is more noticeable in the northern environment. The monuments of the Volintsevo culture of the 7th–8th centuries found here, especially the settlements, are distinguished by a relatively large number of finds of the Saltovian appearance. This is pottery: dark brown pots, polished with wavy and horizontal stripes, gray-glazed jugs, red-clay amphorae with finely zonal corrugation. Its ratio with local stucco ceramics is expressed as 1 to 10–15. At the Volyntsevo sites, glass beads with bronze rings soldered into them, anthropomorphic plaques of belt sets, mirrors, which have analogies in early Saltov antiquities, are found.

It is characteristic that at the next stage of the life of the Severyansk union of tribes, represented by the monuments of the Roman culture of the 8th–10th centuries, its cultural ties with the Khazar world practically faded. This is probably due to the fact that the northerners in this period freed themselves from the Khazar dependence.

More tangible was the influence of Khazaria on the formation of the economic and political structures of the Eastern Slavs. There is reason to believe that the early Russian duumvirate system on the Kiev table was borrowed from the Khazars. This is supported, in particular, by the fact that the Kyiv princes bore the title of khakan or kagan. Of course, one should not overestimate the degree of the beneficial influence of Khazaria on the Eastern Slavs. The state of Russia developed and grew stronger not so much under the patronage of the Khazar Khaganate, but in constant confrontation with it. In addition, Russia also influenced the Khazars. The Russian chronicle mentions the Khazars of the Christian faith as part of Igor's squad, who swore allegiance to the Russian-Byzantine treaty of 944 in the cathedral church of St. Ilya.

There is reason to believe that already under the first Kyiv princes - co-rulers Askold and Dir (60-80s of the 9th century), the Khazar power was overcome in the "Russian land" proper. The Nikon Chronicle reports on the beating of the Pechenegs by Askold and Dir after their campaign against Byzantium.

Since there were no Pechenegs in the Dnieper region at that early time, the researchers make a completely plausible assumption that they mean the Khazars and Hungarians.

A more successful attempt to unite the Eastern Slavs around Kyiv was under the next pair of Kyiv co-rulers - Oleg and Igor.

The chronicle reports that Oleg succeeded in the continuation of 882-885. subjugate most of the East Slavic tribes to Kyiv. In 884 and 885, according to The Tale of Bygone Years, northerners and Radimichi were exempted from the Khazar tribute. At the same time, there are no mentions of the military conflict between Russia and Khazaria in the annals.

It is possible that the Russian chroniclers simply did not have documentary information about Russian-Khazar relations during the reign of Oleg and Igor. In the Cambridge Document of the late XI - early XII century, describing the events of the X century. in Eastern Europe, there is evidence of a clash of interests between Russia and Khazaria, as well as the cunning of the Byzantine emperor Roman. “Roman (the villain) also sent great gifts to Khalgu, the king of Russia and incited him to his (own) misfortune. And he came at night to the city of Sambarai and took it by thieves, because there was no chief there, the slave of Khashmanai. In retaliation for this, the Khazars went again to the cities of Byzantium, apparently in the Crimea, and captured three. Then Pesach (probably the kagan) “went to war against Khalga and fought […] and God humbled him before Pesach. And he found […] the prey that he captured from Sambarai. And he says: “The novel made me do it.”

After that, the Khazar ruler allegedly forced Oleg to carry out a campaign against Constantinople, during which the Russian soldiers were overpowered by Greek fire. Having been defeated by the Greeks, Oleg did not return to his country, but went by sea to Persia, where a new defeat awaited him. As a result of these failures, as the Cambridge Document testifies, the Russians became dependent on the Khazars.

Of course, it would be in vain to expect an adequate reflection of them in a document that is two centuries away from the events described. The events that happened under Oleg and under Igor are clearly confused here. A certain amendment also requires the statement about the spread to Russians at the beginning of the 10th century. tributary dependence on the Khazars. Nevertheless, the general meaning of Russian-Khazar relations is reflected correctly. It is unlikely that Khazaria resignedly yielded its power over the tribal unions of the northerners and Radimichi.

From the middle of the X century. Kievan Rus is increasingly defined as the dominant power in those regions where Khazaria used to dominate. We are talking primarily about the eastern trade routes and markets. In essence, confirmation of this is the message of Tsar Joseph to Khazdai Ibn Shaprut that the most important task of Khazaria is not to let the ships of the Rus through the mouth of the Volga into the Caspian Sea.

To realize this task, as evidenced by written sources, Khazaria failed to the full extent. Russia made its way to the eastern markets by force of arms and, despite the losses incurred (according to al Masudi, the Russians lost about 30 thousand people in only one battle at the mouth of the Volga) (2), became a constant factor in the Caspian-Caucasian region.

This is supported by the Cambridge Document. Noting the atrocities of the Byzantine emperor Roman against the Jews, an unknown author writes that his ally at that time was the Tsar of Russia Khlga (Oleg). “But the villain Romanus sent great gifts to Khlgu, the king of Russia, inciting him to commit an evil deed. And he came at night to the city of Smkriya and seized it by deceit, since there was no ruler there, the servant of Hashmanai. From the further story of the Cambridge anonymous it is clear that the Russians were one of three (also Khazaria and Byzantium) opposing forces whose interests clashed in the Caspian-Caucasian region.

In this regard, the campaign of the Rus in Transcaucasia in 943–944 is also interesting. As M. I. Artamonov rightly believed, the Rus passed from the Don to the Volga, and from there to the Caspian Sea. The Khazars “helpfully” opened this path for them. A.P. Novoseltsev believed that Khazaria in the 40s of the X century. was already simply unable to prevent the passage of Russian ships.

The power of Khazaria was steadily waning. By the 50s of the X century. it has become a secondary state, unable to keep huge territories in its sphere of influence. One by one, the former possessions fell away from her. It was the turn of the Vyatichi land, which had been in tributary dependence on Khazaria for the longest time. Kyiv, which during the years of the reign of Oleg and Igor did not show much activity in the Volga-Oka region, finally remembered that the Vyatichi were also Slavs and were still subject to the Khazars. Svyatoslav in 964 carried out a campaign in the land of the Vyatichi, but, apparently, he could not subjugate them. To do this, he needed two more trips. One for Khazaria in 965 and the second, the following year, for the Vyatichi. The chronicler under 966 noted: "Vyatichi defeat Svtoslav, and pay tribute to them."

It can be said without a doubt that the complicity of the Vyatichi became possible after the blow inflicted by Svyatoslav on Khazaria. The chronicle report about the victory of Svyatoslav over the Khazars led by the kagan, the capture of Sarkel, about the victories over the yases and kosogs does not contain an indication of the complete destruction of Khazaria, but undoubtedly testifies to the significance of the damage inflicted on it. As a result of this campaign, Russia took possession of the Volga-Oka interfluve, went to the Don, and also entrenched itself on the Taman Peninsula.

According to the Tale of Bygone Years, during the reign of Vladimir, Tmutarakan was one of the Russian principalities, Mstislav Vladimirovich was placed on his table. Of course, important for Russia was the capture of the Khazar fortress Sarkel, located on the border of the domain of the Khazar Khaganate. Since the end of the ninth century Pecheneg mercenaries settled here, who not only guarded the borders of Khazaria, but also attacked neighboring Slavic lands. After the capture of the fortress and its transformation into the Russian outpost of Belaya Vezha, its Pecheneg-Oguz garrison ended up in the service of the Kyiv prince. A detachment of ancient Russian warriors was also located here. Researchers based on the reports of Ibn Haukal, al Muqaddasi, Ibn Miskaveikh came to the conclusion that in addition to the campaign of 965, Svyatoslav undertook another campaign against Khazaria in 968–969. This time, he captured the capital of the Khazar state, the city of Atil, and, apparently, completely undermined its viability. A.P. Novoseltsev believed that the Russian garrisons remained in Atil and Samandra until 990 and left only under pressure from Khorezm. Lost by the end of the X century. possessions in the North Caucasus, in the Don region, in the Taman and Crimea, Khazaria lived out its last days, apparently, only in the small limits of the Lower Volga. Judging by the report of the Derbent chronicle, Khazaria finally ceased to exist around 1064. “In the same year, the remnants of the Khazars numbering 3,000 families (houses) arrived in the city of Qakhtan from the country of the Khazars, rebuilt it and settled in it.” (Quoted from the translation by A.P. Novoseltsev.)

The territories, previously subject to the Khazars, went to new strong formations: the Volga-Oka interfluve, the Lower Don and Tmutarakan - to Kievan Rus; the Lower Volga region - to the Volga Bulgaria; The nomadic tribes of the Pechenegs, Oguzes, and Polovtsy became sovereign masters of the steppe regions.