The initial stages of Khazarian history, when the khaganate was being formed and continuous wars were being waged in the Caucasus with the participation of the Khazars, were rarely the subject of special research. And there is always a contradiction in the works devoted to this issue, whether to Khazaria as a whole, or to various aspects of the history of the Caucasus in the seventh and eighth centuries. The Khazar Khaganate appears as an established state with well-defined power structures, a clear hierarchical system, and a defined territory that includes at least all the lands of the Northeastern Caucasus beyond Derbent (Artamonov, 2001: 281-322; Gadlo, 1979: 156-169; Novoseltsev, 1990: 172-195). At the same time, some consider the Khazar state to have existed already during the Iranian-Byzantine wars of the first quarter of the seventh century. [Vernadsky, 1996, p. 215; Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 88; Komar, 2000], others attribute the formation of this political force to the 640-650 years. [Artamonov, 2001, p. 241; Pletneva, 1986, p. 20-21; Naumenko, 2004, p. 52-76; Golden, 1980, p. 51; Pritsak, 1991, p. 1126-1127].

The Khazars appear in Byzantine, Armenian, and Arab sources as the main "barbarian" force in the Caucasus of that era and are mentioned more often than other peoples. It is on the basis of these evidences that most researchers see in the Khazars of the VII-VIII centuries. an independent political force, a full-fledged state that sought to expand its influence and carried out complex multi-way combinations in the international arena. However, it seems that the sources do not give grounds for such unambiguous definitions of Khazaria in the seventh and eighth centuries. The period most thoroughly covered by the sources is two very turbulent centuries, during which the situation changed many times both in the region and in Khazaria itself.

By the end of the sixth century, the Khazars are mentioned in sources as inhabitants of the lands north of Derbent, along with the Bulgars, Barsils, Huns, and other ethnic groups who settled in the Ciscaucasia after the Great Migration of Peoples (Movses Khorenatsi, 1990, p.53, 114; Pigulevskaya, 1941, p. 165).

Then in the north-eastern Ciscaucasia, on the lands of the Late Hunnic and autochthonous Caucasian tribes, after the aggressive raids of the First Turkic Khaganate in the second half of the sixth century, a significant Turkic population remained, headed by a representative of the supreme ruler of the Turks. This representative, according to the early ninth-century Byzantine author Theophanes the Confessor, was "second in dignity to the Khagan" (referring to the ruler of the Turkic Khaganate) and participated in the Iranian-Byzantine conflict in the Caucasus in the 620s at the head of the Khazar army (Chichurov, 1980, p.59). Feofan also mentions his name-Zievil (Xxgeshk). Movses Kalankatuatsi's Armenian "History of the Country of Aluank" mentions a certain Jebukagan operating in the North Caucasus at the same time. Jebukagan ( yabgu-kagan) is the title of the ruler of the western territories of the First Turkic Khaganate, known from many sources.-

page 5

shtorny and Sultanov, 2004, p. 97], initially second in status after the khagan of the eastern lands [Zuev, 1998, p. 159]. The identity of the Khazar warlord Zievil with the Jebu Kagan is proved (Chichurov, 1980, pp. 100-102).

These written testimonies gave grounds to conclude that the Khazar tribal union had an independent policy in the Iranian-Byzantine confrontation at the beginning of the seventh century. A. P. Novoseltsev even wrote about the independence of the Khazars from the Turkic Khaganate (Novoseltsev, 1990, p.87). However, the study of the historical situation that developed by the 620s allows us to doubt the thesis about the independence of the Khazars.

These events are directly related to the Byzantine-Iranian confrontation, which reached its maximum intensity by the beginning of the last decade of the sixth century. At that time, the uprising against the Iranians in Armenia was in full swing. The Byzantine Emperor Maurice actively used the help of the Turks and tribes of the Ciscaucasia, and on the southern borders - of the Arab tribes. With such allies, he managed to deliver several painful blows to Iran. According to the 9th-century Arab historian at-Tabari, following the major anti-Iranian operations of the Turks and Byzantium in 589, the Khazar ruler marched on Bab al-Abwab (Derbent) and ravaged it [at-Tabari, 2003, vol.1, p. 280]. In the same year, 589, after the victory over the Turks in the Amu Darya, the Iranian commander Bahram Chubin "moved the war to Colchis" and then to Svaneti [Feofilakt Simokatta, 1996, pp. 76-78]. In what sequence the events unfolded, it is impossible to establish, but the raid of the Khazars fits into the actions of the anti-Iranian coalition.

Then an uprising broke out in Iran, as a result of which Hormizd IV was killed, and Bahram Chubin was proclaimed Shahanshah, using the forces of the Turks and their subordinate peoples [at-Tabari, 2003, vol. 1, p. 280]. The legitimate heir, Khosrow II, fled to Byzantium and asked for help. Mauritius took advantage of this, forcing Khosrov to conclude peace on unfavorable terms for the latter, in particular, according to them, Iran transferred most of Iranian Armenia under the rule of Byzantium [Uspensky, 2001, p. 590].

After that, there was a relative lull in relations between the two powers, until the coup of 602, when Phocas, the hecatonarch (centurion) of the imperial troops on the Danube, seized power in Constantinople. Emperor Maurice and his family were killed, and Khosrow II started a war with Byzantium [Kulakovsky, 1996, p. 6]. This war, which lasted for more than a quarter of a century, did not stop even after the culprit of Maurice's death was overthrown and Heraclius, the exarch of Africa of Armenian origin, ascended the throne. From 604 to the 620s, Byzantium lost all its eastern provinces.

However, by the second half of his reign, Heraclius managed to turn the situation around dramatically thanks to military reforms, as well as attracting the cooperation of the nobility of the Transcaucasian possessions, on whose lands Byzantium mainly clashed with Iran (Usacheva, 1990). In addition to the Armenians, the Lazes, Abasgians, and Ivirs became Heraclius ' allies for a time. In 624, this coalition fought for Caucasian Albania, but Khosrov at that time had a clear advantage in military strength. New allies left Heraclius, and he himself, according to the Chronograph of Theophanes, retreated to the North Caucasus - "to the lands of the Huns and their narrows through mountainous, impassable places" (Chichurov, 1980, p. 58).

Heraclius returned from the" Hunnic narrows " unscathed and retained the backbone of the army, on the basis of which a new army was assembled in Armenia, which then defeated three Iranian armies [Kulakovsky, 1996, p.88]. Consequently, the Huns were not hostile to Heraclius, but became his allies (otherwise the journey through the mountains would have ended badly for the emperor).

The following year was also a successful one for Byzantium. Heraclius crossed into Mesopotamia and again defeated the Iranians. Khosrov's retaliatory move was an alliance with the western neighbors of Byzantium: Avars, Slavs, Bulgars and some others

page 6

tribes of the Northern Black Sea region (Chichurov, 1980, pp. 58-59). A coalition besieged Constantinople in 626, but Heraclius found a more powerful ally among the barbarians. If M. I. Artamonov, and after him modern Turkologists believe that it was a Western Turkic Khaganate [Artamonov, 2001, p. 204-206; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2004, p. 102; Gumilyov, 1993, p. 157-159], then other researchers consider the new allies of Irakli to be Khazars [Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 87-89; Chichurov, 1980, p. 70-71; Shaginyan, 2003, p. 40-45].

According to Theophanes 'Chronograph, in 625-626 Heraclius went to Lazica and from there" called for an alliance of the Eastern Turks, who are called Khazars." Patriarch Nikephoros, who used the same source, does not mention anything about the Khazars, but describes the conclusion of the union in much more detail [Chichurov, 1980, p. 59, 159-160].

Nikephoros ' Breviary dates back to the 70s and 80s of the eighth century. Theophanes wrote later, between 810 and 814. Therefore, it is natural to assume that there are commentaries in these sources, the purpose of which was to make the description of events of ancient years more understandable for contemporaries. Often, for this purpose, ethnonyms that are not clear to the reader were modernized. Such glosses include the above phrase of Theophanes, written at a time when the Turks had long ceased to take part in Transcaucasian and Eastern European politics, and the Khazars had become one of the most prominent forces in the region. The phrase "Eastern Turks" is meaningless in this case: real Eastern Turks (the Eastern Turkic Khaganate in Central Asia) could not participate in these events. To the west of Byzantium, there was no people that Theophanes would call "Turks". However, a little earlier, in the story about Khosrov's allies, "Western Huns, who are called Avars" are mentioned [Chichurov, 1980, p.58]. Most likely, the source of Theophanes contrasted the Western Huns-Avars with the eastern Huns-Turks. Such an understanding existed in the early Byzantine writings (Theophylact Simocatta, 1996, p. 77). The author of the Chronograph called these Turks Khazars, especially since they are further mentioned as the army of Zievil, sent against the Persians by the khagan of the Turks.

According to the Armenian chronicle of Movses Kalankatuatsi, negotiations on the alliance were conducted not with the Khazars, but with "the successor of the king of the north, the second person in his kingdom, named Jebu Hakan", who was located in the land of the Huns (and not the Khazars) [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 78]. Theophanes also defines the status of Zievil.

After the conclusion of the alliance in 626, troops led by Zievil attack Adraig (Iranian Azerbaijan). Armenian sources speak of "Khazirs"in this regard. This is evidence of the great role of the Khazars in the army provided to help Byzantium. But the leadership of the operation was carried out not by the Khazars, but by Jebu-khakan, who the next year gathered a multi-ethnic army - all " who were under his rule, all tribes and clans... shaving their heads or wearing braids." Jebu-hakan is called the ruler of the "bestial morals of the people of the scythe-bearers". The army of Jebu-khakan looked like "a lot of people ugly and wide-cheeked, without eyelashes, who with long, loose, like women's hair raced on horseback...". The Khazars themselves did not make such an impression [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p.71, 78]. Such emotions indicate a meeting with an ethnic group completely alien, unfamiliar (similar descriptions have been preserved about the meeting of European residents with the Huns of Attila). These ethnographic data were analyzed in detail by M. I. Artamonov, who identified in the army of the Turks of the Asian steppes (they were characterized by loose long hair), Hunnic and Bulgarian tribes (braids and shaved heads, respectively) [Artamonov, 2001, pp. 218-219].

Thus began the famous campaign of Heraclius. The result was the defeat of the Persians and the decline of Sasanian Iran, the end of which sixteen years later was set by the Arabs. The" barbarian " ally of Heraclius played a huge role in this campaign. It was the Turks and the Ciscaucasian tribes under their control, first of all the Khazars, who inflicted OS-

page 7

a new attack on Caucasian Albania and Iranian Azerbaijan, where Ganzak (Shiz), the most important religious center of Iranians, was located.

The title of Jebu-khakan (yabgu-kagan) was traditional for the rulers of the Western Turkic Khaganate. This initially military title was borrowed by the Turks from the Kushan political hierarchy through the mediation of the Eftalites (Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2004: 86,113). The Yabgu khagans of the western branch of the Ashina dynasty were considered junior to the khagans of the eastern branch and were next in rank after the ruler of the first unified and then Eastern Turkic Khaganate, whom Kalankatuatsi mentions as "king of the north".

The campaign of Heraclius in Transcaucasia, in connection with which Yabgu-kagan is mentioned, coincides with the reign of Ton-yabgu-Kagan (618-630), which became the period of maximum territorial expansion of the Western Turkic Khaganate. It was Ton-yabgu that established strict political control of the khaganate in those lands that were only nominally considered subordinate. None of the sources exclude the personal involvement of Ton-yabgu in the war of Heraclius against the Persians. The sources in which Yabgu-kagan is called the ruler of the Khazars are late and / or written in remote areas. The assignment of the title "yabgu-kagana" by one of the subordinate rulers during the heyday of the Western Kaganate was extremely risky.

Sources also mention a certain Shad, the nephew of the "king of the north" (the khagan of the Eastern Turks, who continued to occupy the top line in the Turkic hierarchical system) and the son of the Yabgu khagan (Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p.81, 93). Shad is known in the hierarchy of the First Turkic Khaganate as the supreme leader of the "arrow" of the ten-shot union and the commander of the tushen, which was put up by each "arrow" in the event of war. Strela was actually a tribal alliance headed by a shad, who was subordinate to the Yabgu Kagan. Since the sources about the Byzantine-Iranian war mention not only the Khazars, but also the Turks and "Huns", there is reason to assume that this shad was at the head of the association, which included the territories of the north-eastern Ciscaucasia and the north-western Caspian region.

The shad had such powers only within the supra-tribal division, which included the Khazars and, probably, a number of other tribes of the Northern Caspian and Ciscaucasia. The practice of such "vicegerency" is known among nomads from the time of the Xiongnu Empire to the nomads of Modern times (Chernyshev, 1990, p. 62; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 1992, p. 95-96; Kradin, 2002, p. 192). In the multiethnic steppe empire, power belonged to one tribe. In relations with other tribes, the head of the empire relied on his own tribesmen, whom he placed as governors over the vassal tribes. At the same time, local leaders retained their power and were relatively independent. This is where the roots of the Khazar "dual power"come from. The title of shad was later retained by the Khazars after the formation of the Khazar Khaganate. Then the shad became the second person in the system of power, and the ruler of the Khazars took the title of kagan.

Thus, there are no sufficient grounds for dating the formation of an independent Khazar association in the 20s-30s of the seventh century.On the contrary, all evidence points to the inclusion of the Khazars in the structure of the Western Turkic Khaganate, within which the Khazarian system of power, known at a later time, began to form.

But subordination within the "steppe empire" did not contradict the autonomy of its individual parts. According to Movses Kalankatuatsi, the shad negotiated with Shahanshah Khosrow II, had the authority to send embassies to him and accept responses [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, pp. 84-90]. And participation in" big politics " always turned out to be a large cash flow for small nomadic unions. The latter, in turn, gave an impetus to the process of strengthening power structures in the United States.-

page 8

the "prestige economy" of a nomadic chiefdom [Kradin, 1991, p. 306-320; Istoriya primevalnogo obshchestva..., 1988, p. 121-123].

The road to the formation of the Khazar Khaganate was opened by the collapse of Great Bulgaria, which for half a century controlled the north-eastern Black Sea region. This event occurred in the 670s. Only after the disappearance of this powerful political entity, the Khazars began to raid the Byzantine possessions in the Crimea with "impunity". The Khazars subdued the Bulgar horde of Batbayan, which roamed the territory between the Lower Don and Kuban, and forced these Bulgars to pay tribute [Chichurov, 1980, p. 62, 162].

The Batbayan Horde was the first" acquisition " of the Khazars recorded by sources. In general, military actions against territories with a nomadic population are typical for all nomads at any stage of development of social structures. The first steps of all the nomadic empires of Eurasia were directed precisely against neighbors with a similar way of life. They were robbed during raids, captured cattle and pastures, and forced out of their territories (Vasyutin, 2002, p. 88). If subordination was carried out by a potestar association with the established administrative structure, universal military service was imposed on dependent nomads, a tribute tax was levied, and a viceroy from the family of the leader of the victors was placed at the head of the new ulus. Interestingly, Batbayan was left at the head of the tribal union, although, according to sources, he resisted. This indicates that the mechanisms of exploitation in the Khazar Tribal Union were only being worked out and had not yet been formalized. The conditions in this case could not be too harsh: strong pressure on the nomads could lead to migration or to the use of retaliatory violence, since each nomad was also a warrior.

But the capture of the neighboring territory, caused by favorable external circumstances, was not decisive in the formation of the steppe empire. The Arab wars of the seventh and eighth centuries in the Caucasus played a more significant role in this process.

The appearance of the Arabs in Transcaucasia dates back to the initial period of conquest, when Muslim armies in the fight against Byzantium and Sasanian Iran captured Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia and there was a struggle for Egypt. The weakness of the two great powers allowed the Arabs to enter Transcaucasia as early as 640, where they took the capital of Armenia, Dvin. Under Caliph Uthman, the wave of conquest spread far to the east and west. By 653, the remnants of the Sasanian Empire were conquered: the last Sasanian, Yazdigerd III, was killed near Merv, and in Transcaucasia, the Arabs captured the fortress city of Derbent. According to al-Tabari, then the conqueror of Derbent, general Abd ar-Rahman, went from Derbent to march on the Turks (at-Turk), to the city of Balanjar, and the Arab commander directly indicated this goal in a conversation with Shahrvaraz, the Persian commandant of Derbent. The city was captured, after which the Arabs reached the site of al-Bayda, converting the local population to Islam along the way, and safely returned to Derbent [At-Tabari, 2003, vol.2, pp. 722-723]. At-Tabari dates the campaign to 22 AD (642/643). After the capture of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Mughan (Buniyatov, 1965, p. 81), Arab troops could also make deeper sorties, the surprise of which determined their success.

In 653/654, Abd ar-Rahman (according to other sources, his brother Salman) [al-Beladsori, 1865, p.204] made a second campaign against Balanjar, where the Arabs were defeated by the Balanjars and Turks, and their leader was killed. After his death, his body was placed by local residents in a basket-casket (safat). as having magical properties [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 2, pp. 723, 779]. This legend, according to researchers, is "non-Muslim" in nature and is borrowed from the stories of Arab soldiers who came to Dagestan or from some local folklore sources (Shikhsaidov, 1994, p. 154). The existence of such legends among local residents confirms to a certain extent the authenticity of the events described, including the failure of the Arabs in the campaign against Balanjar.

page 9

At-Tabari puts this legend first under 22 AD in an abbreviated form, then describes the second campaign to Balanjar under the leadership of Abd ar-Rahman in 32 AD, giving more details about the legend of body worship from another source [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 2, p. 778]. Al - Kufi [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 2, p. 258] mentions the Khazar khagan at the head of a 300,000-strong army in describing these events, and replaces the legend of the bodies with a brief statement that the graves of Salman and "all those who were with him" are known in Balanjar as "the graves of martyrs". Al-Balazuri also speaks about the Khazars and their Khagan (Al-Beladsori, 1865, p. 203-204). At-Tabari has no khagan, and the Khazars have no Turks. However, a number of details of Salman's campaign in the interpretation of al-Kufi and al-Balazuri actually and even textually coincide with the description of the campaign against the Khazars of al-Jarrah, which took place almost a century later, in 722/723: after the Arab army crossed the Kura River, the commander stops at the Rubas River and enlists the support of the "lords of the mountains", and arriving in Derbent Al-Beladsori, 1865, p. 203-204; Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 260). In addition, when describing the campaigns of Salman and al-Jarrah, al-Kufi mentions the same Khazar city (in different spellings-Baruf, Yarga), which is known to other authors from the campaign of al-Jarrah [Ibn al-Athir, 1851, p. 84]. Thus, in the story of Salman's campaign, these authors trace two parts: one is borrowed from the campaign of al-Jarrah, the other generally coincides with at-Tabari (about the death of the commander). The late origin of al-Kufi's version is also indicated by the unrealistic ratio of the Khazar and Arab forces-three hundred thousand against ten.

According to Balami, whose work is a revision of the unrecorded full version of at-Tabari's work, a coalition of tribes of the North Caucasus, including Khazars, Alans, and Turks, took part in this war against the Arabs (Dorn, 1844, p.14).

At-Tabari writes that when the siege of Balanjar ended in flight for the Arabs, one part, pursued by the Turks, retreated to Derbent, and the other group moved through the land of the Khazars to Gilan and Djurjan [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 2, p. 779], i.e. one group went south, the second - north and then by sea to the southern coast of the Caspian Sea. The Arabs managed not only to pass unharmed through unfamiliar territories, but also to board ships! Such a route was possible only if the Khazars did not take part in the battle on the side of the Turks and the inhabitants of Balanjar.

At-Tabari does not mention anything about the subordination of Balanjar to the Khazars. The compiler of the famous "Dictionary of Countries" Yakut al-Hamawi (XIII century), referring to al-Balazuri and other (unnamed) sources, defines Balanjar as a city in the country of the Khazars, but in the story of these events also mentions only the Turks [Yakut al-Hamawi, 1996, vol. 1, pp. 489-490]. The Khazars are generally referred to at-Tabari only under 752/753 alongside the Turks ." [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, pp. 1540, 1542].

Other early Arab authors do not know the Khazars as the main actors in the events in the Caucasus in the seventh and early eighth centuries. For example, in the work of Caliph ibn Hayyat al-Usfuri Tarikh, " in the seventh century, the Turks are the opponents of Muslims, and in the eighth century, the Khazars act together with the Turks in the Caucasus [Beilis, 2000, p. 35-43].

Thus, in the story of the events near Balanjar, the mention by some authors of the Khazars led by the Khagan is a late interpolation.

In addition, it should be noted that military operations took place in the north-east of the Ciscaucasia, i.e. the Arabs invaded the lands of the Khazars, not the Alans. Therefore, it is natural that the Khazars were among the most active participants in the events.

Usually, the dominance of the Khazars in the Ciscaucasia at the beginning of the Arab-Khazar wars is justified by more frequent references to this tribal alliance compared to others. However, in the sources of the seventh century, the main actors in the Caucasian

page 10

in the political scene, the Turks and Huns are called. Thus, Kalankatuatsi, in addition to the Khazars, who continued to raid Albania, mentions the king of the Huns (called the "king of Turkestan"), who in the middle of the VII century. he signed an agreement with the Albanian Prince Djuansher [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 100, 102-103].

Movses Kalankatuatsi, describing in detail the barbarian attack on Albania, calls them Huns and tells about the relationship between the Huns ' ruler Alp Ilitver and the governor of Caucasian Albania at the turn of the VII-VIII centuries. [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 122-127]. Starting with M. I. Artamonov, many researchers consider Alp Ilitver to be a vassal of the Khazar khagan - this is the name of the Khazar ruler at Kalankatuatsi [Artamonov, 2001, p. 256-260; Pletneva, 1986, p. 34-35, etc.].

The name of the leader of the Huns is the title Elteber, known among the Central Asian tribes. It was common in Central Asia of the Turkic period in relation to the leaders of large tribes and tribal unions that maintained complete independence. Among the Oghuz Irkin tribes, only the most powerful Uyghur leaders were el-Tebers (Klyashtorny, 2000, p. 122). Accordingly, the title of Elteber at the head of the Huns of the Caucasus does not indicate his dependence on any supreme ruler. The independent policy of the Alp Ilitver is also indicated by the adoption of Christianity by the tribal leaders of the Huns, after which the leader turned to the princes and bishops of Armenia and Albania with a request to establish a bishopric in the kingdom of the Huns [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, pp. 122-127, 133-135].

Already after his baptism and political union with Albania, Alp Ilitver "earned himself the magnificent name valiant, having performed many feats of bravery in Turkestan under the Khazir khakan, he won the love of the Khakan, and the latter gave his daughter to him" [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 199] ("Turkestan" here is no longer the distant countries of the Turks in the past). Central Asia, and the territories of the north-western Caspian region). This meant that the Khazar ruler already had great political influence in the Caucasus and it was probably considered an honor to have his daughter as a wife. By the way, it is important that the kagan did not marry the daughter of Alp Ilitver (then it was possible to consider this marriage as taking a noble hostage), but vice versa. In the nomadic world, marriages of this kind were a contract of peace, and not a recognition of the dependence of one community on another [Vasyutin, 2002, p. 93].

The Khazar ruler is beginning to be perceived as the successor of the Khagan of the Turks in the region at this time. Alp Ilitver had the opportunity to perform "feats" in Turkestan, being an ally of the Khazars in the anti-Bulgar campaign after the collapse of Great Bulgaria.

The Kingdom of the Huns and the associated cities of Samandar and Varachan are described in such detail in Armenian and Arabic sources that this allowed researchers to confidently localize this ethnopolitical formation in the area of the Terek-Sulak interfluve (Artamonov, 2001, pp. 253-268; Gmyrya, 1995). Numerous archaeological sites have been discovered in this area, including extensive settlements, fortresses, and burial grounds dating back to the seventh and eighth centuries. The main researcher of this region, M. G. Magomedov, tried to link them unambiguously with the Khazars (Magomedov, 1983). This version was supported by S. A. Pletneva, who believes that M. G. Magomedov "discovered the Caspian Khazaria" [Pletneva, 2000, pp. 179-180]. The main monument of this "Khazaria" is the Verkhnechiryurt complex, which M. G. Magomedov identified with Balandzhar (Magomedov, 1983, pp. 28-36). This is quite likely: the complex is located on the territory of the Kingdom of the Huns, it is distinguished by a rich material culture. M. G. Magomedov connects the richest burials of the Verkhnechiryurt burial ground with the Khazar ethnic group - underground catacombs. But this thesis has not been understood by archaeologists who deal directly with the medieval North Caucasus, since the underground catacomb burial grounds are well known throughout the region from Kuban to Chechnya since the first century AD.-

page 11

The coniferous shape of the chambers is also found outside Khazaria both in the pre-Khazar period and after the collapse of the khaganate, as well as many other" specifically Khazar " features, according to Magomedov (Abramova, 1997, p. 97-107; Munchaev, 1965; Kuznetsov, 1992, p.148-149). Moreover, such burials are unknown in the Caspian lowlands, where the Khazars lived reliably.

Meanwhile, the appearance of the material culture of the multiethnic Kingdom of the Huns testifies in favor of its independence in the seventh century and relative independence in the eighth century. This is indicated at least by the existence of a separate higher stratum, which buried its dead in underground catacombs. The main population of the kingdom was ethnic Alans and Late Hunnic tribes close to the Bulgars. The top was the result of a mixture of local Iranians (probably Maskuts) with the newcomers "Huns". This is also indicated by the pantheon of Huns recorded by Kalankatuatsi: the two main deities have one-Iranian and the other - Turkic origin [Klyashtorny, 2000]. Traces of the Christianization of the Huns of the Alp and the River were also found - two small churches that were, as S. A. Pletneva suggests, destroyed by the Arabs at the beginning of the VIII century. [Pletneva, 2000, p. 184].

However, at the end of the seventh century, Arab expansion in the Caucasus was suspended, as turmoil began within the Caliphate. The political crisis in the Caliphate lasted until 692, when Caliph Abd al-Malik managed to destroy the main opposition forces and restore the unity of the empire. Naturally, during these 12 years, the Arabs were not up to conquests. The Khazars took advantage of this by attacking the significantly weakened (but not completely looted) Transcaucasian countries in 684. Then the steppe dwellers captured a huge amount of loot and took away a lot of prisoners [Vardan, 1861, p. 90; Levond, 1862, p. 10]. This campaign allowed the Khazars to force the ruler of Albania Varaz-Trdat to pay tribute (in addition to the Khazars, the Arabs and Byzantium received "taxes" from Albania).

After that, for a brief period, Byzantium regains its dominance over Armenia and Albania. But another power struggle in Byzantium did not give her the opportunity to keep this region. Already in 692-693, sources mention the Arab ruler of Armenia, who extends his power to Derbent inclusive (Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 160). In 701-702, the Arabs finally conquered Armenia and established a strict occupation regime there, which caused several uprisings that were supported by Byzantium, but ended unsuccessfully [Ter-Gevondyan, 1977, pp. 72-77]. Derbent passed several more times from the hands of the Arabs to the local tribes and back.

By the end of the seventh and beginning of the eighth centuries, events in another region had a significant impact on the balance of power among the tribal unions of the Ciscaucasia. After the collapse of Great Bulgaria and the seizure of part of the territory of this political association in the last quarter of the seventh century, the Khazars in the late seventh and early eighth centuries subdued part of the eastern coast of the Crimea (Pioro, 1990, pp. 62-64). So the Khazars became involved in the internal political events in Byzantium.

In 695, the deposed Emperor Justinian P was exiled to Chersonesos. While in a distant province, he continued to conduct intrigues in order to regain the throne. The inhabitants of Chersonesos, fearing reprisals from Constantinople, decided to surrender Justinian to the Basileus or kill him. Upon learning of the impending danger, Justinian asked for "political asylum" in Khazaria. The Khazar khagan granted the request and gave Justinian his sister (or daughter), named Theodora in Christianity, as his wife. After that, an ambassador from Constantinople came to the khagan, offering many gifts for the extradition or murder of Justinian. Warned by his wife, the ex-emperor fled to Danube Bulgaria, allied himself with the Bulgarian Khan Tervel, and with the help of his soldiers regained the imperial throne in 705. After this, it is obvious that Chersonesus broke away from Byzantium and entered into an alliance with the Khazars, since under 711 in the Byzantine is-

page 12

the sources mention "Tudun-the archon of Chersonesos, who was there on behalf of the Khagan". Justinian organized a punitive campaign against the rebellious city, during which Kherson was sacked and burned, the "noble men" were subtly executed, and the Khazar Tudun was captured and sent to the Basileus. Soon the Chersonites raised a new revolt against Justinian. They invited the disgraced nobleman Vardan, who was sent into exile in Chersonesos, to lead the uprising. The citizens of Chersonesus proclaimed Vardan, who took the name of Philippicus, emperor. The fleet of Vardan-Philippik with a significant Khazar reinforcement moved to Constantinople (Chichurov, 1980: 64-65).

For Byzantium, the benefits of the traditional use of nomads in solving internal problems were obvious, and the Khazars were no worse suited to this than the Sarmatians, Onogurs and Bulgars of former times. After the capture of the throne by Vardan-Philippik in 711. Chersonesos returned to the bosom of the empire, and the Khazars could not fear for their Bosporan and Kuban possessions. Byzantium especially needed new allies in the fight against the Arab Caliphate in Transcaucasia, when the actions of the nomads were undoubtedly fueled and directed by the Byzantine Empire. Byzantine sources show a striking awareness of the Khazar raids, and the narrative goes in a panegyric style in relation to the latter [see: Chichurov, 1980, pp. 66-68, 166-167].

Just at this time, the Arab conquests in Byzantium and in other directions are being resumed. Under Abd al-Malik's son, al-Walid (705-715), the territories of Central Asia were conquered, including the lands between the Amu Darya and Syr Darya, and the Iberian Peninsula was almost completely conquered. In 715, Abd al-Malik's son, Mas Lama, began the siege of Constantinople, which lasted until 717. It is no exaggeration to call the second decade of the eighth century the apogee of the Caliphate's political power.

The Caucasian direction was one of the priorities in the foreign policy of the Caliphate, since it was directly connected with the offensive on Byzantium. Events in this region are reconstructed using Arabic and Armenian sources, which often contradict each other, especially in chronology.

Maslama, who was almost continuously governor of the north in 709-732, alternately made campaigns against Byzantium and the Caucasus, and during the Byzantine campaigns the tribes of the Caucasus, called in the sources Turks, Huns and Khazars, regained the territories captured by the Arabs. By 89 AD (708-709), these tribes had managed not only to regain the positions in Transcaucasia that the Turks had conquered in their time, but also to expand their influence. Movses Kalankatuatsi reports that in the year 158 of the Armenian chronology (709) The "Prince of Khazirs" with an 80,000-strong army captured Caucasian Albania [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, p. 161]. In response, Maslama went on a campaign "against the Turks", fighting them until he reached Derbent from Albania, after which he "conquered fortresses and cities there" (At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1287). Obviously, we are talking about numerous fortresses and ancient settlements of Primorsky Dagestan. However, these conquests were really just raids, after which everything went back to normal. In 713-714, Maslama, once again taking Derbent (Bab al-Abwab), ordered the destruction of its fortress walls, not hoping to keep the city behind him. However, as soon as Maslama left Derbent "with great trophies", the Khazars returned there. Al-Kufi, in the story about the capture of Derbent by Maslama and the expulsion of the Khazars from there, defines the number of Khazars as 80,000, adding that their wives and children also lived in Derbent [Al-Kufi, 1986, p. 452]. It is obvious that during these years Bab al-Abwab has developed a permanent garrison - Turco-Hunno-Khazar: if at-Tabari calls the Turks, then al-Kufi and Kalankatuatsi - Khazars, and Levond-Huns (Levond, 1862, pp. 27-28).

They did not conquer Derbent by force. First of all, this is not reported by the sources. Secondly, residents of the city always had the opportunity to ask for help from their southern neighbors, who were so eager to get this strategic point. But this was not done.

page 13

Therefore, it is logical to assume that the garrison was invited to protect the city from Muslim expansion.

After that, the raids of the Turkic-Hun-Khazar coalition on the southern coast of the Caspian Sea, which belonged to the Caliphate, continued with enviable regularity, since the springboard for campaigns was on the border with the Arab possessions [At-Tabari, 2003, vol.4, pp. 1322-1325-1330]. Apparently, these regular raids gave rise to the ninth-century geographer. Ibn Khordadbeh claims that Caucasian Albania, Djurjan and Sisajan were ruled by the Khazars before the Arabs [Ibn Khordadbeh, 1889, p. 122]. Although the attacks were repulsed, the situation required drastic measures, because the Caucasian provinces were not reliable and could one day use the help of nomads in the struggle for independence.

In 722-723, al - Jarrah, who temporarily replaced Maslama, went to Azerbaijan. Having learned that a large army was moving, the Khazars "began to run away until they reached the city of Bab al-Abwab" (Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 260). From this report of al-Kufi, it can be concluded that during the absence of the Arabs, the Khazars advanced down the Caspian lowland to Derbent, where their garrison was located. Thus, they seized the most economically advantageous territories-access to the sea and the way south to the Caliphate. Thus, they found themselves in the hands of levers of pressure on the mountain tribal unions of the Eastern Caucasus. But the highlanders at that time were independent of the Khazars. Reaching the Rubas river, two farsakhs from Derbent, al-Jarrah contacted the" lords of the mountains " (muluk al-jibal), who soon arrived with reinforcements. Before that, the leaders of the mountain domains - Lakza, Tabarsaran, Filan-are very rarely mentioned. From now on, they become active participants in events. This indicates the expansion of the Caliphate's claims in the Caucasus, as well as the fact that the highlanders were dissatisfied with the Khazar control of the "Caspian Gate".

Al-Jarrah advanced north to the city of Balanjar. As early as the end of the seventh century, this place, built, according to legend, by Shahanshah Khosrow Anushirvan, may have been the capital of the kingdom of the Huns. In the 20s of the 8th century Balandzhar was already perceived by sources as a Khazar fortress. This indicates the growing influence of the Khazars in the region and the subordination of the Huns of the Caucasus to them. In addition, sources also know other Khazar cities - Khasin and Bar'ufa (Yarga) [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol.4, p. 262].

It is from the end of the seventh and beginning of the eighth centuries that the Khazars ousted the Turks and Huns from the Caucasus, and in the sources the title "khagan" begins to be used directly in relation to the head of the Khazars.

Balanjar was taken by the Arabs, and the actions of the Khazars were classic defensive actions of nomads: they surrounded the city with wagons. The Arabs quickly broke through the defense line. The Khazars ' actions suggest that they may have had to take cities, but not defend them. Therefore, if Balanjar was located in the Khazar land, it was recently, and the Khazars had not yet managed to settle there. But the captive wife of the ruler of Balanjar, whom al-Jarrah bought for himself at the auction after the victory, was a Khazar, and of such a noble family that the Arabs later argued what attracted the commander in a woman - her beauty or origin [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 263]. It is possible that she was the daughter of the khagan, i.e. the peace treaty between the Huns and the Khazars was confirmed by dynastic marriages, as in the times of the Alp Ilitver. This assumption, as well as the subsequent relative independence of the Huns within the Khazar "confederation", is confirmed by the subsequent actions of al-Jarrah. He returned his wife and children to the lord of Balanjar in exchange for a surrender (aman), ensuring a reliable rear.

The further route of al-Jarrah shows what the Khazar "confederation"was then. After leaving Balanjar, he went further north until he reached the land of al-Wabandar, where there were about 40 thousand dwellings. Scared of the Muslims,

page 14

the inhabitants of this land requested peace and paid an indemnity [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 263].

Archaeologist V. G. Kotovich identifies al-Vabandar with Varachan of Armenian sources, the capital of the Kingdom of the Huns (Kotovich, 1974, p. 191). However, this hypothesis cannot be considered proven, if only because al-Wabandar is a land, and Varachan is a city. At the same time, a small conjuncture: Vabandar - Vanandar - allows you to look at the localization of this territory in a different way. The land and people with the same or very similar name are known to other Eastern sources. In a letter from the Khazar king Joseph to the Kordov dignitary Hasdai ibn Shafrut, the Khazars defeat the tribe of the c. n. d. T. R. The people of the c. n. d. r are known to the anonymous author of Hudud al-Alam and Gardizi [Hudud al - ' Alam, 1970, p. 159; Martinez, 1982, p. 160]. In all cases, we are talking about Unogundurs who were previously part of Great Bulgaria and then partially joined the Khazar Union. Their localization in the steppes of the Kuban region and on the Stavropol upland is well known. Thus, al-Jarrah passed through the Caspian lowlands and reached the Bulgar tribes through the steppes. It is significant that they also concluded a separate peace with the Arabs.

But the Khazars, Turks and Huns together managed to gather a significant army. And al-Jarrah, who had thought of going as far as Samandar, was forced to return to Albania with his loot, so that he could not gain a foothold in Bab al-Abwab and to the north of it. The Khazars and" other infidels " responded to al-Jarrah's actions by launching devastating raids on Albania and Arran for several years. Attempts to deal with the Khazars and Turks within the Caliphate did not bring success: the enemy retreated "to their own land" and returned after a while. Al-Jarrah, and after him the newly appointed Maslama, made retaliatory attacks [Ibn al-Athir, 1851, p. 108, 115; At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, pp. 1374-1379].

These actions did not solve the "Khazar" problem at all, but only united the tribes north of Derbent. By 112 AH (730-731), the Khazars had managed to gather a huge army of about 300,000 people, which, under the leadership of Barsbek, the son of the Khagan, passed through Azerbaijan with fire and sword, destroying al-Jarrah and his army [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, pp. 266-270, At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, pp. 1380-1381; Ibn al-Athir, 1851, p. 118]. In this regard, al-Kufi reports that the Khazar khagan, gathering an army, "sent to all kinds of infidels who were of the same faith and origin as him, calling for a fight against the Muslims, and they (the infidels. - E. G.) agreed to this" [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 266]. By "types of infidels" here we should understand the Turks and the Late Hunnic tribes of the Caucasus related to the Khazars, who really professed similar pagan cults.

Interestingly, the khagan asked for the consent of the tribal unions that were part of the khaganate. Like the actions of the ruler of Balanjar and the people of Vanandar, this indicates the significant independence of such unions within the Khazar potestar formation. In the first half of the eighth century, the Khazar Khaganate was just forming a military-hierarchical structure; ethnic and tribal stratification was not yet so strong that the ethno-political elite could assemble troops by order. But the process of unification of the Late Hunnic and Turkic tribes was already underway, and the Khazars led it.

Many researchers believe that the Khazars also included the Alani tribes (Kuznetsov, 1992, pp. 147-168; Gadlo, 1994, pp. 47-51). However, the Alans should not be considered vassals of the khaganate. No source other than King Joseph knows about the submission of the Alans to the Khazars. Judging by the preserved data, the relations of these neighbors went through different stages. The Bulgarian tribes of the Prikuban region, which were part of the Khazar Union, were long-time rivals of the Alans in the Western Ciscaucasia (Kuznetsov, 1992, p.150). Obviously, the territorial problem was not solved later. Under 103 AD (721-722 AD), at-Tabari reports a conflict between the Alans and the "Turks" [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4,

page 15

p. 1355]. And in 105 AD, the year after the campaign against Balanjar, al-Jarrah made a campaign against the Alans, in which he passed through their territory to the cities and fortresses located beyond Balanjar, and plundered some of them [At-Tabari, 2003, vol.4, p. 1362]. The campaign against the Alans was carried out separately; in the war against the Khazars, the Alans were not mentioned. But control of the Alanian territories made it possible to attack the Khazars from the rear. Therefore, in 106 AH, another general, al-Hajjaj bin ' Abd al-Malik, fought with the Alans and concluded a peace treaty with them, under which they pledged to pay jiyeh [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1365]. The mention of this tax means that the Alans recognized the suzerainty of the Caliphate. This success allowed Maslama bin ' Abd al-Malik to attack the Khazars from the Daryal Gorge a few years later, in 110 AH (729-730), and ravage the lands of the Khagan for a month (At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1374).

But the following year the situation changed. At-Tabari reports that in 730-731 the Turks attacked Albania from the Alan side [At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1380]. The Alans themselves did not participate in military operations on the side of Barsbek. But they did not like the" patronage " of the Arabs, and they allowed the Turkic-Khazar militia to pass through their territory. The Khazars ' side was also taken by the Georgians, one of whose princes informed the Khazars about the location of al-Jarrah's army (Buniyatov, 1965, p.111).

Finally, the Arabs managed to take Derbent only in 732-733. By order of Mas Lama, the fortress was rebuilt, its supply of weapons and food was organized. After that, Maslama handed over the leadership of the region to the future caliph Marwan ibn Muhammad. A talented commander, Marvan began to conquer the regions north of Derbent, especially since the Khazars and other inhabitants of the North-Eastern Ciscaucasia were pretty tired of many years of wars and could not provide a worthy rebuff. Dividing the army into two parts, Marwan ordered one to go through the conquered Derbent, and he went to Daryal. The Alans put up an active resistance, Marwan brutally suppressed it and went through the "Alan Gate" to Samandar, where the Arab troops were reunited [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, pp. 282-289].

The culmination of the Caucasian wars of the Caliphate was the famous Marwan campaign of 737, when the future caliph, after passing through Balanjar and Samandar, reached the distant city of Khazar al-Bayda', where the Khazar khagan was located. The ruler of Khazaria fled. However, Marwan did not rush after him, but began to devastate the Caspian lowlands, in which he succeeded a lot, later reaching, according to al-Balazuri and al-Kufi, to the lands located "beyond the country of the Khazars". There Marwan attacked some as-sakalib and other pagans, captured 20 thousand families and reached the as-Sakalib River (lower Volga). Across this river, the newly assembled Khazar army led by Tarkhan was defeated, and the Khazar khagan and many of his family and country were forced to convert to Islam [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol.4, pp. 282-289; Al - Beladsori, 1866, pp. 207-208]. In fact, this meant submission to the Caliphate. After defeating the Khazars, Marvan returned to Transcaucasia with rich booty. After that, Arab sources forget about the Khazars for a long time.

In the same year, Marwan took Balanjar and conquered a number of mountainous territories, in particular the lands of "Sahib al-Sarir", the lords of Lakz and Tuman [Ibn al-Athir, 1851, p. 132], that is, independent territories directly adjacent to the Khazar country from the south and southwest. The next seven years were spent suppressing the rebellions of the "lords of the mountains", who did not want to accept their fate.

It is hardly true that the Khazars lost most of their territories during these wars. The transfer of the" capital " of the Khazars from Samandar or Balanjar to Itil, which is reported by later authors-al-Masudi and Yakut, cannot be considered a loss [Al-Masudi, 1987, p. 178; Yakut al-Hamawi, vol.3, p. 253]. In the exact sense of the word, neither Balanjar nor Samandar have ever been capitals. The very phenomenon of the capital in the pre-state period is characteristic of agricultural societies. In nomadic potestar areas

page 16

In these formations, the role of the capital was replaced by the leader's headquarters, the location of which changed along with migrations. Even in the" imperial "stage of development, the nomad" capitals " moved easily, although not as often as before.

In general, the formation of a permanent political center in a nomadic community requires a long experience of interaction with farmers and the presence of a clear potestar structure. The Khazar Khaganate of the mid-eighth century was just beginning its journey from a confederation of nomads to an early state and had no such experience, nor even a coherent hierarchical structure.

In addition to the khagan, Arabic sources mention only one title - tarkhan. Both titles are undoubtedly of Turkic origin and were borrowed during the Western Turkic Khaganate (Golden, 1993, p. 219). Tarkhan among the Turkic nomads of the Middle Ages is a representative of the military nobility. Sources record the stratification of Khazarian society into two strata: the military aristocracy and simple community members-warriors [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 278]. Other titles and positions in Khazaria of the eighth century are unknown according to Eastern sources. Judging by individual references, the Tarkhans were not only part of a select military unit, but also were the Kagan's retinue. They performed administrative functions on the acquired lands, but all this was done without a clear specialization, as needed. The phenomenon of such " squads "is widely known among other nomads and is defined as an" embryonic " management apparatus. The candidate's personal qualities were the criterion of selection everywhere; the nobility of his family did not matter [Vladimirtsov, 2002, p. 388-392; Khazanov, 1975, p. 186; Kradin, 2002, p. 152-153]. In the first half of the eighth century, the potestar structure of Khazaria was just beginning to take shape, as were its borders.

The territorial losses of Khazaria after the wars with the Arabs were not significant: Derbent and Samandar never belonged to the Khazars for a long time. According to Ibn Khordadbeh, in the middle of the 9th century, the Khazars owned lands to the north of Samandar, and the Khazar cities were Hamlij, Balanjar, and al-Bayda' (Ibn Khordadbeh, 1889, p. 123). It was from the Arab-Khazar wars of the first half of the eighth century that these cities became Khazar. This is also confirmed by archaeological evidence.

The process of forming early city centers began in Dagestan in the first centuries AD (Gadzhiev, 2002, p. 210). But in the first half of the eighth century, major changes took place in the settlements of Primorsky Dagestan. At first, the ancient settlements and fortresses experienced some kind of catastrophe: there were traces of fires, destruction of dwellings and fortifications, and human casualties. After the elimination of the consequences of the disaster, new fortifications are being built, new dwellings appear on the adjacent settlements, represented by yurts. Nomadic ceramics appear. These settlements are associated with a wave of migration of new ethnic groups from the northern steppe regions. Since that time, the economic structure has also changed - the role of cattle breeding increases [Gadlo, 1994, p. 39-40]. The catastrophe is, of course, the Arab raids. But the new nomadic population will be logically associated with the Khazars. So the territory of the Huns becomes part of the Khazar potestar formation. The entry of the Huns was obviously peaceful, due to the need for a joint struggle against Arab expansion. Khazar soldiers and their families were relocated here to protect the troubled area. Such close interaction with the settled population became an economic incentive for the process of political genesis in Khazar society: the cities of Primorsky Dagestan were very rich, with developed trade ties.

The relative calm in the south also contributed to the political genesis in Khazaria: the Caliphate was shaken by internal turmoil, which forced the Arabs to forget about conquering the North Caucasus. In 744, Marwan became caliph , the last of the Umayyad dynasty. His rule was spent in a continuous struggle with the Kharijites, Shiites, local separatists and the main opponents in the struggle for power-the descendants of his uncle.-

page 17

rock, Abbas. There were not enough forces to continue the offensive. In 750, Marwan's forces were defeated at Damascus, and he and members of the Umayyad family were soon killed. The reign of a new dynasty began, accompanied by internal reforms aimed, in particular, at retaining the conquered territories. Riots were constantly breaking out on the outskirts. For the Caliphate, it became necessary to ensure the security of the existing borders from external invasions, including nomadic raids.

The marriage of the new Transcaucasian governor, Yazid al-Sulami, to the daughter of the Khazar khagan, which, according to al-Kufi, was paid an incredible qalim of 100,000 dirhams (Al-Kufi, 1986, vol.4, p. 393; At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1618). The peace treaty with the nomads, based on a marriage alliance, was backed up by a huge ransom, which the Arabs hoped to secure for many years to come. But two years later, the kagan's daughter and the children born to her died under unclear circumstances, which was regarded by the kagan as deliberate murder. In 763, a coalition of nomads led by Khazars emerged from beyond Derbent and plundered Armenia [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol.4, pp. 394-395; At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, pp. 1615; Chichurov, 1980, p. 68]. Yazid was unable to put up a serious resistance due to the small number of troops (the Arabs, obviously, did not expect such a development of events and kept a small garrison). The following year, the attack was repeated, only against Georgia. Then the arrival of reinforcements allowed Yazid to drive the enemy to Derbent.

In 799-800, the last Khazar raid on Arran took place. The Khazars were called upon by residents of Derbent, dissatisfied with the high taxes, promising the kagan a "land of Islam" to ruin. Having completed their task, the Khazars with rich trophies left without waiting for a meeting with Arab troops, and the uprising in Derbent was suppressed [Al-Kufi, 1986, vol. 4, pp. 410-413; At-Tabari, 2003, vol. 4, p. 1720]. Khazaria no longer troubled the region.

Until the end of the seventh century. Khazaria was not an independent and significant political force in the Caucasus. In the Iranian-Byzantine confrontation, the Khazars occupied a subordinate position in relation to the Western Turkic Khaganate. In the first clashes of the Arabs with the tribes of the Caucasus and the Caspian region, a coalition of Turks, Khazars and Huns operated until the end of the 7th century. But the subjugation of the remnants of Great Bulgaria by the Khazars strengthened the position of the Khazars. The favorable geographical position, in comparison with other Caspian associations, which were more exposed to Arab attacks, allowed the Khazars to concentrate military and material resources, to become the center of the association in the fight against the Arab onslaught. During the Caucasian wars with the Arabs, the Khazar proto-state significantly expanded its borders and received the status of a khaganate, began to conduct an independent international policy, the main vector of which was an alliance with the Byzantine Empire. The raids of the Khazars and their allies in Transcaucasia distracted the forces of the Caliphate and made it impossible for it to make a decisive blow to Byzantium. But in the second half of the eighth century. Khazaria was still a semi-nomadic "federation" in which the nomads lived by collecting tribute from the inhabitants of the cities that existed before their arrival and from the semi-settled population.

list of literature

Abramova M. P. Rannie alany Severnogo Kavkaza III-V vv. AD [Early Alans of the North Caucasus of the III-V centuries AD].

Artamonov M. I. Istoriya khazar [History of the Khazars]. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 2001.

Beilis, V. M., Reports of Khalifa ibn Hayyat al - ' Usfuri on the Arab-Khazar wars in the seventh and first half of the eighth centuries, Drevneyshie gosudarstva Vostochnoi Evropy. 1998. Moscow, 2000.

Buniyatov Z. M. Azerbaijan in the VII-IX centuries. Baku, 1965.

[Vardan the Great] Universal History of Vardan the Great, Moscow, 1861.

Vasyutin S. A. Tipologiya potestarnykh i politicheskikh sistem kochevnikov [Typology of potestar and political systems of nomads].

Vernadsky G. V. Drevnyaya Rus ' [Ancient Russia]. Tver, 1996.

page 18

Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Public order of the Mongols. Vladimirtsov B. Ya. Raboty po istorii i etnografii mongol'skikh narodov [Works on the History and Ethnography of Mongolian peoples], Moscow, 2002.

Gadzhiev M. S. Drevny gorod Dagestana: Opyt istoriko-topograficheskogo i sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo analiza [The Ancient City of Dagestan: The Experience of historical and topographical and socio-economic analysis].

Gadlo A.V. Ethnic history of the North Caucasus. IV-X centuries L., 1979.

Gadlo A.V. Ethnic history of the North Caucasus. X-XH centuries St. Petersburg, 1994.

Gmyrya L. B. The Country of the Huns at the Caspian Gate. Makhachkala, 1995.

Golden P. B. Gosudarstvo i gosudarstvennost ' u khazar: vlast khazarskikh kaganov [State and statehood among the Khazars: the power of the Khazar Kagans].

Gumilev L. N. Drevniye tyurki [Ancient Turks], Moscow, 1993.

Dorn B. Izvestiya o khazarakh vostochnogo istorika Tabari [News about the Khazars of the Eastern historian Tabari]. 1844. 4.XLIII. N 7 - 8.

Zuev Yu. A. Drevnetyurkskaya sotsial'naya terminologiya v kitayskom tekste VIII v. [Ancient Turkic social terminology in the Chinese text of the eighth century]. Issue 2. Almaty, Moscow, 1998.

The history of primitive society. Epoch of Class Formation, Moscow, 1988.

Iakut al-Hamawi. Mujam al-Buldan (Dictionary of Countries), Vol. 1-7. Beirut, 1996.

Klyashtorny S. G. "The People of Asparukh", the Huns of the Caucasus and the ancient Turkic Olympus//The oldest states of Eastern Europe. 1998. Moscow, 2000.

Klyashtorny S. G., Sultanov T. I. Gosudarstva i narody Evraziyskikh steppei [States and peoples of the Eurasian steppes]. Antiquity and the Middle Ages. St. Petersburg, 2004.

Kokovtsov P. K. Jewish-Khazarian correspondence in the tenth century of Leningrad, 1932.

Komar A.V. Rannie khazary v Severnom Prichernomorye [Early Khazars in the Northern Black Sea Region]. 3(4), май-июнь 2000 (http://archaeology.kiev.ua/journal/030500/komar.htm).

Kotovich In .G. On the location of the early medieval cities of Varachan, Belenger and Targu. Makhachkala, 1974.

Kradin N. N. The Xiongnu Empire, Moscow, 2002.

Kradin N. N. Osobennosti klassoobrazovaniya i politogeneza u kochevnikov [Features of class formation and political genesis among nomads].

Kuznetsov V. A. Ocherki istorii alan [Essays on the history of the Alans]. Vladikavkaz, 1992.

Kulakovsky Yu. A. Istoriya Vizantii [History of Byzantium]. 3. 602-717 years. St. Petersburg, 1996.

Al-Kufi. Al-Futuh (Conquests), Vol. 1. Beirut, 1406 / 1986.

[Levond] Istoriya khalifov vardapet Gevond, pisatelya VIII V. [History of the Caliphs of Vardapet Gevond, a writer of the eighth century].

Magomedov M. G. Obrazovanie Khazarskogo kaganata (po materialam arkheologicheskikh issledovaniy i pismennym dannym) [Formation of the Khazar Khaganate (based on archaeological research and written data)]. Moscow, 1983.

Al-Masudi. Muruj al-zahab wa maadin al-jawhar (Gold mines and deposits of gems), vol. 1, Beirut, 1987.

Movses Kalankatuatsi. Istoriya strany Aluank [History of the Aluank Country]. Yerevan, 1984.

Movses Khorenatsi. Istoriya Armenii [History of Armenia] / Translated from ancient Armenian, ed. by G. Sarkisyan. Yerevan, 1990.

Munchaev P. M. Novye sarmaticheskie pamyatniki Checheno-Ingushetii [New Sarmatian monuments of Chechen-Ingushetia]. 1965, N 2.

Naumenko V. E. K voprosu o vremya i usloviyakh obrazovaniya Khazarskogo kaganata [On the question of the time and circumstances of the formation of the Khazar Kaganate].

Novoseltsev A. P. Khazar state and its role in the history of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. Moscow, 1990.

Pigulevskaya N. V. Syrianskie istochniki po istorii narodov SSSR [Syrian sources on the history of the peoples of the USSR].

Pioro I. S. Crimean Gothic. (Essays on the ethnic history of the Crimean population in the Late Roman period and Early Medieval period). Kiev, 1990.

Pletneva S. A. Ocherki khazarskoy arkheologii [Essays on Khazar Archeology], Moscow, 2000.

Pletneva S. A. Khazary, Moscow, 1986.

[At-Tabari]. Tarikh al-umam wa-l-muluk li-Abi Ja'far bin Jarir al-Tabari (History of Peoples and Kings). In 6 tt. Beirut, 2003.

Ter-Gevondyan A. N. Armenia and the Arab Caliphate. Yerevan, 1977

Usacheva I. M. The countries of Transcaucasia in the system of international policy of Byzantium (560-620s). historical sciences. Yerevan, 1990.

Uspensky F. I. Istoriya Vizantiiskoi imperii [History of the Byzantine Empire], Vol. 1. Period I (before 527). Period II (516-610). Moscow, 2001.

Theophylact of Simocatta. Istoriya [History] / Translated by Kondratiev Publishing House, Moscow, 1996.

Khazanov A.M. Social history of the Scythians. The main problems of development of the ancient nomads of the Eurasian steppes. M., 1975.

page 19

Chernyshev A. I. Obshchestvennoe i gosudarstvennoe razvitie oiratov v XVIII V. [Social and State development of Oirats in the XVIII century].

Chichurov I. S. Byzantine historical works: "Chronography" of Theophanes," Breviary " of Nikephoros (texts, translation, commentary). Moscow, 1980.

Shahinyan A. K. Armenia on the eve of the Arab conquest. St. Petersburg, 2003.

Shikhsaidov A. R. Ob istochnikakh "Derbend-Nam" [On the sources of Derbend-Nam]. Vostochnoe istoricheskoe istochnikovedenie i spetsialnye istoricheskie discipliny [Eastern Historical Source studies and special historical disciplines]. Issue 2. Moscow, 1994.

[Al-Beladsori] Liber expugnationis regionum, auctore Imamo Ahmed ibn Jahja ibn Djabir al-Beladsori. Ed. M J. de Goeje. Lugduni Batavorum, 1866.

Golden P. Khazar Studies. Vol. 1. Budapest, 1980.

Hudud al-‘Alam. The Regions of the World. A Persian Geography 372 A.H. -982 A.D. / Transl. by V. Minorsky. E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Series. New Series, XI. L., 1970.

[Ibn al-Athir] Ibn-el Athire chronicon, quodperfectissimum inscribitur. Ed. C.T. Tornberg. Lungdunum Batavorum, 1851.

[Ibn Khordadbeh] Kitab al-Masalik wa'l-Mamalik (Liber viairum et regnorum) auctore Abu' l Kasim Obaidallah Ibn Abdallah Ibn Khordadbeh et Excertpta e Kitab al-Kharadj auctore Kodama Ibn Dja'far. Lugduni Batavorum, 1889.

Martinez A.P. Gardizi's Two Chapters on the Turks // Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi. T. 2. Wiesbaden, 1982.

PritsakO. Khazaria// The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. N.Y., 1991.

Permanent link to this publication: