The Kavar revolt in Khazaria is known only from the writings of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, and the Byzantine emperor mentions it in connection with the advance of Magyar tribes to the Northern Black Sea region. The most balanced dating of this migration seems to be the 30s of the IX century, when the Magyars begin to appear in the sources [Kristo, 1996; Zuckerman, 2002, pp. 527, 528]. According to other opinions, the migration of Magyars to the Northern Black Sea steppes occurred at an earlier time (Rona - Tas, 1990, p. 319-324, 413-422; Golden, 1992, p. 260).

Konstantin Porphyrogenitus, referring to the Magyars as Turks, (for an explanation of this, see: [Shusharin, 1997, p. 119 - 134, 216 - 217]), he tells about them the following: "[Know] that the people of the Turks had an ancient settlement near Khazaria, in a place called Levedia - after the nickname of their first voivode. This voivode was called by the personal name of Levedius, and by the name of his dignity he was called voivode, like others after him. So, in this area, already called the Levet of the Day, the Hidmas River flows, which is also called Hingilus. In those days, they were not called Turks, but were called savart-asfals for some unknown reason. There were seven tribes of Turks, but they never had an archon over them, one of their own or another, but they had certain governors, of whom the first was the aforementioned Levedia. They lived together with the Khazars for three years, fighting as allies of the Khazars in all their wars. Hagan, the archon of Khazaria, because of the courage of the Turks and their military assistance, gave in marriage to the first governor of the Turks, called Levedia, a noble Khazar woman because of the fame of his valor and the celebrity of his family, so that she would bear children by him. But this Levedia, by some unknown chance, did not have children with that Khazar woman. The Pachinakites, formerly called Kangar..., having moved to the Khazars by war and being defeated, were forced to leave their own land and inhabit the lands of the Turks. When a battle took place between the Turks and the Pachinakites, then called Kangar, the Turkish army was defeated and divided into two parts. One settled to the east, in the region of Persia - they are still called savart-asfal by the ancient name of the Turks, and the second part settled in the western region, together with their commander and chief Levedia, in the places called Athelkuzu, in which the Pachinakite people now live. After a short time, the aforementioned Khagan, the archon of Khazaria, informed the Turks to send Levedius, their first voivode, to him. So Levediah went to the Khagan of Khazaria and asked him the reason why the Khagan had sent an embassy for Levediah to come to him. The Hagan said to him,"We have called you here to choose you, because you are noble, intelligent, courageous, and the first among the Turks, the archon of your people, and so that you will obey our word and command."

However, Levedia recommended Almutz or his son Arpad instead. The "Turks" themselves chose Arpad, and since then the archon of "Turkia" was chosen from among his descendants. "After some time, the Pachinakites attacked the Turks and drove them out together with their archon.-

page 17
pad. So the Turks, wandering in search of land to settle in, came and drove out the inhabitants of Great Moravia and settled in their land, where the Turks now live to this day. Since then, the Turks have not experienced war from the Pachinakites" [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 161].

There are various ways of interpreting this message of Konstantin Bagryanorodny [for a review of various points of view, see Moravcsik, 1961, p. 62, 144-155; Shusharin, 1997, p. 135]. Without going into the analysis of these opinions, I will limit myself to analyzing the information of the cited source. According to Konstantin Porphyrogenitus the sequence of events is as follows: 1. The Magyars lived in Levedia, near Khazaria. The Magyars were then called Savart-Asfals. While in Levedia, they participated in the wars for three years as allies of the Khazars. 2. The Pechenegs, defeated by the Khazars, invaded Levedia and attacked the Magyars. The Magyars suffered their first defeat at the hands of the Pechenegs. One part of the defeated Magyars fled to Syracuse, and the other-to the "lands of Persia". 3. After some time, the Khazar Khagan appointed Arpad "archon" of the Magyars. 4. After some time, the Pechenegs defeated the Magyars for the second time. The defeated Magyars, led by Arpad, moved to Great Moravia (more precisely, to Pannonia).

To clarify the date of the second defeat of the Magyars by the Pechenegs, researchers use data from Byzantine sources about the Bulgarian-Byzantine war of 890-893. In this war, the Bulgarian Prince Simeon was victorious and obtained the title of "Caesar"from Emperor Leo VI (886 - 912). However, following this, Leo VI attracted Magyar troops to the war against the Bulgarians. In 894, the Magyars, having crossed the Danube on Byzantine ships, inflicted several defeats on the Bulgarians and forced Tsar Simeon to make concessions to Byzantium. But then Simeon suggested that the Pechenegs jointly attack the Magyars, and in the summer of 895 the Magyars were defeated [Groth, 1881, p. 289-290; Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 396, comm. 6; Matyas, 1898, S. 19 - 25]. After that, they crossed the Carpathians and settled in Pannonia.

The defeat of the Magyars by the Pechenegs is also reported in the World Chronicle of the abbot of the Prium Monastery Regino (d. 915). In a note dated 889, he says that the Magyars were expelled from "Scythia", i.e. from the Northern Black Sea region [Shusharin, 1997, p. 181], by their neighbors - the Pechenegs; wandering, the Magyars settled in the "deserts of the Pannonians and Avars" [Reginonis Chronicon; Quellen..., 1961, p.393].

One might assume that the quoted text of Abbot Regino is connected with the first defeat of the Magyars, which is reported in the work of Konstantin Porphyrogenitus [see, for example: Artamonov, 1961, pp. 345, 350]. However, Regino's reference to the Magyars ' retreat to Pannonia after this defeat suggests that the events of 895 were the same. However, this date does not correspond to the date (889) under which Regino gives his report on the Magyars and Pechenegs (e. Syuch considers the date under which Abbot Regino mentions the defeat of the Magyars by the Pechenegs to be doubtful [Syuch, 2002, p. 231; 259-260, ed. 2. Ibid. and the literature of the question]). This is the information of the sources about the time of the second defeat of the Magyars and their migration to Pannonia.

Exact information about the date of the first defeat of the Magyars by the Pechenegs/Pachinakites is not available in the sources. Researchers usually use reports from Byzantine sources about the participation of Magyars in the events that took place in 837 north of the Danube, i.e. in the territory of Atelkuzu, to determine its significance. On the basis of this date, it is clear that the migration of Magyars from Levedia to Atelkusa (after the first defeat by the Pechenegs) took place several years earlier than 837, but not later than 836. In this case, the three years that the Magyars lived in Levedia should be counted from [836-3 =] 833 or sooner from an earlier date. So far, this is all that can be said about the first Magyar-Pecheneg clash mentioned by Konstantin Bagryanorodny.

page 18
The Byzantine emperor mentions the second Magyar-Pecheneg war in another chapter of his work, which is already devoted to the Pechenegs: "Let it be known that the Pachinakites first had their place of residence on the Atil River, as well as on the Geih River, being neighbors of the Khazars and the so-called Uzs. However, fifty years ago, the said Uza entered into an agreement with the Khazars and went to war against the Pachinakites, overpowered them and drove them out of their own country, and the so-called Uza still possess it to this day. The Pachinakites, on the other hand, took to flight and wandered about, looking for a place to settle. When they reached the land that they still possess today, found the Turks in it, defeated them in the war and drove them out, they expelled them, settled here and own this country, as it is said, up to this day for fifty-five years" [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p.154, 155]. As V. P. Shusharin rightly pointed out, information obtained directly from the Pechenegs is reflected here [Shusharin, 1997, p.140, 146].

Researchers have repeatedly pointed out the following contradiction in this text: in one case, it is said that the Pechenegs settled in Atelkuzu 50 years ago, and in the other-55 years [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 388, comm. 4]. In this regard, it is customary to take into account that the second chronological indication fits into the period between 893 and 897. (the essay "On the management of the Empire" was written between 948 and 952 [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 5 (preface), 388, comm. 4]), i.e. it corresponds to the date of the defeat by the Pechenegs and Bulgarians of the Magyars who then lived in Atelkuzu (895) [Artamonov, 1962, p. 350].

The term Atelkuzu (Etelkyuznyu) has a Turkic-Hungarian etymology - "interfluve", where etel is Turkic for "river" (Moravcsik, Bd. II, 1958, p.77). Konstantin Bagryanorodny's list of the rivers that flowed into Athelkuz (Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 162, 163) - Varukh, Kuva, Trull, Brut, Seret (respectively Dnipro, Burg, Dniester, Prut, Siret) - confirms that this region lay to the west of the Dnieper-up to Danube estuaries [Artamonov, 1962, p. 342].

As for the localization of Levedia, a number of researchers suggest that the Khingilus River (Khidmas) flowing through it can be identified with the Ingul River, a lower right tributary of the Dnieper (Cassel, 1948, p. 124; Brun, 1879, p. 105; Ilinsky, 1930). On this basis, it is concluded that Levedia practically corresponds to Athelkuz [Vestberg, 1908, p. 52; Artamonov, 1962, p. 340-341], which contradicts the report of Konstantin Porphyrogenitus about the migration of Magyars (Turks) from Levedia to Athelkuz. According to M. I. Artamonov, the fact that in 837 the Magyars already lived near the Danube leads to the same conclusion, since it is known that at this time they were attracted by the Bulgarians to the war against the rebellious Byzantine captives, whom they settled north of the Danube in 813-between Siret and The Dniester River [Artamonov, 1962, pp. 341-343]. However, one can object to this: in the list of rivers that flowed through Athelkusa given by Konstantin Bagryanorodny, the name of the Khingilus River is absent, therefore, Levedia cannot be identical with Athelkuz, and the consonance of the hydronyms "Khingilus" and "Ingul" is obviously accidental (although it is possible that the name of one river is transferred to another during migration).). In this case, Levedia should lie to the east of the Dnieper - in the Azov Sea region, or perhaps even further east.

According to V. P. Shusharin, information about the voivode of Levedia (Hungarian form-Levedi [Moravcsik, Bd. I, 1958, p. 177; Barczi, 1975, p. 171]) and the country of Levedia are folklore in nature, and they are not related to the entire Magyar ethnic group, but only to the Magyar tribe that belongs to it . to which Levedia himself belonged (Shusharin, 1997, pp. 143-144, 147). In addition, as V. P. Shusharin notes, " it turned out to be impossible to practically localize Levedia. As a result, it becomes necessary to abandon the name Levedia (as modern historians do) of the ethnic territory of the Magyars, where they "lived together with the Khazars"" [Shusharin, 1997, p.144].

page 19
According to V. P. Shusharin, in this tribal legend there are other not entirely reliable elements that reflect the autostereotype of the Magyars, in particular, an indication of the alleged independence of their ancestors from the Khazars - they lived in Levedia "together with the Khazars" for only three years ("...The statement about this short period of living with the Khazars is nothing more than an attempt to justify the idea of Magyar independence, which is characteristic of the autostereotype expressed here, at the level of ordinary self-consciousness" (Shusharin, 1997, p.144).

It is necessary to object to this as follows: 1) the statement that the three-year period of Magyar residence "together with the Khazars" can be estimated as short is controversial; 2) if the legend of Levedia contains information about three years of living "together with the Khazars", then this must be due to some very vivid events in Magyar history; 3 In the Magyar tradition, there is no attempt to conceal the dependence of the Magyar ancestors on the Khazars; on the contrary, the episode with the appointment of Arpad as "archon" directly refers to his subordination to the Kagan, i.e., to the Khazars. e. the dependence on the Khazars in the tradition is measured not by three years, but by a somewhat longer period of time. Thus, there are no sufficiently strong reasons not to trust the information of Constantine Porphyrogenitus and the "Magyar tradition" about their residence in Levedia for at least three years (attempts by some researchers to read "twenty", "thirty-three", "two hundred", "three hundred years" instead of "three years" [see fig.: Moravcsik, 1962, p. 148; Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 392, comm. 7] I consider them groundless and unacceptable). And the fact that Levedia is really difficult to localize does not mean that this name should be abandoned - after all, somewhere the Magyars had to live for the three years during which they fought against the enemies of the Khazars.

Some researchers associate the appearance of the Magyars in Levedia with the outbreak of the Kavar revolt in Khazaria, which is reported by Constantine Porphyrogenitus. For example, according to M. I. Artamonov, during the Kavar uprising, Magyars from the Trans-Volga region broke through to the west of the Don and, possibly, were involved in the Kavar war against the central government; the Khazar government hired Oguz and Pechenegs against both [Artamonov, 1962, p. 327, 339-340, 343]. This interpretation of the data from the Byzantine source seems quite logical, but it needs some adjustment.

Konstantin Bagryanorodny tells the following about the Kavar uprising:: "Let it be known that the so-called Kavars are descended from the Khazars. It so happened that a revolt broke out among them against their authority, and when a civil war broke out, this former power of theirs [still] won. Some of them were killed, others, having fled, came and settled with the Turks in the land of the Pachinakites, became friends with each other and became known as Kavars. Therefore, they also taught the Turks the Khazar language, and they still speak this language, but they also have another language-the language of the Turks "[Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 162, 163].

When describing the fact that during his stay in Levedia the Magyars were called Savartes, Konstantin Bagryanorodny admits an obvious inaccuracy, since the ethnonym "savart" is more likely associated with Savirs than with Magyars [Németh, 1930, p. 183 ff, 315 ff; Moravcsik, 1959, Bd. II, 1958, P. 261 - 262; Moravcsik, 1962, p. 147; Czegledy, 1985]. Objections to the comparison of the Savarti and savira forms were expressed by M. I. Artamonov: [Artamonov, 1962, p. 127, note 59, p. 349]. This fact becomes clear from the subsequent story of Constantine Porphyrogenitus that after the Magyar-Pecheneg war in Levedia, part of the Magyars fled not to Athelkusa, but to the "lands of Persia". And it is of the latter that he says that they are " even now... they are called savartas-asfals." Thus, it seems quite fair to conclude that we are really talking not about the Magyars, but about those who lived in the city of Shamkhor (on the territory of modern Azerbaijan

page 20
Republic) of the Savardiya tribe (Groth, 1881, p. 289-290; Marquart, 1903, p. 36-40). See also: (Macarthney, 1930, p. 86, 174-176; Moravcsik, 1962, p. 147; Czegledi, 1985) 1.

Al-Mas'udi (X century) and some other medieval Arab-Persian authors wrote about the siyavardiiya people who lived on the right bank of the Kura River in its middle course (Al-Dimashki wrote about the al-Sawardiyah mountains [Al-Dimasqi, 1866, p. 107; Mehren, 1874, p. 131]2. In Armenian sources, this ethnonym was transmitted as sewordik (sewordik'). Ibn al-Faqih (X century) wrote that the Sawardiyyah destroyed the city of Shamkhor "in the days of the removal of Yazid ibn Uthayd from Arminiyyah" [Ibn al-Faqih, 1885, p. 293]. This led some researchers astray, who believed that the time of the settlement of sawardiyya in Arminiyya should refer to 762-764, when Yazid ibn Usayd's tenure as governor of Arminiyya ended [see, for example, Marquart, 1903, p. 36-40; Artamonov, 1962, p. 330, 349; Minorsky, 1963, p. 214]. However, it does not follow from the report of Ibn al-Faqih that during the governorship of Yazid ibn Uthayd, the Sawardiyyahs already lived south of Kura. He only writes that they "formed an alliance in the days of the removal of Yazid ibn Usayd from Arminiya", which is very difficult to interpret in any way (it is possible that the alliance arranged by savardiya means joining the Khazar army that attacked Transcaucasia in 764, Savir, whose ancestors were resettled in Albania around 559). under Shahan-shah Khosrov I Anushirvan [Semenov, 2002, p. 24].

These Savirs (and Alans) are reported by Menander [Menander Protector, 1868, fr. 42, p. 203]). Al-Balazuri, writing in the ninth century, gives a somewhat different account of sawardiyya: they destroyed the city of Shamkhor, "it was the people who flocked from all sides after Yazid ibn Uthayd left Arminiya." Here, al-Balazuri tells us that later, in 240 AH (June 2, 854 - May 21, 855), the Arab governor of the Caucasus, Abu Musa Bugha the elder, restored Shamkhor "and settled in it some of the Khazars who came to him with a request for protection, as they wanted to accept Shamkhor". Islam" [Zrodla..., 1956, p. 220 - 221, 233 - 234]3. The Georgian chronicle "Matiane Kartlis" also contains information about the settlement of 300 Khazar families in Shamkhor, but this event is dated to 239 AD (June 12, 853-June 1, 854) [Kartlis Tskhovreba, 1955, pp. 256-257]: "The Daruban gate was opened [by Buga Sr.-I. S.] - yes, and he brought out three hundred houses of the Khazars and planted Dmanisi with them..." [Chronicle of Kartli, 1982, p. 50. See also: Dzhanashvili, 1897, p. 39; Matiane Kartlisa, 1976, p. 50]. 30]. Most lists of "Kartlis tskhovreba" refer to the arrival of Bugi Sr. in Transcaucasia as 219 AD, but some give a more accurate date-239 AD [Matiane Kartlisa, 1976, p. 24, 69-70, ed. 44; Chronicle of Kartli, 1982, p. 84, note 23]. It is known that Buga the elder invaded Georgia in 853. If we follow the "Mathiana Kartlis", the Khazars moved to Shamkhor after Buga the elder wintered in Bardavi (Arm. Partav, an Arab. Barda'a), i.e. in the spring, summer, or autumn of 854. And since al-Balazuri attributes the migration of the Khazars to Shamkhor to 240 AD, it is most likely that this event can be attributed to the summer or autumn of 854 AD.

The desire to convert to Islam as the only goal that prompted 300 Khazar families to move to Transcaucasia seems very strange. It was possible to practice Islam

1 V. P. Shusharin believes that the Savarts are Magyar tribes that remained in the east, in the so-called Great Hungary [Shusharin, 197, p. 112, 157, 159, 166 - 167]. On the localization of Greater Hungary, see [Shusharin, 1997, pp. 157, 166-167.]

2 On the possibility of comparing "savarti-asfaly" with the ethnonym savardiya, see, for example: [Moravcsik, 1962, p. 147 (ibid. bibliography of the question); Czegledi, 1985; Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 80, 83]. Both variants are very distorted, sawardiyya is more correct in Arabic [Marquart, 1903, S. 36-40; Nemeth, 1930, S. 183 ff, 315 ff; Moravcsik, Bd. II, 1959; Moravcsik, 1962, p. 147; Minorsky, 1963, p. 214 and note 115].

3 M. I. Artamonov, following I. Marquart [Marquart, 1903, p. 412], believed that the Khazars who came to Bugra the elder were Muslims, but this is a clear mistake, since al-Balazuri says that these Khazars wanted to convert to Islam.

page 21
and in Khazaria; it is known that Muslims lived there, and in 737 even the Khagan himself converted to Islam [Abu Muhammad Ahmad ibn A'sam al-Kufi, 1981, p. 51; Dorn, 1844, p. 87-88; al-Beladsori, 1866, p. 207]. It can only be assumed, but very cautiously, that the 300 families of Khazars accepted by the Bug were resettled for a different reason; perhaps they were participants in the uprising against the central government, and after the defeat they fled to Transcaucasia and later became known there as Savardiya.

The fact that the mention of savardiya in the sources is associated with the" removal " of Yazidi ibn Usayd from Arminiya is easily explained by the fact that in 762-764, during the Khazar attacks on Transcaucasia [Dunlop, 1954; Czegledy, 1960, p. 75-88; Artamonov, 1962], after which Yazid and he was recalled from the post of governor of the caliph in Arminiyya, and Shamkhor was destroyed by the Khazars. The logic of this report boils down to the following: the Savardiyas as part of the Khazar army" in the days of Yazid's removal " from Arminiya, or rather, immediately before this removal, raided Transcaucasia and destroyed Shamkhor, and in 854 Buga settled the Savardiyas on the site of the same Shamkhor that was once destroyed by their ancestors [Kristo, 1980, p. 104].

In this case, it can hardly be doubted that Savardia is a well-known Savir from Byzantine sources (Σαβιροι, Σαβιροι) [Marquart, 1903, p. 36 ff; Artamonov, 1962, p. 330; p. 127, ed. 59; Priscus Panites, 1868, fr. 24, p. 104; Menander Protector, 1868, fr. 5, p. 203; fr. 41, p. 242; fr. 42, p. 244; Agathiae Myrinae, 1967, § 4. 121; Iordanes, 1882, § 37 The local form of this ethnonym could be säwär [Golb and Pritsak, 1997 (5757), p. 56], and the element-d - or-di-could be a Northern Iranian or Turkic indicator of belonging; in this case, the term savardi-ya is an extended Arabic form of the ethnonym savard(i) (= caßup), which is also confirmed by the Armenian form sevordik', which contains the suffix-k'.

Thus, we can say more confidently that Constantine Porphyrogenitus was "mistaken" in attributing the name Savartes to the Magyars. Most likely, his reference to the fact that the Magyars living in Levedia were called Savartes-Asfals (Σαβαροι ασφαλοι) should have referred not to the entire Magyar ethnic group, but to the Kavars, who integrated into the Magyar tribal association relatively late [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p.162, 163]. In this case, ethnically speaking, the Kavars, who came "from the Khazar family", were Savirs (for the etymology of the term Kavar, see fig.: [Nemeth, 1991, s. 39, 265; Shusharin, 1997, p. 168; Kristo, 1983, Bd. 2, p. 144; Kristo, 1968, Bd. 2, P. 12]). As for this" mistake " of Konstantin Bagryanorodny, it can be explained by the fact that by his time the Kavars-Savarts had joined the Magyar ethnic group, and in addition, by the fact that he had two different sources about the Kavars - Magyar and Kavar proper, but did not attempt to generalize and comprehend relevant information. The process of ethno-linguistic mixing of the Kavars (Savarts) with the Magyars (Turks) is quite well reflected, as already noted, in Konstantin Porphyrogenitus: the Kavars "came and settled together with the Turks (i.e., with the Magyars. - I. S.)... became friends with each other and began to be called Kovars... they also taught the Turks the Khazar language, and they still speak this language, but they also have another language-the language of the Turks [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 162-163].

In this sense, the information of Constantine Porphyrogenitus that the Turks (Magyars) "were called savart-asfals" (i.e. Kavars) for an unknown reason, no longer looks erroneous. And in his two seemingly contradictory reports about the Magyars (Turks), whom he calls in one case Kavars, and in the other - Savrats, reflect, in my opinion, different sources of information (Magyar and Kavar, with respectively different ethnonyms-self-name and foreign name) and the idea of ethnic identification and Savarts.

page 22
Finally, in connection with the identification of the Savartes as Savir, the following fact is of interest: in the part of the letter of the Khazar king Joseph that deals with the mythical ethnogenealogy of the Turkic peoples, the eponym savir is present among the sons of Togarma (tchko) [Kokovtsov, 1932, p. 91 (28.3), but when listing the peoples subject to Joseph, the name savir is used no longer, i.e., by the middle of the tenth century (the date of Joseph's letter) they no longer lived within the Khazar Khaganate.

So, if the Kavars are Savirs, and the Savarts-Asfals (= savardiya / sevordik) are another part of the Savir ethnic group that fled from Khazaria not to the West, but to Transcaucasia, then the flight of the Savarts-Asfals can really be explained by their participation in the uprising against the central government. However, it is easy to see that the date of the Kavar revolt (830s) and the date of the flight of 300 Khazar, i.e. Savardian, families (854) do not coincide; this may indicate that there were not one, but two Savir revolts against the central government.

M. I. Artamonov believed that the Kavar revolt could have started as early as the beginning of the 9th century, under Bek Ovadia (Artamonov, 1962, p. 324, 325, 328), and one of the episodes of the Kavar movement was the above-mentioned flight of the Khazars to Transcaucasia in 854 (Artamonov, 1962, p. 328) .4 It is difficult to accept that the uprising could have been so protracted, since the Khazar authorities hardly began to put up with the confrontation of the Savirs that did not stop for several decades. In addition, the long-term political crisis within Khazaria should have had a negative impact on the state of international trade along the Volga-Caspian route, and meanwhile numismatic data indicate that during the period under review, the flow of eastern silver to Eastern Europe and the Baltic States not only did not decrease, but, on the contrary, sharply increased 5. Thus, it should be assumed that there were two kavar (= savir)uprisings: the first was in the early 830s, and the second in 854.

In the report of Konstantin Bagryanorodny that in Levedia the Magyars (Turks) were called Savart-Asfals and it was there that they were first defeated by the Pechenegs (after which they moved to Athelkusa), one can see an indication that the Magyars, as M. I. Artamonov assumed, had something to do with the uprising kavar [Artamonov, 1962, p. 327, 339-340, 343]. And probably the first Pecheneg attack on the Magyars (in Levedia) was due to the fact that the Pechenegs were hired by the Khazar government to fight against the Magyars. It should be noted here that in the reports of Constantine Porphyrogenitus there is not even a hint that the Magyars ever had hostile relations with the Khazar rulers. However, Ibn Ruste explicitly states that Magyar-Khazar relations were hostile for some time: "It is said that earlier the Khazars dug ditches against the Magyars and other peoples neighboring their country" (quoted from the translation by D. A. Khvolson [Khvolson, 1869], clarified by V. P. Shusharin in Russian). based on the Hungarian translation by K. Cegledi [Shusharin, 1997, p. 106, 107]). V. P. Shusharin questions the reliability of this report [Shusharin, 1997, p.111].

Apparently, the time when "the Khazars dug ditches against the Magyars" dates back to the mid-30s of the IX century, since the construction of the fortress of Sarkel on the Don belongs to this period [Györffy, 1959, p. 79], as reported by Konstantin Bagryanorodny [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 170, 171]. As for the differences between researchers regarding whether the Sarkel was built against the Hungarians [Marquart, 1903, S. 27-30; Bartha, 1975, p. 61; Wozniak, 1975, p. 56-62] or against Russia

4 For an overview of other dating options for the Kavar uprising, see [Zuckerman, 19988, p. 671, note 25]. K. Zuckerman himself attributes this uprising to approximately 870 [Zuckerman, 1998, p. 672].

5 One of the most recent works on the supply of oriental silver to the countries of Northern and Eastern Europe belongs to T. S. Noonan [Noonan, 1992, p. 237-259].

page 23
[Bury, 1912, p. 417; Vasiliev, 1936, p. 108-112; Treadgold, 1988, p. 313; Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 401, comm. 5], then, as it seems to me, both Magyars and Rus were equally dangerous for the Khazars. This may be indicated by the report of Ibn Ruste that the Khazars dug ditches not only against the Magyars, but also against "other peoples neighboring their country." However, the motive for the construction of Sarkel, apparently, was the Magyar threat, since it arose somewhat earlier.

Thus, there are sufficient indications in the sources to suggest that the Magyars, while living in Levedia, joined the Kavar revolt; then, after being defeated by the Pechenegs, the Magyars fled to Athelkusa. As mentioned above, this event should be dated no later than 835 AD.The first Kavar revolt should also be attributed to the same date.

After the defeat of the Magyars and their flight to Alcusa, the Kavars had to stop the uprising. This is evidenced by the report of Constantine Porphyrogenitus that the Kavars did not flee together with the Magyars, but to the Magyars, i.e. the final defeat of the Kavars and their flight to the Magyars does not belong to 835 (or earlier), but to a later time. Thus, we can say that there were two rebellions of the Kavars, and the data of Constantine Porphyrogenitus about the decisive massacre of the rebellious Kavars should be attributed not to the first, but to the second uprising. Apparently, after the suppression of the first uprising, the Khazar government did not take harsh reprisals against the Kavars, but after the second uprising, they already had to flee, and then some of them became part of the union of Magyar tribes. The probable date of the second Kavar revolt is established by the already mentioned reports of al-Balazuri and "Matiane Kartlis" that in 854 Buga the elder settled some of the Savardiya/Khazars who fled to him in Shamkhor.

After the escape of some of the surviving Kavars to the Magyars, Khazar-Magyar relations did not remain hostile for long: the presence of the Kavars within the Magyar ethno-political association was not an obstacle to the restoration of the Khazar-Magyar union, since the Kavars, being in exile, no longer posed an immediate threat to the territory of Khazaria proper, and in the Magyars, as allies, the Kaganbek still remained hostile. continued to need - to maintain their positions in the Northern Black Sea region. In any case, Levedia was summoned to the court of the khagan, and he was asked to become the" archon " of the Magyars and restore vassal relations with the khagan. But on Levedia's recommendation, Arpad, the son of Almutz, became the Magyar archon. Apparently, this happened even before 861, since under this date the Byzantine source notes the Magyars as allies of the Khazar military commander who operated in the Crimea [Life of Constantine, 1981, pp. 77-78].

In conclusion, I can't help but touch on the possible causes of the Kavar uprising. First of all, it should be pointed out that a significant part of the aristocratic families of Khazaria were Savirs, whose ethno-political association collapsed under the blows of the Avars (558) and Persians (about 559) [Semenov, 2002, p.24]. The remnants of the Savir clans then joined the Khazar confederation and continued to maintain their former authority and influence within it, and the indignation of the Kavar (Savir) probably had something to do with the political situation that developed in Khazaria after the reforms of Bey Ovadia. Most likely, Kavar's actions were directed against Beck's hegemony [Golb and Pritsak, 1997 (5757), p. 57; Zuckerman, 2002, p. 529]. I also believe that there is no reason to attribute an anti - Jewish character to the Kavar uprising, as was done, for example, by M. I. Artamonov and S. A. Pletneva [Artamnov, 1962, p.324, 329; Pletneva, 1972, p. 61-63], and after them by other researchers. For example, N. A. Fonyakova draws a connection between the Judaization of the Khazars and the subsequent "turmoil" in Khazaria [Fonyakova, 2004, p. 193]. The use of the term "turmoil" is inappropriate in this case-

page 24
but, since it was precisely an uprising. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that Kavar's speeches were of an ethnic nature, which could most likely be caused by the infringement of some political or economic interests of Savir.

list of literature

Abu Muhammad Ahmad ibn A'ssam al-Kufi. The Book of Conquests (Extracts on the history of Azerbaijan in the 7th-9th centuries) / Translated from Arabic by Z. M. Buniyatova. Baku, 1981.

Artamonov M. I. Istoriya khazar [History of the Khazars], Moscow, 1962.

Brun F. Chernomorye, I. Odessa, 1879.

Westberg F. K analizu vostochnykh istochnikov o Vostochnoi Evrope [On the analysis of Eastern sources on Eastern Europe]. 1908. March. XIV.

Golb N. and Pritsak O. Khazar-Jewish documents of the X century / Translated from English, scientific ed., afterword. Petrukhin, Moscow; Jerusalem, 1977 (5757).

The grotto of K. J. Moravia and the Magyars, from the middle of the IX to the beginning of the X century. St. Petersburg, 1881.

Dzhanashvili M. Izvestiya gruzinskikh letopisei i istorikov o Severnom Kavkaze i Rossii [News of the Georgian chronicles and historians about the North Caucasus and Russia]. 22. Tiflis, 1897.

Dorn B. Izvestiya o khazarakh vostochnogo istorika Tabari [News about the Khazars of the Eastern historian Tabari]. ZHMNP. 1844. Ch. 43.N 7, 8.

The Life of Constantine // Skazanie o nachale slavyanskoi pismennosti [The legend of the beginning of Slavic writing]. Edited by V. D. Korolyuk, Moscow, 1981.

Il'insky, G. I., Lydia of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Byzantinoslavica, vol. II. Praga, 1930.

Kartlis tskhovreba / Prepared for publishing on all the main manuscripts of S. G. Kaukhchishvili. Vol. 1. Tbilisi, 1955.

Kokovtsev P. K. Jewish-Khazar correspondence in the tenth century of Leningrad, 1932.

Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. About the management of the empire. Text, translation, comment. / Edited by G. G. Litavrin and A. P. Novoseltsev, Moscow, 1989.

Chronicle of Kartli / Trans., introduction. and notes by G. V. Tsulaya. Tbilisi, 1982.

Mathiane Kartlis / Trans., introduction. and note by M. D. Lordkipanidze. Tbilisi, 1976.

Minorsky V. F. Istoriya Shirvan i Derbend X - XI vv. M., 1963.

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

Pletneva S. A. Khazary, Moscow, 1972.
Semenov I. G. Etnopoliticheskaya istoriya Vostochnogo Kavkaza v III - VI vvakh [Ethnopolitical history of the Eastern Caucasus in the III-VI centuries]. diss. ... candidate of Historical Sciences. Makhachkala, 2002.

Xiuch Ye. Essay on the ancient history of the Hungarians (fragment) / / Bulletin of the Society of Orientalists. Issue 9. Hungaro-Rossica: History and Culture of the Eurasian Steppe, Moscow, 2002.
Fonyakova N. A. Etapy razvitiya prikladnogo iskusstva Khazarii vtoroi poloviny VIII - nachala IX vvakh [Stages of development of Khazarian applied art in the second half of the 8th-early 9th centuries] / International scientific Conference dedicated to the 100th anniversary of E. I. Krupnov / XXIV Krupnov Readings on the archeology of the Caucasus. Tez. dokl. Moscow, 2004.

Khvolson D. A. Izvestiya o khozarakh, burtasakh, bolgarakh, magyarakh, slavyanyakh i russakh [News about Khozars, Burtas, Bulgarians, Magyars, Slavs and Russ of Abu-Ali Ahmed bin Omar Ibn Dast]. St. Petersburg, 1869.

Zuckerman K. Hungarians in the Land of Levedia: A New Power on the borders of Byzantium and Khazaria ca. 836-889. Issue VI. Simferopol, 1998.

Zuckerman K. On the origin of dual power among the Khazars. Issue IX. Simferopol, 2002.

Shusharin V. P. Early stage of the ethnic history of Hungarians. Problemy etnicheskogo samosoznaniya [Problems of ethnic identity], Moscow, 1997.

Agathiae Myrinae. Historiarum libri uinuque / Rec. R. Keydell. Berolini, 1967.

Barczi G. A Magyar nyelv életrajza. 3.kiad. Budapest, 1975.

Bartha A. Hungarian Society in the 9th and 10th Centuries. Budapest, 1975.

[Al-Beladsori]. Liber expugnationis regionum, auctore... al-Beladsori / Ed. M. J. Goeje. Lugduni Batavorum, 1866.

Bury J. B. A History of the Eastern Roman Empire from Fall of Irene to the Accession of Basil (802 - 867). L., 1912.

Cassel S. Magyarische Altertümer. Berlin, 1948.

Czeglédy K. Khazar Raids in Trabscaucasia in 762 - 764 A. D. // Acta Orientalia Hung. T. XI. Fasc. 1 - 3. 1960.

Czeglédy K. Magyar östörténeti tanulmányok. Budapest, 1985.

Al-Dimašqi. Šams al-Din Abu Abd Allah Mahammad b. Abl Tdlib al-Ansari al-Sufi I Ed. A. F. Mehren. SPb., 1866.

Dunlop D. M. The History of the Jewish Khazars // Princenton Oriental Studies. Vol. 16. Princenton (N. Y.), 1954.

Golden P. B. An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples. Wiesbaden, 1992.

Gyöffy Gy. Tanulmányok a magyar állam eredetérói. Budapest, 1959.

Ibn al-Faklh. Kitab al-buldan. Leiden, 1885.

Iordanes. Getica / ed. Th. Mommsen // Monumenta Germaniae historical Auctires Antiquissimi. B., 1882. T. V, Psl.

Kristó Gy. A történeti és politikai gondolkodás elemeinek feilödése krónikairodalmunkban. Bd. 2. Budapest, 1968.

Kristó Gy. Levedi törzsszövetségétöl Szent István államáig. Budapest, 1980.

Kristó Gy. A történeti az Arpad-korról. Bd. 2. Budapest, 1983.

page 25
Kristó Gy. Hungarian History in the Ninth Century. Szeged, 1996.

Macarthney C. A. The Magyars in the Ninth Century. Cambridge, 1930.

Marquart J. Osteuropäische und Ostasiatische Streifzüge. Leipzig, 1903.

Mátyás F. A magyarok alsö hadjaratai Euripában. Budapest, 1898.

Mehren A. F. Manuel de la Cismographie du Moyen Age. Copenhagen, 1974; Amsterdam, 1964.

Menander Protector. Fragmenta / Ed. C. Müller // FHG. Vol. IV. P., 1868.

Moravcsik Gy. Byzantinoturcica. Bd. I - II. Berlin, 1958.

Moravcsik Gy. Commentary // Constantine Porphyrogenitus. De Administrando Imperio. Vol 2. Commentary by F. Dvornik, R. J. H. Jenkins, B. Lewis, Gy. Moravcsik, D. Obolensky, S. Runcimen. L., 1962.

Németh Gy. A honfoglaló magyarság kialakulása. Budapest, 1930.

Noonan Th. s. Fluctuations in Islamic Trade with Eastern Europe during the Viking Age // Harvard Ukrainian Studies. Vol. 16. 1992.

Priscus Panites. Fragmenta / Ed. C. Müller // FHG. Vol. IV. P., 1868.

Reginonis Chronicon / Ed. Perts // Monumenta Germaniae historica. Ss I.

Rona-Tas A. Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages: An Introduction to Early Hungarian History. Budapest, 1990.

Quellen zur Karolingishen Reichsgeschichte / Neu bearb. von R. Rau. Th. 3. Berlin, 1961.

Treadgold W. The Byzantine Revival 780 - 842. Stanford, 1988.

Vasiliev A. A. The Goths in the Crimea. Cambridge (Mass.), 1936.

Wozniak F. E. Byzantine Policy on the Black Sea or Russian Steppe in the Late 830's // Byzantine Studies I Etudes Byzantines. 1975. 2.

Zródla arabskie do dziejów Stowianszczyzny. T. 1. Wydar i opracoval T. Lewicki. Wrozlaw; Kraków, 1956.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ZHMNP-Magazine of the Ministry of National Education

MAIET-Materials on the archeology, history and ethnography of Tavria

FHG - Fragmenta historicorum graecorum

Permanent link to this publication: