There is no information about the time and circumstances of the formation of the Khazar Khaganate, as well as about the origin of the Khazar khagan dynasty in the sources. As a result, these issues cause quite heated discussions. The most common point of view is that the Khazar Khaganate was one of the fragments of the collapsed Turkic Khaganate.

Key words: M. I. Artamonov, Khazar Khaganate, Khazaria, Khazar-Elteber.

As is known, the founder of the Turkic Khaganate was the Ashina clan, which consolidated around itself the Altai nomads, whom the Ashins themselves called Turks [Klyashtorny and Savinov, 1994, p. 11-12; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2000, p. 74-75; Klyashtorny, 2006, p. 441; Artamonov, 1962, p. 103-04; Gumilyov, 1967, pp. 22-24]. In 542, the Turks defeated the Zhuan-Zhuan khagan, and at the same time Bumyn (Tumyn), the head of the Ashin family, was proclaimed khagan (see [Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2000, pp. 76, 77]). Only a few decades later, the Turkic state expanded its borders to South-Eastern Europe: by 571, it included a significant part of the Ciscaucasia, up to Derbent [Artamonov, 1962, p.137-138; Gumilev, 1967, p. 47, 50; Romashov, 2005, p. 188].

Already at the dawn of its history, the Turkic Khaganate was actually divided into two parts - eastern and western; the ruler of the Western Khaganate bore the title yabgu-khagan and was formally subordinate to the ruler of the Eastern Khaganate, but de facto it was in an independent position [Klyashtorny, 1964, p. 21; Zukerman, 2002, p.522]. The mainstay of the western Turkic khagan was the Turkic tribes of Central Asia. They were divided into two confederations: Nushibi and Dulu (Chavannes, 1903, p. 27-28), between which a fierce struggle for influence in the Western Turkic Khaganate developed in the last decades of the sixth century.

In the 1920s of the seventh century, the ruler of the Western Turks entered into an alliance with the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius (610-641) and joined the military operations against Iran, which Byzantium waged throughout almost the entire previous century, as well as at the beginning of the seventh century. In the spring of 627, Yabgu Kagan and the Byzantine emperor met at Tbilisi, which was held by Iranian and Georgian troops. This meeting is described in many sources, including the Caucasian ones. In one of them, "The History of the country of Aluank", the ruler of the Turks appears under the name of Tszhebu khakan [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 11], in the other, "Stories and narration of Bagrations" - Jibgo [Takaishvili, 1900, p. 126, 127; Sumbat Davitis-dze, 1979, p. 29]. In a Byzantine source, his title is rendered as Zievil [Theophanis Chronographia, vol. I, 1883, p. 316; Chichurov, 1980, p. 59]. The question of the identity of Zievil to Jebu Hakan and Jibgo has been repeatedly considered in historiography [Istoriya Agvan, 1861, p. 137, 331; Artamonov, 1962, p. 146; Golden, 1980, p. 188]. Apparently, the part of the Western Turks with

page 5
She spoke the Jekai dialect of the Turkic language, and hence the forms jebu and jibgo (< jabgu) - instead of yabgu (Klyashtorny, 2003, p.433-434). Usually, this character is identified with the ruler of the Western Turks, Ton-yabgu-kagan (616-630) [Chavannes, 1903, p. 256; Dunlop, 1954, p. 30 sq; Haussig, 1954, p.307, anm. 86; Bombaci, 1970, p. 7-24; Chichurov, 1980, p. 102, ed. 218; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2000, pp. 90-91; Zukerman, 2001, pp. 321-322]. For other variants of identification of Jebu Hakan (Jibgo, Zievil), see: [Artamonov, 1962, p. 146, 147; Gumilev, 1967, p. 159; Golden, 1980, p. 188; Romashov, 2005, p.192].

As described in the "History of the country of Aluank", shortly before the meeting at the walls of Tbilisi, Jebu Hakan sent his son Shat (< shad - one of the highest titles in the military-political hierarchy of the Turkic Khaganate, "deputy" of the khagan) to raid the Iranian possessions, after which, having gathered more significant forces, Jebu Hakan went to the Iranian territory. to Tbilisi for a meeting with the army of Irakli [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 11].

Without stopping to consider the military operations of Irakli and his Turkic allies against Iran (see: [Bolotov, 1880, p. 68-124; Gerland, 1894, p. 350-373; Kulakovsky, 1915, p. 60-107; Manandyan, 1950, p. 133-153; Danielyan, 1988, p. 62 - 82; Spek, 1988, pp. 101-103; Lomouri, 1999, pp. 31-44; Howard-Johnston, 1999, pp. 1-44; Zuckerman, 2001, pp. 321-322]), I will only note that the military failures of the Iranians led to a palace coup: Shahanshah Khosrow II (590 - 628) was overthrown and killed, and the new shahanshah Kavadeh hurried to make peace with Heraclius.

According to the" History of the country of Aluank", Emperor Heraclius agreed with Jebu Hakan on the division of Iranian possessions in Transcaucasia: Georgia passed to Byzantium, and Albania-to the Western Turkic Khaganate. And after the sacking of Tbilisi captured by the Turks, Shat, on the orders of Jebu Hakan, began to subordinate Albania [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 14]. After taking an oath from the Albanians and imposing taxes on them, Shat left the country.

Two years later, the Turkic army returned to Transcaucasia. This time, the target of the attack was those regions of Armenia that were part of Iran. The Turks defeated the Iranian army sent against them, but then suddenly left Transcaucasia [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 16]. Apparently, the reason for this was the internal political strife that began in the Western Turkic Khaganate. It is known from Chinese sources that the Tong-yabgu Kagan was killed during the civil strife (630) [Bichurin, 1950, p. 284], after which the struggle between the Nushibi and Dulu confederations, which sought to bring their protégé to the Kagan throne, flared up with renewed vigor [Artamonov, 1962, p. 153; Golden, 1980, p. 51; Klyashtorny and Savinov, 1994, p. 23; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2000, p. 92]. The Turks of the Eastern Khaganate, as well as the Chinese, intervened in the internecine war. During 640-657, during Chinese raids in Semirechye, the Western Turks were defeated, and their state ceased to exist [Klyashtorny and Savinov, 1994, p. 23; Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2000, p.92].

M. I. Artamonov drew attention to the fact that the first information about the Khazar Khaganate appears in sources in the second half of the 7th century, i.e. immediately after the fall of the Western Turkic Khaganate. In this connection, and also taking into account the fact that the anonymous Persian geography of the 9th century "Khudud al-Alam" allegedly contains an indication that the Khazar khagans belong to the Ashina family [Validi Togan, 1939, p. 270 ff.], M. I. Artamonov proposed the following hypothesis of the formation of the Khazar Khaganate.

In 651, the Western Turkic khagan Ibi Shegui (Irbi Shegui), who came to power with the support of nushibi, was overthrown. The new khagan was Halu Shabolo Khan, who leaned on the muzzle, and Ibi Shegui had to flee. He could not hide in Tokharistan, as his opponent Yugu-shad was sitting there at that time. Iran has also been closed to

page 6
flees - there was a rampant Arab offensive. Therefore, it seems quite acceptable to assume that Ibi Shegui fled to Khazaria, and that it is he or his heir who should be considered the founder of the Khazar Khaganate. If we follow these assumptions, the Khazar Khaganate should have been founded around 651 (Artamonov, 1962, pp. 170-171).

It seems that this hypothesis is quite reasonable (cf.: [Gumilev, 1967, p. 238; Fedorov Ya. A., Fedorov PS, 1978, p. 202; Gadlo, 1979, p. 136; Golden, 1980, p. 59, 219-221; Golden, 1993, p. 219]), but I believe that it is necessary to provide additional arguments in its favor, and in addition, to consider other points of view on this issue.

The first researcher who attempted to substantiate the thesis about the origin of the Khazar Kagan dynasty from the Ashin family was Z. Walidi Togan. It was he who, considering the report of Khudud al-Alam that the Khazar tsar is a "descendant of Ansa", proposed to correct Ansa to *Ashina [Validi Togan, 1939, p. 270 ff.] (see also: [Artamonov, 1962, p. 103, 170 - 171, 217, 281, 410] and [Minorsky, 1937, p. 161-162]). V. F. Minorsky showed that this conjecture has no basis. The same conclusion was reached by A. P. Novoseltsev, who pointed out that the assumption about the origin of the Khazar khagans from the Turkic Ashina dynasty is not based on any sources [Novoseltsev, 1990, pp. 134-138; Novoseltsev, 2000].

This conclusion was also accepted by P. B. Golden [Golden, 1980, p. 220; Golden, 1993, p. 223], but, despite this, he still believes that the connection with the Ashina clan was the only source of legitimization of the power of the Khazar Kagans [Golden, 1992, p.237]. Somewhat earlier, a similar point of view was expressed by D. Ludwig [Ludwig, 1982, S. 58, 130, 132]. At the same time, P. B. Golden, like M. I. Artamonov, believes that the formation of the Khazar Khaganate was chronologically connected with the collapse of the Western Turkic Khaganate (50s of the seventh century) [Golden, 1980, p. 50], and therefore considers M. I. Artamonov's hypothesis as quite acceptable [Golden, 1980, p. 219-221; Golden, 1993, p. 219].

D. Ludwig was more cautious and associated the time of the formation of the Khazar state with a broader chronological period - 630-653, when civil strife practically did not stop in the Western Turkic Khaganate (Ludwig, 1982, p.134). A similar opinion was shared by O. Pritsak, who believed that the Turkic prince (shad), who was at the head of the Khazar troops operating in Albania in 627-628, became the founder of the Khazar Kagan dynasty (Pritsak, 1996, p. 232-236). In my opinion, the latter point of view is extremely difficult to justify, since, firstly, 653, which is the first historically reliable mention of the Khazar khagan (see below), and 628 are separated by a quarter of a century, and secondly, nothing is known about the fate of this prince, and his identification with whom-either of the known representatives of the Ashina genus is highly controversial (see [Artamonov, 1962, p. 146, 147; Gumilev, 1967, p. 195]).

Unlike the above-mentioned researchers, E. S. Galkina denies the connection of the Khazar Kagans with the Ashina clan. In her opinion, in the late seventh and early eighth centuries, the Khazars ousted the Turks and Huns from the Caucasus, after which the head of the Khazars assumed the title of khagan (Galkina, 2006, p.14). This point of view is contradicted by the evidence of the "History of the country of Aluank" that even before the embassy of the Albanian Bishop of Israel to the Prince of the Dagestani Huns Alp-ilitver, i.e. before 682, the prince managed to marry the daughter of the "khakan of the Khazirs", and before that he also performed for this khakan "many feats of bravery in Turkestan"[Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 41]. Thus, the Khazar Khaganate was formed no later than 680, and the Khazars did not displace the Dagestani Huns, since, according to the information of the "History of the country of Aluank", the possession of Alp-Ilitver became part of the khaganate.

page 7
The existence of genetic links between the Khazar and Turkic Khagan dynasties is also denied by K. Zukerman [Zukerman, 2002, p. 524], who constructed his own hypothesis regarding the origin of the Khazars and the emergence of the Khazar Khaganate. In his opinion, the Khazars moved south from the Samara Luka region in the 60s of the seventh century [Zukerman, 2001, p. 328; Zukerman, 2002, p. 525] and defeated the Bulgarians, after which their leader assumed the title of khagan around 670 [Zukerman, 2001, p. 325, 329, 331 Zuckerman, 2002, p. 524]. Zuckerman's constructions have a number of weaknesses, some of which I would like to point out.

The most important part of the hypothesis of K. Zuckerman is a new interpretation of the description of the Volga River that is present in the "Armenian Geography" of the seventh century (Ašxarac 'oyc'). Let me remind you that this source is a translation into Armenian of one of the non-preserved versions of Ptolemy's "Geographical Guide", supplemented by information from other geographical treatises (Eremyan, 1986, p. 79; Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 30, 82; Kasumova, 1994, p. 48).

The author of the" Armenian Geography " of the seventh century is considered to be the Armenian scholar Anania Shirakatsi (610-681) [Armenian Geography, 1877, p. XIII; Marquart, 1899, p. 4; Manandyan, 1947, p. 127-143; Abegyan, 1975, p. 216; Eremyan, 1963; Eremian, 1980, p. 143 155; Hewsen, 1967, p. 409-432; The Geography of Ananias of Širak, 1992, etc.the only researcher who has questioned the authorship of Anania Shirakatsi, as well as the dating of this work in the seventh century, is V. F. Butba [Butba, 2005, pp. 188-198]. An Armenian geographer describes the Volga River as follows:"...Live the Amazons... to the river Ira (read: Ra-under the name ' Pa (Rha) Ptolemy appears Volga. - I. S.), which flows in the north in an Unknown country by two sources, which then join and, reaching the Hippian Mountains, allocate a branch to the river Tanais [Don. - I. S.], flowing into the Maeotis Sea [Sea of Azov. - I. S.]. The rest of it turns east at the Keraunian Mountains. After that, two rivers that flow from the Rhimnici montes join it and make of it (i.e., the Volga) a river with seventy branches, which the Turks call Atl. In the middle of this river there is an island where the people of 8) Baslov hide from the strong peoples of 9) Khazars and 10) Bushkhs, who come to winter pastures and are located in the east and west of the river. The island is called Black, because it appears black from the multitude of Basle who inhabit it along with their flocks. Ptolemy calls it Grav Island (?). The branches of the Atl River beyond the island join again and flow into the Caspian Sea, separating Sarmatia from Scythia" [Patkanov, 1883, pp. 29-30; numbering of peoples and comments in parentheses by K. P. Patkanov].

To. Zuckerman suggests identifying Grave Island with the territory bounded by the Samara Luka and the Usa River (compare the point of view of A. V. Gadlo, who identified Black Island (Grave Island) with the Black Lands in modern Kalmykia (Gadlo, 1979, p. 136)), but this raises a number of objections. First, the source clearly refers to an island located not in the middle reaches of the Volga, but in its lower reaches ("The branches of the Atl River behind the island again join and flow into the Caspian Sea"). This is most likely an elongated island located between the main course of the Volga and Akhtuba. Secondly, the source clearly states that "the branches of the Atl River behind the island are connected again", i.e. in this case there can be no question of identifying this island with the area of Samara Luka. Third, it seems extremely unlikely that an early medieval Armenian geographer could have had information about three peoples of the Middle Volga region (Basli, Khazars, and Bushkhs) at once and yet not have any information about the peoples of the Lower Volga region; rather, the opposite is to be expected, so the three mentioned peoples should be associated with the Lower Volga region.

Thus, K. Zuckerman's attempt to prove that there were no Khazars in the Northwestern Caspian region before the 70s of the seventh century and that, consequently, they had no relation to the Turkic Khaganate loses its foundation.

page 8
Another hypothesis concerning the formation of the Khazar Khaganate was proposed by A. P. Novoseltsev, who also rejected the possibility of related relations between the Khazar khagans and the Ashin [Novoseltsev, 1990, pp. 55, 61, 134-135]. In his constructions, A. P. Novoseltsev relied on Mikhail Syriysky's statement that Heraclius 'ally in the wars with Iran was "Hakan Khazar" [Michel le Syrien, 1901, p. 409], as well as on the fact that al-Ya'qubi and al-Kufi, describing the events of 40-50The Khazar ruler is called a khaqan (Al 1883, p. 194; Fl-Kufi, 1981, p. 10). On this basis, A. P. Novoseltsev concluded that already in the first quarter of the seventh century the Khazars had their own ruler, the Yabgu kagan, who only formally recognized the supreme power of the Turkic kagan (Novoseltsev, 1990: 87, 88), and in the 30s of the same century the Khazar ruler assumed the title of kagan [Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 89].

It is well known that the Yabgu khagan was the title of the ruler of the Western Turkic Khaganate, and for the events of 627-628, when this state still existed, it would be logical to assume that the name of Jebu Khakan, an ally of Heraclius, hides the ruler of this particular power. In this regard, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that, except for Michael of Syria, who lived in the XII century, no other source (and all of them refer to a time much earlier than the work of Michael of Syria) does not call the ally of Heraclius the Khazar khagan. dBLBVJ the last message is nothing else, as an anachronism, which cannot be used in constructions related to the formation of an independent Khazar Khaganate.

In order to be completely convinced of this, it is enough to return once again to the consideration of the data of some sources about the events of 627. For example, Theophan the Confessor literally says the following about this:: "[Meanwhile] the Khazars, having broken through the Caspian Gate, in Persia, attack the lands of Adraig [Adurbadagan-the territory of Iranian Azerbaijan. - I. S.] with their leader Zievil, the second man in dignity after the Khagan" [Theophanis Chronographia, 1983, p. 315.26 - 316.1; quoted translation: Chichurov, 1980, p. 59]. And then follows the story that Heraclius hurried to Zievil and met him at Tbilisi. It does not follow from this report that Zievil was precisely the Khazar ruler, especially since later in Feofan, everywhere the troops subordinate to Zievil are called Turks. In addition, in this case, Feofan confuses two events, about which the "History of the country of Aluank" tells in more detail: first, the shad with the Khazar army invaded Adurbadagan [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 11], and only later in Transcaucasia Jebu hakan made a speech - with troops recruited from all over the khaganate, and only after that a meeting between Jebu Hakan and the emperor took place [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2.11]. Jebu Hakan's recruitment of troops for this raid is described in the History of the Aluank Country as follows:: "And so he ordered that all who were under his authority, all the tribes and clans living in the mountains and valleys, on land or on islands, settled or nomadic, shaving their heads or wearing scythes, that they should all be ready [to appear] at the first call of him" [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 11]. According to M. I. Artamonov, here we are talking about ethnically different tribes, i.e. not only about the Khazars themselves, but also about the Bulgarians and others. [Artamonov, 1962, p. 151-152]. Thus, it should be stated that Feofan had a fairly reliable source about these events, but for some reason, perhaps due to the fault of later editors, an absurdity crept into his text due to the fact that two different campaigns were combined into one. However, not only Feofan, but also Sumbat Davitis-dze calls the army of Jibgo (=Zievil, Jebu khakan) Khazar [Takaishvili, 1900, p. 4]. 126, 127; Sumbat Davitis-dze, 1979, p. 29]. This fact is usually regarded as evidence that the main part of the army of Jebu Hakan during the events of 627-628. It was the Khazars who made it up [Artamonov, 1962, p. 155-156; Gumilev, 1967, p. 184; Bombaci, 1970, p. 13; Ludwig, 1982, p.348-355]. For other points of view on this issue, see [Moravcsik, 1930, s. 87 und anm. 2; Artamonov, 1962, p. 155 et seq.; Chichurov,

page 9
1980, p. 100, comm. 214; Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 86-87], although in general, as mentioned above, it was polyethnic.

Thus, it seems that Yabgu Kagan, an ally of Heraclius, was not an independent ruler of the Khazars. He was the ruler of the Western Turkic Khaganate, which is reflected in the message of Theophanes that Zievil was "the second person in dignity after the khagan", i.e. after the ruler of the eastern Turks. The same is noted in the "History of the country of Aluank": Jebu Hakan was "next in rank" after the "king of the north". The author of the latest translation of the History of the Aluank Country, Sh. V. Smbatyan, translates arm. yajord as "successor" (king of the North), but A. P. Novoseltsev believed that it is better to translate this term as "next (in rank)" (Novoseltsev, 1990, p. 87), i.e. again-taki after the Khagan of the Eastern Turks [Zukerman, 2001, p. 321, 322].

One cannot but agree with the opinion expressed in relation to the hypothesis of A. P. Novoseltsev by E. S. Galkina that the adoption of the title of yabgu-kagan by the Khazar ruler at the very period when Tong-yabgu-kagan, the most powerful of the Western Turkic kagans, was at the head of the Western Khaganate, "was extremely risky" (Galkina, 2006, p. 8]. Continuing the analysis of A. P. Novoseltsev's constructions, it is necessary to point out that since during the events of 627 - 628 AD. if the Khazars did not have their own ruler, independent of the Western Khaganate, it is unlikely that he could appear, as A. P. Novoseltsev believed, a decade later. In this connection, we will discuss the earliest references to the title "Khaqan Khazar" in al-Ya'qubi and al-Kufi.

Medieval Arab-Persian authors attribute the first clashes of Arab troops with the Khazar Khaganate to the 40-50s of the VII century. Thus, al-Ya'qubi reports that during the reign of Caliph 'Uthman (644 - 656), Arab commanders conquered the Transcaucasian regions of Baylakan, Berda'a, Jurzan, Shirvan, Muscat, Lakz, Shabiran, Filan, after which a four-thousandth Arab detachment led by Salman ibn Rabi'a passed "across the river Balanjar" and was killed by numerous troops of "Khakan, the king of the Khazars" [Al 1883, p. 194].

Medieval Arab-Persian sources give conflicting information about the date of the death of Salman ibn Rabi'i at Balanjar. Thus, Ibn Hayat refers to this event in one place in his work to 29 AH, in another-to 30 AH, in the third - to 31 AH [Khalifa ibn Hayat, 1967, p. 139, 142]; apparently, in each case, the author relied on different sources. The same applies to the work of at-Tabari, who attributed the raid to Balanjar to 32 AD, but he was also aware of another date of this campaign - the tenth year of the reign of Caliph Osman [At-Tabari, 1879, p. 2889-2893], i.e. 654 AD Z. M. Buniyatov rightly attributed the death of Salman to 32 G. kh. (652/53) (see the commentary of Z. M. Buniyatov: [al-Kufi, 1981, p. 78, ed. 6]; see also: [Novoseltsev, 1990, pp. 174-175]), since at-Tabari also provides a clarifying date for this event - the ninth year of the reign of Caliph Osman [at-Tabari, 1879, p. 2889], i.e. 653. A number of new arguments in favor of this dating were also given by O. G. Bolshakov (Bolshakov, 1993, pp. 168, 170-171, 252). 65, 254, note 81]. Thus, al-Ya'qubi's earlier reference to "Khakan, king of the Khazars" should be attributed not to the 40s of the seventh century, but to 653.

In al-Kufi and al-Balazuri, the account of Salman's campaign to Balanjar and his death in the battle with "Khakan, the king of the Khazars" is also preceded by a story about the subjugation of a number of Transcaucasian regions by Arab troops [Al-Kufi, 1981, pp. 9-11; Al - Beladsori, 1866, p. 204]. Most likely, these data were borrowed by al-Ya'qubi, al-Kufi and al-Balazuri from the same source.

Thus, from the data of medieval Arab-Persian sources, it cannot be concluded that the title "khakan Khazar" could have existed as early as the 40s of the seventh century, since their first mention of this title should be associated with the events of 653. And since this date is very close to the date of the formation of the Khazar Khaganate,

page 10
which leads to the hypothesis of M. I. Artamonov, and the hypothesis itself takes on a more solid foundation.

As already mentioned, there are no direct references in the sources to the origin of the Khazar Khagan dynasty from the Turkic Ashina family, but this connection is indicated by a number of indirect data, some of which have already been mentioned. But perhaps the most important argument in favor of this point of view comes from an analysis of the state structure of the Khazar Khaganate.

Until now, researchers have not paid due attention to the report of the Armenian historian Levond (Gevond, VIII century) about the existence of the khat 'irlit 'ber family in Khazaria; according to his information, the Khazar commander Razht'arkhan, who led the Khazar raid on Albania and Georgia in 764, belonged to this family [Gevond, 1862, p. 92].

P. B. Golden gave very strong linguistic arguments in favor of reconstructing the term "hat'irlit'ber" as il täbär or el täbär [Golden, 1980, p. 125, 149, 198]. He believes, in particular, that al-awp. t ' conveys here, as in many other cases, Turkic. d or [Golden, 1980, p. 198]. He also points out that the term * Qadir is found in the Ottoman-Turkish, Uyghur, and Old Turkic languages in the sense of " harsh, fierce, etc.". In addition, the Turks also had a personal name with the component *Qadir-Qadir Bilgä [Golden, 1980, p. 198] and, according to P. B. Golden, the term "hat'irlit'ber" was the name of the ruler [Golden, 1980, p. 198].

Earlier researchers expressed mixed opinions on this issue. Thus, while D. M. Dunlop expressed serious doubts about the presence of the Turkic title elteber in the term "hat'irlit'ber" [Dunlop, 1954, p. 180, note 43], K. Tsegledi, on the contrary, saw this title in it and even identified Raj-t'arkhan as the ruler of the Huns ' Country in Dagestan [Czeglédy, 1960, p. 85]. V. F. Minorsky reconstructed the term "khat'irlit'ber "as * khazar-elteber [Minorsky, 1963, p. 157, ed. 157]. This possibility was also considered by M. I. Artamonov, who rather hesitantly brought the khatir element closer to the Armenian form of the ethnonym "khazar" -khazir-k' [Artamonov, 1962, p. 338]. However, this approach is, in my opinion, the most preferable.

As is known, in the Khazar Khaganate, the title "elteber" in the VII century. It was worn by the ruler of the Country of the Huns (Honk', Honast'an; in the territory of modern primorsky Dagestan), who appears in the" History of the country of Aluank' "as Alp' ilit 'uer [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 36, 41, 42, 43] ( Alp'-ilit'uer; *alp-elteber| / *alp-elteber, where alp - - turksk. the adjective "valiant", as translated by M. Erdal [Erdal, 2005, p.127]), and in the X century - the ruler of the Volga Bulgarians [Kovalevsky, 1956, p. 121, 132]. For the historiography of the issue, see: [Malov, 1951, p. 31, 32; Artamonov, 1962, p. 338; Smirnova, 1981, p. 249-255; Fakhrutdinov, 1979, p. 65, ed. 20; Klyashtorny, 2005, p. 108]. Both of them were vassals of the khagan, which may indicate that in the Khazar Khaganate, as well as in the Turkic Khaganate, eltebers were the rulers of the most important ethnopolitical associations that were vassally dependent on the khagan (see [Golden, 1980, p. 151-152; Stepanov, 2003, p. 225D. Derfer believes that the title "Elteber" is of Ruan-Ruan origin (Doerfer, 1965, p. 203).

Considering various forms of the name Raj-t 'arhan, given by medieval Arab-Persian authors-Rās tarxān [al p. 446], As tarxān [At-Tabari, 1879, p. 328], etc., P. B. Golden prefers the form As-tarkhan that appears in at-Tabari. P. B. Golden connects this commander with the Aces related to the Alans, some of whom, in his opinion, could have become dependent on the Khazars. Thus, the researcher comes to the explanation of the name As-tarkhan as "Khazar tarkhan of the Aces" [Golden, p. 152].

page 11
In my opinion, the latter point of view has a serious drawback: the most accurate form of the name of the Khazar commander is not As-tarkhan, but rather Ras-tarkhan, which appears in al-Ya'qubi, since it is consonant with the Raj-t 'arkhan cited by Levond (cf. Czeglédy, 1960, p. 86-87).), and thus any connection between Raj-t'arkhan and the Asami becomes impossible.

Levond's unique testimony about the existence of the title Khazar-Elteber in the eighth century allows us to draw several important conclusions about the peculiarities of the state structure of the Khazar Khaganate at an early stage of its existence (until the end of the eighth century).

1. In the eighth century, the Khazars themselves continued to preserve their ethnic identity.

2. The Khazars themselves had their own ruler, who bore the title "Elteber" and was in vassal relations with the khagan. The Khazars, having supported the first khagans, played an exceptional role in the creation of the Khazar Khaganate and undoubtedly continued to dominate the political life of the state in subsequent periods of its existence; but nevertheless, their ruler could only count on the title of elteber, which in the military-political hierarchy of the Turkic Khaganate was the highest for the ruler who was in the vassalage from the khagan and not belonging to the Ashin family.

3. Since the Khazars themselves had their own special ruler, who bore the same title as the ruler of the Huns of Dagestan and the ruler of the Volga-Kama Bulgarians, it must be assumed that the khagan himself did not consider himself as the ruler of the Khazars: he considered himself the legitimate heir of the Western Turkic Khagans, and his state-the legal successor of the Western Turkic the Khaganate (Artamonov, 1962, p. 171), and in this sense the Khazars were as much its subjects as the Dagestani Huns. Thus, if this circumstance is considered as an element of the doctrine of the power of the Khazar khagans, then such combinations as" Khazar Khaganate "and" Khazar Khagan " become largely conditional, although they are still necessary for modern historiography, since they allow us to distinguish the era of the existence of the Western Turkic Khaganate from the era of the "Khazar Khaganate". They are also justified because the importance of the Khazars themselves in the military and political life of this state was so significant that some sources refer to its ruler as the Khazar khagan [Movses Kalankatuatsi, 1984, ch. 2. 41; Armenian Geography, 1877, p. 38; Patkanov, 1883, p. 28; Al 1883, p. 194; Al-Kufi, 1981, p. 10].

Based on the latter conclusion, we can ask ourselves: where in South-Eastern Europe could there have been a kagan who did not belong to any well-known charismatic family? After all, if this khagan had had a proper Khazar origin, it is unlikely that he could have received the support of other tribes of South-Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. In addition, from the above-mentioned features of the state structure of the Khazar Khaganate, it is clear that the power of the khagan was of a supra-ethnic nature. From this, it seems, the conclusion should follow that the Khazar khagans belonged to the Ashina family, since only this can explain the fact that they already at the dawn of the history of the Khazar Khaganate received such powerful support from the tribes of South-Eastern Europe that they were able to organize a repulse to Arab invasions in Dagestan and in the areas lying to the north of it (the 1950s of the seventh century), as well as to organize the defeat and persecution of the Bulgarian ethnopolitical association headed by Asparukh (the end of the 70s of the seventh century).

Apparently, the strength of the first Khazar khagans in South-Eastern Europe and the Caucasus was largely due to the fact that shortly before the formation of the Khazar Khaganate, many tribes of these regions, together with the Ton-yabgu-khagan, participated in a victorious campaign in Transcaucasia.

page 12
The arguments presented above complement the argumentation of the assumption about the origin of the Khazar khagans from the Ashin family, and this, in turn, suggests that M. I. Artamonov's hypothesis about the emergence of the Khazar Khaganate around 651 becomes even more likely or, in any case, the most preferable.

list of literature

Abegyan M. History of Ancient Armenian literature. Yerevan, 1975.

[Armenian Geography] Armenian Geography of the seventh century A.D. (attributed to Moisey Khorensky) / Text and translation with the addition of maps and explanatory notes published by K. P. Patkanov, St. Petersburg, 1877.

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

Bichurin N. Ya. (Iakinf). Collection of information about the peoples who lived in Central Asia in ancient times, Vol. I. M.-L., 1950.

Bolotov V. V. K istorii imperatora Irakli [On the History of the Emperor Heraclius].
Bolshakov O. G. Istoriya khalifata [History of the Caliphate]. 2. The Epoch of Great Conquests (633-656), Moscow, 1993.

Butba V. F. Nekotorye zametki k voprosu ob avtorom "Ashkharatsuytsa" [Some notes on the question of the author of "Ashkharatsuytsa"]. Sukhum, 2005.

Gadlo A.V. Etnicheskaya istoriya Severnogo Kavkaza IV-X vv.L., 1979.

Galkina E. S. Kavkazskie voyny VII VIII vv.i vozrozhdenie Khazarii [The Caucasian Wars of the VII-VIII centuries and the Rise of the Khazars]. 2006. N 4.

Gewond. Istoriya khalifov [History of the Caliphs] / Translated by K. Patkanyan, St. Petersburg, 1862.

Golden P. B. Gosudarstvo i gosudarstvennost ' u khazar: vlast khazarskikh kaganov [The state and statehood of the Khazars: the Power of the Khazar Kagans].
Gumilev L. N. Drevniye tyurki [Ancient Turks], Moscow, 1967.

Danielyan E. L. Armenian-Byzantine relations (the end of the VI-first half of the VII century) / / Historical and Philological Journal. Yerevan, 1988. N 3.

Eremyan S. T. Armenia by "Ashkharatsuytsu". Yerevan, 1963 (in Armenian).

Eremyan S. T. "Ashkharatsuyts" from the point of view of source studies / / International Conference on Medieval Armenian Literature, Yerevan, September 15-19, 1986. Abstracts of reports. Yerevan, 1986.

[History of Aghvan]. Istoriya Agvan Moisei Kagankatvatsi, pisatelya X veka [The History of the Agvan of Moses Kagankatvatsi, a writer of the X century].

Middle Persian epigraphy of Caucasian Albania (Derbent). Cities of Iran / Transcr. text, per. with srednepers., vved. and comm. of S. Y. Kasumova. Baku, 1994.

Klyashtorny S. G. Drevnetyurkskie runicheskie pamyatniki [Ancient Turkic Runic monuments]. Moscow, 1964.

Klyashtorny S. G. the History of Central Asia and monuments runic letters. St. Petersburg, 2003.

Klyashtorny S. G. Khazar notes / / TS. 2003-2004. Tyurkskie narody v drevnosti i srednevekovye [Turkic peoples in ancient and Medieval Times]. Moscow, 2005.

Klyashtorny S. G. Pamyatniki Drevnetyurkskoy pis'mosti i etnokul'turnaya istoriya Tsentralnoi Azii [Monuments of Ancient Turkic writing and ethno-cultural history of Central Asia].
Klyashtorny S. G., Savinov D. G. Steppe Empires of Eurasia. St. Petersburg, 1994.

Klyashtorny S. G., Sultanov T. I. States and peoples of the Eurasian Steppes: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. St. Petersburg, 2000.

Kovalevsky A. P. The book of Ahmed Ibn Fadlan on his journey to the Volga in 921-922. Articles, translations, and comments. Kharkiv, 1956.

Kulakovsky Yu. History of Byzantium, vol. 3. Kiev, 1915.

[Al-Kufi] Abu Muhammad Ahmad ibn A ' sam 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.

Iranskiye pokhody imperatora Irakli i Gruziya [The Iranian campaigns of Emperor Irakli and Georgia] / / Byzantine Essays / Trudy sovetskikh uchenykh k XVIII Mezhdunarodnomu kongressu byzantinistov (8-15 Aug 1991 g. Moscow). Moscow, 1999.

Malov S. E. Monuments of ancient Turkic writing. Texts and Research, Moscow-L., 1951.
Ya. Manandyan When and by whom was the Armenian Geography attributed to Moisey Khorensky compiled / / VV. T. 26. 1947.

Manandyan Ya. A. Routes of Persian campaigns imp. Iraklia / / VV. T. 3. 1950.

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

Movses Kalankatuatsi. Istoriya strany Aluank [History of the Aluank Country]. and Sh. V. Smbatyan's comm. Yerevan, 1984.

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

Novoseltsev A. P. "Khudud al-Alam" as a source about the countries and peoples of Eastern Europe. 1998, Moscow, 2000.

Patkanov K. From the new list of Geography attributed to Moisey Khorensky / / Journal of the Ministry of National Education. 1883. March.

Romashov S. A. Ot tyurkov k khazaram: Severny Kavkaz v VI-VII vv. [From the Turks to the Khazars: The Northern Caucasus in the VI-VII centuries]. Tyurkskie narody v drevnosti i srednevekovye [Turkic peoples in ancient and Medieval Times]. Moscow, 2005.

Smirnova O. I. To the name of Almysh, son of Shilka, king of the Bulgars / / TS. 1977, Moscow, 1981.

page 13
Stepanov Ts. Развитие на концепцията за сакралния цар у хазарите и българите през ранното средновековие // Българи и хазару през ранното средновековие. Sofia, 2003.

Sumbat Davitis-dze. Istoriya i narazovanie o Bagrationakh [History and narration of Bagrations]. Tbilisi, 1979.

Takaishvili E. S. Sources of Georgian chronicles: Three chronicles / / Collection of materials for describing the territories and tribes of the Caucasus. Issue 28. Tiflis, 1900.

Fakhrutdinov R. G. Ob imeni i titule pravitelya Volzhskoy Bulgarii [On the name and title of the ruler of Volga Bulgaria]. Baku, 1979. N2.

Fedorov Ya. A., Fedorov G. S. Early Turkic tribes in the North Caucasus, Moscow, 1978.
Caliph ibn Hayyat. Ta'rih Akram Diya'al- ' Umari. An-Najaf, 1386 (1967).

Zuckerman K. Khazars and Byzantium: the first contacts. Issue VIII. Simferopol, 2001.

Zuckerman K. On the origin of dual power among the Khazars and the circumstances of their conversion to Judaism. Issue IX. Simferopol, 2002.

Chichurov I. S. Byzantine historical works: "Chronography" of Theophanes; Nikifor's "Breviary" / Texts, translations, comm. Moscow, 1980.

Erdal M. Khazar language / / Jews and Slavs. Vol. 16. Khazary. Jerusalem-Moscow, 2005.

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

Bombaci A. Qui état Jebu Hak'an? // Turcica. 1970. 2.

Chavannes E. Documentes sur les Tou'kiue (Turcs) occidentaux / / Proceedings of the Orkhon Expedition, vol. 6, St. Petersburg, 1903.

[Michel le Syrien] Chronique de Michel le Syrien, patriarche Jacobite d Antioche / Ed. J. Chabot. T. II. P., 1901.

Czeglédy K. Khazar Raids in Transcaucasia in 762 - 764 A.D. // Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. T. XI. Fasc. 1 - 3. 1960.

Doerfer G. Türkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen. Bd. II. Wiesbaden, 1965.

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

Eremian S.T. La reconstitution des cartes de l'atlas arménien du monde ou Ašxarhac 'oyc' // RÉArm. 14. 1980.

[The Geography of Ananias of Širak] The Geography of Ananias of Širak (Ašxaracoiz): The Long and the Short Recensions / Introduction, Transl. and Comm. by R.H. Hewsen. Wiesbaden, 1992.

Gerland E. Die persische Feldzüge des Kaisers Heracleios // Byzantische Zeitschrift. Bd. 3. 1894.

Golden P.B. Khazar Studies: An Historico-Philological Inquiry into the Origins of the Khazars. Vol. I. Budapest, 1980.

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

Haussig H.W. Theophilakts Exkurs über die Skythischen Völker // Byzantion. Vol. XXIII. 1954.

Hewsen R.H. On the Date and Authorship of the Ašxarhac'oyc' // RÉArm. IV [1967.]

Howard-Johnston J. Heraclius' Persian Campaigns and the Revival of the East Roman Empire, 622 - 630 // War in History. 6. 1999.

Historiae Ibn Wādhih qui dicitur al / Ed. M.Th. Houtsma. II. Lugduni Batavorum, 1883.

Ludwig D. Struktur und Gesellschaft des Chazaren-Reiches im Licht der schriftlichen Quellen. Münster, 1982.

Marquart J. Eranšahr nach der Geographie der Ps. Moses Xorenaci. Mit historisch-kritischem Kommentar und historischen und topographischen Excursen. B., 1899.

Minorsky V. The Regions of the World, a Persian Geography 372 AH - 982 AD. L., 1937.

Moravcsik Gy. Zur Geschichte der Onoguren // Ungarische Jahrbücher. 10. 1930.

Pritsak O. Turcophone Peoples in the Area of the Caucasus from the Sixth to the Eleventh Century // II Caucaso: cerniera fra culture dal Mediterraneo alia Persia (secoli IV-XI) (Settimane di studio del Centre Italiano di Studi sull'Allo Medioevo 43). Spoletto, 1996.

Spek P. Beobachtungen zu den Nachrischten über die Regierung des Kaisers Herakleios und die seiner Söhne bei Theophanes und Nikephoros // ΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΝΑ. Bonn, 1988.

[At-Tabari] Annates quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed ibn Djarir at-Tabari cum aliis ed. M.J. de Goeje. Ser. I. Lugduni Batavorum, 1879.

Theophanis Chronographia. Vol. I. Recensuit C. de Boor. Lipsiae, 1883.

Validi Togan A.Z. Ibn Fadlān 's Reisenbericht. Leipzig, 1939.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BB-Byzantine Time Period

DCE - The oldest states in Eastern Europe

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

TS-Turkological collection

RÉArm - Revue des Études Arméniennes

Permanent link to this publication: