The ethnopolitical history of Eastern Europe in the last quarter of the 1st millennium is still full of unresolved problems. First of all, this concerns the formation of the Old Russian state and the origin of the ethnic group "Rus".

Numerous Early Medieval sources often contradict each other in the localization of Rus and in describing the potestar structure, social relations, economic structure, and rituals of this ethnic group [Slavs and Rus..., 1999, pp. 430-435]. But among the sea of reports there is a range of sources of the first half of the IX-XII centuries about the Russ with the Khaqan at their head, combining Western European and Arab-Persian news. The use of the title "hakan" by both Western and Eastern authors (in Latin-language sources chacanus, chaganus) suggests the existence of a political entity already at the beginning of the IX century, in the name of which the root rus/ros is present, while the emergence in the political arena of Kievan Rus dates back to the end of the IX century.¹. And if the localization of the "Russian Khaganate" causes lively discussions [Slavs and Rus..., 1999, p. 456-461], then the emergence of the title of khakan as a claim to independence from Khazaria [Novoseltsev, 1982, p. 150-159] is practically not disputed in modern historical science (for the historiography of the issue, see [Konovalova, 2001, p.108-111]). However, the Arabic-Persian sources give a different understanding of this title, which does not allow us to agree with this interpretation.

Information from Western Europe is limited to only one source - the famous mention of the Vertin Annals under 839 about the embassy of the Khaqan Rus to Byzantium [Annales Bertiniani, 1964, p. 30-31]. The most complete information about the Russ with the Khaqan at their head is contained in the medieval Arab-Persian geographical literature. This is explained by the peculiarities of trade relations between Eastern Europe in the last quarter of the 1st millennium: if finds of European goods in this region are extremely rare, then contacts with the East, according to archaeological data, were very lively [Ancient Rus..., 1985, p. 400].

In the literature of the Caliphate, according to the modern classification, there are two traditions that have preserved the most detailed and ancient, but different descriptions of the peoples of Eastern Europe, including the Rus. One is the so-called al-Jaykhani school (a story about the Khaqan of Rus and the" island of Rus"), the other is the "al-Balkhi school" ("three types of Rus"). The tradition of al-Jayhani includes reports about Eastern Europe

¹ The term" kagan "was used in Ancient Russia in the XI-XII centuries in relation to some of its rulers and was used in a number of written sources in relation to Vladimir Svyatoslavich, Yaroslav the Wise, Svyatoslav Yaroslavich [Ideological and philosophical Heritage..., 1986, p. 171; Vysotsky, 1966, p. 49-52]; in oral literature, the term "kagan" was used in the context of the Russian Empire. According to the poetic tradition ("The Word about Igor's Regiment"), Oleg Svyatoslavich was called a kagan [The Word about Igor's Regiment, 1995, p.14]. However, this article does not address the problem of the origin and existence of this title among the Eastern Slavs.

page 16

in the works of scholars of the X-XVI centuries: Ibn Ruste, Gardizi, al-Marwazi, an unknown author of "Hudud al - 'Alam", etc. Both traditions at different times drew information from exploring the Volga-Baltic and Black Sea trade routes.

However, the description of the Rus in these sources is radically different, and according to such an ethnomarkating feature for pagan tribes as the burial rite. In the works of geographers of the al-Jayhani school, the Rus bury the deceased in "a grave like a spacious house "(Ibn Rosteh, 1892, p. 147). According to the followers of al-Balkhi, the Russ of the deceased are burned [Ibn Haukal, 1939, vol. 2, p. 397].

The term "khaqan" in relation to the ruler of the Rus is mentioned only by scholars of the al-Jayhani school: "They have a Malik (tsar. - E. G.), who is called khaqan Rus "[Ibn Rosteh, 1892, p. 145]. Representatives of the al-Balkhi school call the head of each" type " (jeans, sinf) of the Rus simply the tsar (malik) [Ibn Haukal, 1939, vol. 2, p. 397; al-Istakhri, 1870, p. 225]. This distinction is of fundamental importance.

Medieval authors of both the East and the West, as is well known, were very attentive to political terminology. Titles were the subject of disputes. The Frankish Emperor Louis II in 871, in response to a letter from the Byzantine Emperor Basil I, indicated who could and should not, in his opinion, be called "khagan": "We call the ruler of the Avars Khagan, and not the Khazars or the northern people (Nortmanni) "[Chronica Salernitanum, p. 111]. The ninth-century Franks had no contact with the Khazars or the "northern people" and knew nothing about the extent of their power (unlike the Avar Khaganate, which was defeated by Charlemagne). The Byzantine Emperor evidently referred to the Khazar rulers and the "northern people" as "Khagans"in his unrecorded message.

More specific definitions of the title "hakan"have been preserved in medieval Arabic sources. Al-Biruni in the XI century in the list "Categories of kings and nicknames of the kings of these categories" defines the khaqan as the king (malik) of the Turks, Khazars and Toguzguz [Al-Biruni, 1957, p. 111-111]. Russ in al-Biruni are not mentioned at all in this list, and the ruler of the Slavs is called "knaz" (conjecture, in the source of K. bar [Al-Biruni, 1957, p. 437]. In the anonymous Persian work " Mujmal at-tavarikh "(1126), it is said that the title "khakan" is borne by the padishahs of Rus, Khazars, Tuguzuguz and Tibet. In the same essay, an ethnogenetic legend is given, in which the Rus and Khazars are brothers [Novoseltsev, 1965, pp. 399-400]. Analogs to the information given in Mujmal at-Tawarih are still unknown, so unfortunately, it is not possible to draw any conclusions based on them.

The author of the first half of the 9th century, al-Khwarizmi, comparing the titles of khan and khaqan, explains khan as ar-ra'is, and khaqan as khan of khans, which was translated by al-Khwarizmi as ra'is ar-ru ' asa ' (head of chapters) [al-Huwarizmi, 1926, p. 135]. Naturally, in the first half of the 9th century, when the Uyghur Khaganate was still well-known in Central Asia and Khazaria was a strong state, the title of khakan was not nominal. Since the corpus of news about the Khakan Rus dates back no later than the 9th century (according to T. M. Kalinina, to the "Anonymous Note on the Peoples of Eastern Europe" [Kalinina, 2000, p.117]), this title should correspond to the concepts of that time.

The title of khakan, which was borne by the" king " of the Rus of Arab-Persian sources, among nomadic peoples and in potestar formations with a settled nomadic population, meant a ruler similar to the European emperor of the early Middle Ages. For example, the Turks of the sixth century, from whom this name originated, called the khaqan of the Chinese emperor. The term itself, however, is not Turkic and probably originates from the Avars (Ruan-Ruan) of Central Asia, whose ethnicity is debatable (Boyle, 1977, p. 915). Among the Xianbians, who are considered the "heirs" of the Xiongnu Empire, the title of khagan was recorded in the third century (Pulleyblank, 1962, p. 261). As a permanent title, it was reliably used by ruan-ruani. Full title, known from Chinese IP-

page 17

To be exact, it sounded like "the ruling kagan, which led to the expansion of the borders (of the country)" [Kychanov, 1997, p. 278].

It is known that the Zhuani became the ethnic basis of the Avars. After the defeat of the Avar Khaganate in the middle of the sixth century by their own vassals - the Turks-the Ashina-part of the Avar tribes took part in the ethnogenesis of the Turks. The other part fled to the west and, including along the way many Late Hunnic tribes of Eastern Europe, formed the European Avar Khaganate on the Danube. The first Turkic Khaganate was the direct heir of the Asian Avar state (the leader of the Turks Bumyn took the title of khagan immediately after the suicide of the last Avar ruler). The main feature of both potestar formations was the polyethnic nature of the population (the actual tribal association of Turks was called Turk el). The Khazar and Uyghur khaganates that emerged later are characterized by the same thing. In the 13th and 14th centuries, the title of kaan (khakan) was used by the rulers of the Mongol Empire centered in Karakorum.

In the famous Orkhon inscriptions written in the Turkic runic script, the title kagan is applied to the rulers of China and Tibet, as well as to the leaders of the allied Turgesh and Kirghiz [Kychanov, 1997, p.280].

The role of the Turkic and Uyghur khaganates in the early Middle Ages was enormous. Al - Khwarizmi and al-Farghani, Arab authors who worked in the first half of the ninth century, perceived the entire territory from the Urals to Mongolia as divided into" the land of the Turks "and" the land (country) of the Tughuzguz " (Kalinina, 1988, p.129). The latter were understood in this case as the Uyghurs, who at the end of the eighth century conquered the Turkic-speaking carriers of the ethnonym "tokuz-oguz", after which the Arab authors transferred this name to the Uyghurs [see: Barthold, 2002, p.568-569; Klyashtorny, 2003, p. 455].

It is characteristic that after the collapse of the Uyghur Khaganate, the Tuguzguz leaders of Eastern Turkestan, being descendants of the Uyghur khagans and dominating the diverse population of a vast territory, did not retain the title of khagan for long [Klyashtorny, 2003, pp. 457-459].

In Gardizi's Zain al-Akhbar (XI century), one of the most detailed descriptions of the Turks of the early Middle Ages, Khagans refer to the rulers of both the Tuguzguz of East Turkestan and the Kirghiz, who led an alliance of tribes dissatisfied with the ruling elite of the Uyghur Khaganate, ousted the Uyghurs and formed their own polity in Central Asia (Martinez, 1982, p. 126,132]. Gardizi describes in detail the system of administration of the Tuguzguz, in which the hakan was not only the supreme ruler, but also the supreme judge and supreme military commander. The fact that the Kyrgyz rulers inherited the title of khaqan is confirmed by the Khudud al-'alam news [Hudud al -' Alam, 1970, p. 97]. It is significant that Gardizi calls the Khakans the ancient rulers of the Western Turkic Khaganate, as well as the Khazars and Rus [Martinez, 1982, p. 119, 125, 153, 167]. V. V. Barthold dated the Khudud al-'alam news about the Kirghiz people to the 840s, when they briefly conquered vast territories. Soon the bulk of the Kyrgyz, satisfied with the defeat of the Uyghur Khaganate, turned back to the Yenisei [Barthold, 1927, p. 20].

Thus, the khakan in the steppes of Eurasia of the 1st millennium (not only among the Turks) was considered an absolute ruler, who was subject to many, usually diverse, lands ruled by subordinate governors. The adoption of this title testified not only to the independence of the state, but also to the multi-ethnic composition of the population, and the vastness of the territory occupied, and well-founded claims to dominance in the region. The adoption of the title "khakan" made political sense only for a ruler whose main contacts were in the steppe zone. For Western Europe-

² This title was also used by the ancient Mongol rulers of the 12th century, but only after the formation of the Khamag Mongol ulus - "The State of all Mongols", i.e. also a formation that united various tribes.

page 18

Judging by the sources, this title did not carry a special semantic load in Europe and the European North (this is shown by the correspondence of the Frankish emperor and the Byzantine Basileus). In the Caliphate, the meaning of the title was better known due to long-term contacts with Turkic tribes, but still required clarification. It is important that the story of the Russ with the Khaqan at their head is present in the works of those geographers who left the most detailed descriptions of the peoples of Northern Eurasia in general, and were familiar with the political structure of the khaganates of Asia.

The terminology of explanations used by the Arab-Persian authors in relation to the ruler of the Rus in the explanations is also significant. If, for example, the head of the Slavs is often called ra 'is ar-ru' asa ' ("head of heads") or sahib ("ruler", "ruler"), sometimes-malik, then the Rus - without any reservations-is ruled by Malik (king, sovereign owner, owner of the land), who is called hakan. In the Persian versions, "padshah" is used instead of "malik", which is synonymous with the title of shahanshah.

Slavs and Russ in the tradition of al-Jaykhani are sharply divided. Ethnographic descriptions of these peoples do not even give grounds to talk about ethnic kinship (agriculture, burning of the deceased among the Slavs - and the Russ, who have "no estates, no villages, no arable land", burying corpses according to the rite [Ibn Rosteh, 1892, p. 143-147; Hudud al - ' Alam, 1970, p. 158-159; Marvazi, 1942, p. 22-23]). It is impossible to imagine the Rus as the social elite of Slavic society, the "squad". Archaeological excavations show that in the Middle Dnieper region in the 9th century, the Slavs were absolutely dominated by corpse immolation, and the first corpse sites that can be confidently dated date back to the second quarter of the 10th century (Motsya, 1990, p. 85). The terms "ra'is ar-ru'asa" and "sahib", used by Arab geographers in relation to the head of the Slavs, fully correspond to the structure of Slavic tribal unions of that era known from archaeological and written sources (Froyanov, 1980, pp. 20-24). They reflect the control of the power of the Grand Duke to society (congresses of princes, "elders of Gradsky", veche), preserved before the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The potestar structure of the Rus, judging by the terminology of the sources, was different.

In the understanding of Soviet historical science, the state in the full sense of the word is only that which has emerged as a result of the split of society into antagonistic classes. In the 1960s, the concept of the "pre-feudal period" (the transition between pre-class and early-class social formations) was introduced, the initial stage of which is military democracy. In the political sphere, it corresponded to the "proto-state" (or "barbarian", "early" state, "chiefdom") - a political structure in which there are elements of future statehood in a very undeveloped form. The peoples of Eastern Europe, including the Rus, in the early Middle Ages experienced precisely the pre-feudal period of development. Researchers of politogenesis distinguish between a simple proto-state (within a part of a tribe or when sub-clans of different tribes are mixed) and a composite one (at the level of a tribe or several tribes, the population is divided according to the territorial principle, legal proceedings are carried out by the ruler, his assistants and governors) [Vasiliev, 1981].

The khaganate, as understood by the inhabitants of the medieval steppes, should correspond, according to modern scientific terminology, to a composite proto-state that extended power over vast multiethnic territories. Even the rulers who had the hereditary right to the title of khakan lost it if their association ceased to correspond to the status of the khaganate.

This conclusion does not agree with the so-called story about the "Rus island in the sea in three days of travel" [Ancient Rus..., 1999, p.209], on which the Khakan lives. Indeed, only one source - an anonymous work of the late tenth century "Hudud al - 'alam" - does not mention a wooded and swampy area in three days of travel, but gives accurate geographies.-

page 19

historical landmarks of the "vast country", with the Pecheneg Mountains to the east, the Ruta River to the south, the Slavs to the west, and uninhabited lands to the north (Hudud al - 'Alam, 1970, p. 159). This essay requires a separate study. Reports about the "island of Rus" from representatives of the al-Jaykhani school differ very significantly from each other. The traditional translation of the very ambiguous term Jazira as "island" is not doubtful only for late authors of the XIII-XIV centuries, such as Dimashki and Aufi. In the oldest extant version of reports about the "island" [Zahoder, 1967, vol. 2, p. 78] - Ibn Ruste-it is not the sea (bahr), but the lake (buhayra), which is located near the" island " (khawalayha), and does not surround it [Ibn Rosteh, 1892, p. 145]. The work of Ibn Ruste clearly refers not to an island,but to a peninsula or some watershed.

In later authors, the island is already in the sea (fi-l-bahr). A transitional version is preserved in the work of al-Marvazi, which included both the sea and the lake [Marvazi, 1942, p.23]. Usually this place is translated as: "As for the Rus, they live on an island in the sea... there are trees and forests, and a lake around them" (Zakhoder, 1967, vol. 2, p. 79). In this form, the message looks clearly illogical. Therefore, V. F. Minorsky noted the possibility of a different translation: "... near them (in the text of the same khawalaykha as in Ibn Ruste - E. G.) is a lake" [Marvazi, 1942, p. 36], although the merged pronoun rather refers to jazira. It is obvious that al-Marwazi used several editions at the same time, as a result of which in his text the Russ "live on an island in the sea, and the length of the island is three days' journey in both directions, and there are forests and swamps on it, and a lake near it."

However, the common thing that unites the Rus with the Khaqan at the head of all authors, starting with Ibn Ruste or even with the "Anonymous Note" of the 70s of the IX century., is the territory in three days of travel, impossible for the status of the khaganate, as well as the lack of accurate localization of the Rus in relation to their neighbors (in relation to other peoples It is available in Eastern Europe). Already in the XI century. there were several variants of describing the place of residence of the Rus.

All this suggests that the Russian Khaganate, which should be located no further north than the forest-steppe zone of Eastern Europe, ceased to exist no later than the second half of the 9th century. The story of the "Rus island" appeared after the Russian Khaganate ceased to exist and the ruler of the Rus ceased to play a significant role in the history of Eastern Europe. There was no new information about the Rus with the Khaqan at their head, and this story became another legend-a curiosity, passing from composition to composition.

list of literature

Barthold V. V. Kirghiz people. Historical sketch. Frunze, 1927.

Barthold V. V. Novoe moslemskoe izvestiye o rusakh [New Muslim news about Russ].

Barthold V. V. Tuguzguzy // Works on the history and philology of the Turkic and Mongolian peoples, Moscow: East Lit., 2002 (reprint. with ed.: Barthold V. V. Sochineniya. T. V. M., 1968).

Al-Biruni. Monuments of past generations // Selected works. Tashkent, 1957. Vol. 1.

Vasiliev L. S. Proto-state-chifdom as a political structure / / Peoples of Asia and Africa. 1981. N 6.

Vysotsky S. A. Old Russian graffiti of Sofia of Kiev in the XI-XIV centuries. Kiev, 1966. Issue 1.

Drevnyaya Rus ' v svete zarubezhnykh istochnikov [Ancient Russia in the Light of Foreign Sources]. Moscow: Logos, 1999.

Drevnyaya Rus': gorod, zamok, selo [Ancient Russia: city, Castle, village]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1985.

Zakhoder B. N. Kaspiyskiy svod informatsii o Vostochnoi Evropy [The Caspian Set of Data on Eastern Europe], vol. 2, Moscow, 1967.

Ideino-filosofskoe nasledie Ilariona Kyivskogo [The ideological and Philosophical heritage of Hilarion of Kiev].

Kalinina T. M. Zametki o torgovle v Vostochnoy Evropy po dannym arabnykh uchenykh IX-X vv. [Notes on Trade in Eastern Europe according to Arab scholars of the 9th-10th centuries]. 1998. Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2000.

Kalinina T. M. Information of early scholars of the Arab Caliphate, Moscow: Nauka, 1988.

page 20

Konovalova I. G. On possible sources of borrowing the title "Kagan" in Ancient Russia / / Slavs and their neighbors. Slavs and the Nomadic World, Issue 10, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2001.

Klyashtorny S. G. the History of Central Asia and monuments runic letters. St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University, 2003.

Kychanov E. I. Nomadic states from Huns to Manchus. Moscow, 1997.

Motsya A. P. Funerary monuments of the Southern Russian lands of the IX-XIII centuries. Киев: Наукова думка, 1990.

Novoseltsev A. P. Vostochnye istochniki o vostochnykh slavyanakh i Rusi VI-IX vv. [Eastern sources on the Eastern Slavs and Rus of the VI-IX centuries]. Drevnerusskoe gosudarstvo i ego mezhdunarodnoe znachenie, Moscow: Nauka, 1965.

Novoseltsev A. P. On the question of one of the oldest titles of the Russian prince // Istoriya SSSR [History of the USSR], 1982, No. 4.

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

Slavs and Rus: Problems and ideas. Concepts born of three centuries of polemics, in a textbook presentation. Moscow: Nauka-Flinta Publ., 1999.

Slovo o plku Igorev, Igorya, senya Svyatoslavlya, vnuka Olgova [The Word about Igor's Regiment, Igor, son of Svyatoslav, grandson of Olgov]. Enksiklopediya "Slova o polku Igorev" Vol. 1.SPb.: Dmitry Bulanin, 1995.

Kievskaya Rus': Ocherki sotsial'no-politicheskoi istorii [Kievan Rus: Essays on Socio-political History].

Annales Bertiniani: Annates de Saint-Bertin. P., 1964.

Boyle J. A. Khagan // The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New edition. Vol. IV. Leiden: Brill-London: Luzac, 1977.

Chronica Salernitanum / U. Westerbergh. Stockholm, 1956 (Studia Latina. T. III).

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.

[al-Huwarizmi] Das Kitab Surat al-Ard des Abu Ga'far Muhammed Ibn Musa al-Huwarizmi. Hrsg. von H. V. Mzik. Leipzig, 1926.

[Ibn Rosteh] Kitab al-A'lak an-nafisa VII auctore Abu Ali Ahmed ibn 'Omar Ibn Rosteh / M. J. de Goeje. Leiden: Brill, 1892 (Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum, VII).

[Ibn Haukal] Opus geographicum auctore Ibn Haukal al-Nasibi / J. H. Kramers. Leiden, 1938. Vol. I. Leiden, 1939. Vol. 2.

[al-Istakhri] Viae Regnorum. Descriptio ditionis moslemicae auctore Abu Ishak al-Farisi al-Istakhri / M. J. de Goeje. Lugduni Batavorum, 1870 (Bibliotheca geographorum arabicorum, I).

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

[Marvazi] Sharaf al-Zaman Tahir Marvazi on China, the Turks and India / Arabic text (c. a.d. 1120) with an English Translation and Commentaries by V. Minorsky. L.: Luzac, 1942.

Pulleyblank E. G. The Consonantal System of Old Chinese // Asia Major. 1962. T. IX.

Permanent link to this publication: