The Steppe Lion: A History of Khazaria

Valdemar II

Banned
That's the process things took (are taking) in my own TL where the Khazars lasted until the dawn of the 12th century so I agree with you totally about the Rus' states.

Great mind think alike:D.

A few other points, I don't think the different religeon of the Rus will have much effect on either the Balts or Finno-Urigics population in the area. So we will likely still see the Baltic Crusades. But a few thing will radical change one are Lithuania if the Ruthenians they conquer are a weird of Jews, Catholics and Pagans, the nature of the Lithuania state radical change from OTL dominance of first a relative small (25%) Pagan and Later Catholic elite ruling over a majority Othodoxs population. It could very well make the Lithuanian state much more stable.
Another major changes are the Jewish migration to Poland-Lithuania in OTL they was allowed to do so, because they wasn't a threat to the state and the Poles and Lithuanian needed to develop the state. Here with big Jewish neighbouring population and states and likely a large Jewish minority in Polish and Lithuanian territorium, they won't be welcomed. Some will likely be welcomed by the different post Khazar states instead, which will use them to develop urban centres, but anything like easten Yiddish culture as we know it in OTL won't exist, even through they may still keep their language.
 

Zioneer

Banned
Thanks for the comments, guys. It really keeps this alive. One question though; you seem to agree that the Khazars surviving in this fashion is plausible. But there's been no thoughts on my approach to the Jewish method of conversion. I looked up Noahidism a while back when planning this TL, and thought "Well, Judaism doesn't have much of a missionary system, but this seems like it would be reasonable for that problem".

So is the Bene Noach idea a plausible way of essentially converting the Khazar client states to Judaism?
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Thanks for the comments, guys. It really keeps this alive. One question though; you seem to agree that the Khazars surviving in this fashion is plausible. But there's been no thoughts on my approach to the Jewish method of conversion. I looked up Noahidism a while back when planning this TL, and thought "Well, Judaism doesn't have much of a missionary system, but this seems like it would be reasonable for that problem".

So is the Bene Noach idea a plausible way of essentially converting the Khazar client states to Judaism?

I would say absolutely, through it may run into the problem, that other Jewish groups won't recognise it, which may result in that if it is succesful, that Noahidism will be end up as yet another Abrahamic religeon. But if the ruler of the Khazan stay somewhat traditional Jewish and the Noahidist stays his vassal for a few centuries, I think they will be seen as Jewish.
 

Zioneer

Banned
Chapter 2: Imposters and Alans


At the coming of the Imposter, Kiev burned. Yaropolk, Prince of the so-called "Varangian Principality" fought for his life in the ruined streets. Rus mace met Khazarian scimitar[1] as the man who declared himself to be Yaropolk's father battled with him in the grand city.


The Imposter was a fool, but a cunning one; Yaropolk thought as he sidestepped the massive crushing weapon of his fellow Rus. The man's bald head and lovingly trimmed facial hair did call to mind the deceased Sviatoslav's features, but that is where the resemblance ended. This deceiver was massive where Sviatoslav was average, and where Sviatoslav was whole (before his death, of course), the Imposter was scarred and pitted, missing three fingers and an eye.

Still, Yaropolk could see why Vladimir had put his warriors behind the false Sviatoslav, and proclaimed the man his father. His brother wanted a chance for revenge against the Khazars. As he clashed weapons with the Imposter, the two exchanged few words.


"Why?", asked "Sviatoslav".

Yaropolk answered with his blade, slashing the Rus's wrist, forcing the larger man to shift his mace to the other hand.

The Imposter growled, and swung his mace in a skull-crushing assault. Yaropolk was forced to duck behind a portion of wooden wall that once guarded Kiev. The mighty warrior strode towards Yaropolk slowly, deliberately.

"You would forsake our traditions for those of the Jew? You would spit on our ancestors gods?"

Whirling around, and striking the deceiver in the throat, Yaropolk watched as the life bled from the giant Rus.

"If it means that my children's children will someday be rulers of all Khazaria, I will."

Yaropolk cleaned his blade on the pitted armor of the Imposter, and looked upon the destruction visited upon Kiev by his fallen foe.

"We will be more Jewish than the Khagans themselves, if needs be."

Yaropolk strode off to meet his trusted band of warriors, the druzhina. Before he did so, he uttered a small, half-pagan prayer.

"May Elohim, Perun, and all the gods bless the Khagan against my brother. He is an easier master then the Greeks and Arabs, and a far less arrogant lord then Vladimir."

--------

In 977, when Melech took power among the Khazars, a figure appeared among the Rus, claiming to be Sviatoslav, not killed by Khagan Joseph, but alive and well.

It was a paperthin pretext, but Vladimir of the Rus took the opportunity as it came. Proclaiming the man to be his true father, the two led a massive invasion of Khazaria in the first year of Melech's rule. The man who would be known to history as "The Imposter of Kiev" invaded Yaropolk of Kiev's Varangian Principality[2].

The Imposter was defeated and slain during his sacking of Kiev; popular legend of the time holds that Yaropolk himself cut the Imposter's throat while reaffirming his loyalty to the Khagan.

In any case, Vladimir the Rus was not beaten yet, and it took until the spring of 978, when a counter-attack of Khazar horse archers ambushed him, to get the Rus to declare a peace between the two peoples.

Melech had stopped another invasion by the northern raiders, and gained as impressive a reputation as his father, but at the cost of another sacking of Kiev.

Knowing that without any aid, one of the greatest and richest cities of Khazaria would be abandoned, and also knowing that he could solidify his hold on Yaropolk, Melech proclaimed that if the citizens of Kiev would join their ruler in Noahidism, they would not be required to pay even the small portion of tribute they usually paid for 40 years, the same amount of time that the Hebrews wandered in the desert.

Along with the rabbis sent to instruct the pagans of Kiev in the ways of faith, this proclamation caused nearly all of Yaropolk's capital to convert to the half-faith of Bene Noach. A few even converted fully to Judaism, and received training in reading, so that they could read the Torah.

Melech was a ruler determined to reform his lands, however, and this was not the end of his plans. Aware that while a greater portion of the nobles in his personal lands practiced Judaism, most of the non-Khazar nobility did not, he sought to bring more prestigious Jews to his court, and to this end struck up a written correspondence with the elderly Hasdai ibn Shaprut[3], friend of his father Joseph. Hasdai promised to encourage Jewish scholars and other trained men to visit Khazaria, as the only Jewish kingdom in the world.

Finally, as the son of old Khagan Joseph and an Alan princess, Melech attempted to enforce his royal right to Alania, which he believed to be his birthright. The Alans disagreed. Violently.

However, this was not to be a mere domestic rebellion against Khazar authority; in the Byzantine Empire, anti-Khazar sentiments lead to the brilliant general-turned exiled rebel known as Bardas Phokas[4] being sent to "help" the Alans in their fight against the Khazars.

Bardas was supplied with 5,000 Greek soldiers, and ordered to cause as much chaos among the Khazars as possible. This he did eagerly, "advising" the Alan king to hamper the Khazar trade routes for several years; not until 980 was he stopped and the Alan capital of Maghas occupied. Bardas fled Alania, but took enough loot with him that the Byzantines hailed him as a hero. Bardas's popularity led Emperor Basil II to exile the general once more, this time in Sinope, where Basil hoped he could not cause trouble.

Melech was not very partial to the idea of the Alans rebelling again, so he hired a force of 4,000 assorted soldiers from the Volga Bulgars and the Maygars, to permanently garrison Alania.

In order to gain much more power and money, he also proclaimed that any merchant traveling through Khazaria must give a tithe of 1/10 of his goods, and must travel through the capitals of the client states of the Khazars.

Soon, Melech's centralizing tendencies would lead to bigger rewards and bigger problems. However, the first portion of his long rule is generally agreed to have ended in 980 AD.





------
Author's Notes:


[1] According to the notes I've gathered on the Khazars, they were the first European power to use scimitars, excluding the Persians.

[2]Note; this is not the name that the Rus under Yaropolk call the Rus beholden to the Khazars, it is just a sort of "historian's name", like the Byzantine Empire.

[3]Hasdai ibn Shaprut was a Jewish scholar, doctor, and diplomat around this time period. He served the Caliph of Cordoba in all three professions, forging a short alliance between the Caliph and the Byzantines in RL. He also had a short written correspondence with the RL Khagan Joseph, (called the Khazar Correspondence, of course), in which he asked for as much information as possible about the Khazars. I'm assuming that in the event of Joseph's survival, Hasdai becomes his good friend, and extends that friendship to Melech.

[4]Bardas Phokas the Younger was a three-time rebel, twice rebelling against the Byzantine Empire, and once on their behalf against Bardas Skeleros. I plan to use Bardas Phokas later on in my TL, but I'm not sure in what context. Any suggestions? While it has to be somewhat plausible, the Rule of Cool is in effect, so feel free to make outrageous suggestions for Phokas.
 
SplendidTuesday

Byzantium is likely to be a continuing problem. It's pretty much at the height of its post-arab revival and with no real visible Muslim threats at the moment the old friendship with Khazaria has lost its purpose. Also with Khazaria prospering and even expanding and possibly converting people who were tending towards the Orthodox church there will be envy and rivarly.

The saving grace might be that Basil is going to be increasingly involved with Bulgaria but even if the Khazars don't try getting some revenge there is likely to be continued attempts at interference from the empire.

Wondering what might happen if Basil died markedly earlier? Possibly opening up the question of the succession as although his nieces are younger they will still be up for grabs and the dynasty might not have built up the sizeable level of popularity and loyalty in the general population it did OTL so could be a new wave of succession wars. In which case Phokas might have another go for the purple.

Steve
 

Zioneer

Banned
Thanks, stevep for the advice on Phokas and Byzantium as a whole.

Everyone else, I'm going to have a "rest of Europe update" up soon. What would you like me to focus on in that?
 

Zioneer

Banned
I'm going to switch to a more timeline-friendly format as of this chapter; it seems to me that my current format is a bit difficult to follow. Do you guys want me to continue with the narratives, or just cut them entirely out?

Chapter 3: The State of Northeastern Europe:

978: After Vladimir Sviatoslavich's defeat, the Rus pledge to never attack Khazaria for as long as Vladimir lives. Surprisingly, the Rus do their best to honor that pledge, expanding instead into the lands of the primitive[1] Finns. The Finns, disunited and weak under the rule of several feuding chiefs, do not put up a strong fight, and the Rus take a portion of the sparsely populated Finnish areas. Vladimir, still staunchly pagan at this point, builds a shrine to Perun the thunder god at the edge of his Finnish domain. This shrine will soon become an important symbol to Finns and Rus alike.

Additionally, Vladimir's first son is born in this year; he will be named Borislav. Vladimir promptly makes the boy Voivode[2] of Kareliya, the Rus-controlled Finnish territory.

Over in the east, the Volga Bulgars and the Pechenegs trade blows, the Bulgars annexing a small panhandle of land between them and the Khazars.

979: With the Khazars occupied with the Greeks aid of the Alan rebellion, Vladimir crushes several small East Slavic tribes near Khazaria, turning them into various tiny client states. Also this year, the Rus adopt the Turkic composite bow that the various Slavic/Turkic tribes use.

In the (formerly Danube Bulgarian[3]) lands of the Byzantines, a massive rebellion erupts against Emperor Basil's rule. While the Tsar of Bulgaria had been imprisoned and later murdered by the Greeks, this had the effect of inspiring the four Cometopuli brothers to rebel. The Cometopuli's were Bulgarian governors over the Danube Bulgars, and saw the Byzantine distraction in Alania a perfect opportunity to re-create the Bulgarian Empire of olden days. Samuil Cometopuli, the second-eldest of the brothers is proclaimed Tsar Samuil I of Bulgaria, and immediately starts ravaging Thessaly and Thrace.

Basil responds to the Bulgarian attacks by... doing nothing for a year, at the urging of his eunuch advisor Lekapenos. Lekapenos (bearing the name of Basil like his master) feared that the Emperor would take the opportunity to not only crush the Bulgarians, but remove from Lekapenos the advisor's ill-gotten lands.

This inaction allows Tsar Samuil to send his eldest brother, the Pro-Byzantine Aaron Cometopuli, to seize many of the lands of the Vlachs for the war effort.

980: Tsar Samuil notices the destruction of the Alan rebellion in Khazaria, and desperate to keep the attention of the Byzantines off of him, he arranges a deal with the Khazars; he would send annual gifts to them, and allow them to annex both a piece of Northern Bulgaria, but also allow them to take the Byzantine ports on the Crimea. In return, they would arrange for the escape of the thrice-imprisoned Bardas Phokas from his prison at Sinope.

Khagan Melech is somewhat unhappy with releasing the general that occupied Alania for two years, and the negotiations drag on to 981. In the meantime, the warrior-Emperor Basil takes to the field against the Bulgarians, driving them away from Thrace.

981: Melech finally agrees to the terms Samuil asked for, and Khazar merchants in the Crimea free Bardas Phokas from his imprisonment. Bardas proclaims himself rightful Basileios of the Romans[4], and sparks a civil war in the Byzantine Empire, aided by the resources and popularity he had managed to gain from heading the Byzantine intervention in Alania. The Khazars occupy the Greek ports on the Crimea.

Enraged by this insult, Emperor Basil sends a portion of the mighty Byzantine navy with a detachment of 6,000 troops to fight the Khazars off; Bardas Phokas intercepts and pays the small army/ large navy to instead blockade the Black Sea.

Meanwhile, Samuil reneges on his deal with the Khazars, and instead occupies what is the Khazar portion of what is OTL Romania. He assures Khagan Melech that he still intends to send tribute to the Khazars, and extra for the newly Bulgarian territories. Melech responds by sending (unarmed) rabbis and Turkic settlers to Samuil's occupied areas, thus ensuring that a portion of Bulgaria will look to the Khazars and Judaism for leadership, not Samuil and Orthodoxy.

982: The Byzantine civil war continues to rage, and all powers are growing at the expense of Byzantium. The Bulgarians continued to keep Thessaly and the Khazars occupied the Bosphorus. And even more chilling was the Arabs awakening once more, and taking an interest in the small, Byzantine-supported state of Armenia.

However, in this last issue was Basil II successful. Fearful of a pro-Bardas attack by Armenia, Basil managed to marry his brother Constantine to an Armenian princess and by flexing his diplomatic muscles, place Constantine on the throne of Armenia.

983: Barda's rebellion rages on. No major changes other than Bardas growing in power.

984: Bardas seizes all but the Balkan areas (including Constantinople) from Basil. The technically independent Armenian state declares war against Bardas, and seizes up to the majority Armenian city of Van, as Basil's brother Constantine (now known as Constan I of Armenia) proves to be a good ruler with a small state; not a match for his beleaguered older brother, but still an efficient leader.

In the far north, the Finno-Ugric tribes receive refugees from Kareliyan Finland; nothing much comes of this yet, but the Finnish refugees immediately clamour for attacks against the Rus.

985: Bardas ignores the troublesome Armenians, and marches on the City of Emperors. He is given a triumph, and becomes Emperor Bardas I. He spends the rest of the year crushing Basil's supporters in the Balkans (conspicuously leaving parts of Thessaly for the Bulgarians to root out), and sends the Bulgarian imperial symbols to Tsar Samuil in thanks for the aid during the civil war.

Basil flees to Armenia, and begins making deals with every power that is jealous of Emperor Bardas.





----
Author's Notes: So, a change of format. I'll repeat what I asked before: Is the format change preferable, or should I go back to what it was before?

[1] "Primitive" meaning mostly hunter-gatherers and without a written system; the Rus are not primitive because while they are still somewhat nomadic, they do have farming.

[2] Voivode is an old Slavic word meaning basically "commander of a military force" but which evolved into "governor". Technically, the title was elected, but the Rus leaders are still strong enough to basically force the issue.

[3] This happened in real life, but under slightly different circumstances. For one, the Cometopulis claimed to act as a sort of "regent" for the imprisoned Tsar until his death. Also, the imprisoned Tsar died later on in RL.

[4] I'm sure all of you, as alternate history fans, know that the "Byzantines" thought of themselves as Romans, and the Roman Empire as still existing in their time. If you don't know, then congrats! Now you do.
 
Last edited:

Zioneer

Banned
So the Romans end up worse than OTL at this point due to the civil war?

Well, I see it as critical that the Byzantines are weakened, if I'm going to have the Khazars survive. With the destruction of the advance of the Rus, the only other power that has a more than average chance to crush Khazaria is the Byzantines.

So at this point, yes. But Bardas, from all the sources I've seen on him, was very skilled, and the biggest reason he failed was lack of resources. He may act as a ATL Basil II, so don't count the Romans out yet.
 
Well, I've always been interested in a medieval Jewish state surviving to at the very least the early modern period...

So will this mean the Turks will have an easier time fighting the ERE, or will they be butterflied away?
 
Ha, we both ended up with Emperor Bardas I Phokas. I had him crown his son as co-emperor in The Muallaf of Kiev.

And you are correct in identifying him as very skilled, a trait he shared with his much more famous uncle Nikephoros.
 
Ha, we both ended up with Emperor Bardas I Phokas. I had him crown his son as co-emperor in The Muallaf of Kiev.

And you are correct in identifying him as very skilled, a trait he shared with his much more famous uncle Nikephoros.

This may not be the best idea but couldn't the romans become allies with the khazars instead and so they both can help each other become powerful?
 
They were allies for a time IOTL. But if you know much about the Byzantines, you would know that divide et impera was the rule- if the Khazars were flourishing like ITTL, the Byzantines would be searching for a new proxy.

But that is all up to the TL's author.
 
Well, I've always been interested in a medieval Jewish state surviving to at the very least the early modern period...

So will this mean the Turks will have an easier time fighting the ERE, or will they be butterflied away?

SavoyTruffle

Not necessarily. This is a period of weakness largely caused by open internal conflict rather than the victory of bureacracy and vested regional interests over the central government. It is weakened currently but, especially if Bardas establishes himself as a strong emperor can easily resurge. It could be that if the Seljeks came through as OTL a powerful rather than stagnant empire could stomp any attack into Anatolia or Syria.

One other interesting possibility. While the Khazers were at their height their influence spread beyond their formal empire. Remember reading about them a couple of decades back so details are a bit rusty. However the book suggested they had a lot of influence on the Magyars before they headed west and also much of western central Asia, including the region the Seljuks came from. Also the latter were relatively recent converts to Islam so I remember thinking at the time that if the Khazers hadn't declined you might possibly see a Jewish Turkish invasion of the ME.

Checking dates on Wiki the Seljuks spent a period during the 9thC near the northern reaches of the Caspian Sea so would have known the Khazers and be influenced by them. However it said they moved to the Khurasan region of Persia, where they were strongly influenced by Persian culture in the 10thC. Hence probably too late for a Jewish orientated Seljuks.

Steve
 
I'm going to switch to a more timeline-friendly format as of this chapter; it seems to me that my current format is a bit difficult to follow. Do you guys want me to continue with the narratives, or just cut them entirely out?

I think I should continue with the narratives, you write very well. :D

978: After Vladimir Rurikovich's defeat

A minor nitpick; I think you meant Vladimir Sviatoslavich. ;) (Sorry, I'm obsessed with this time period.)
 
Ouch for the Byzzies.

Okay, here's the thing with dialogue, for me I have a hard time reading it if it's simply two characters talking at each other. In Raptor of Spain (self-promote!) I tend to include verbal passages either as two things. One is "historical" statements--describing what happened, the include a line that person X said relevant to the situation.

You can use this to make a point like in the Revised version when Eder Abarran killed Amrus ibn Yusuf, a rival general wearing a token of higher office. In regards to Amrus's position: "You were never fit for it old man," he said before slicing the throat of the general. “But it is not fit for me." That was an attempt to put an exclamation point on recent events and told you in the Consulate War, Eder would never surrender. Whether it worked or not, your mileage may vary, but that's what I was attempting to do.

The other is part of a fiction passage. You have a conversation interspersed with description. Each description is for a reason, it helps show the emotional state of the characters, their mindset (thus showing motivations and reasoning for their dialog), their history, or describes the culture of the world. Or at least, that's what I'm trying to do!

I'm sure other people have different ways of doing this, but this what I've tried to do when I use dramatic dialog. Tomorrow's update (already written!) has both types of conversations a "historical impact" statement, and an "illustrative conversation."
 

Zioneer

Banned
Ouch for the Byzzies.

Okay, here's the thing with dialogue, for me I have a hard time reading it if it's simply two characters talking at each other. In Raptor of Spain (self-promote!) I tend to include verbal passages either as two things. One is "historical" statements--describing what happened, the include a line that person X said relevant to the situation.

You can use this to make a point like in the Revised version when Eder Abarran killed Amrus ibn Yusuf, a rival general wearing a token of higher office. In regards to Amrus's position: "You were never fit for it old man," he said before slicing the throat of the general. “But it is not fit for me." That was an attempt to put an exclamation point on recent events and told you in the Consulate War, Eder would never surrender. Whether it worked or not, your mileage may vary, but that's what I was attempting to do.

The other is part of a fiction passage. You have a conversation interspersed with description. Each description is for a reason, it helps show the emotional state of the characters, their mindset (thus showing motivations and reasoning for their dialog), their history, or describes the culture of the world. Or at least, that's what I'm trying to do!

I'm sure other people have different ways of doing this, but this what I've tried to do when I use dramatic dialog. Tomorrow's update (already written!) has both types of conversations a "historical impact" statement, and an "illustrative conversation."


Alright, how about this: I remove all dialog and most narrative from my new updates, but then do a "remastered" version afterwards? I can gurantee that the narration will get better if I take my time on it and focus on the meaty, "historical" aspects of the TL.

I tried to combine the two a little with the "legend of the time says" bits, but that doesn't seem to have worked.
 
Top