Notes on Arthur Koestler's <i>The Thirteenth Tribe</i>. By Raeto West.

Notes on Arthur Koestler's 1976 book
The Thirteenth Tribe

by

Arthur Koestler


Note: 13 May 2023:   Koestler's book caused, and is still causing, controversy.

This note may help you sidestep the usual controversies. The point is quite simple and concerns religious 'conversion'.

Koestler says the Khazars converted to Judaism. Koestler makes it sound like the whole population decided to become Jews.

But Koestler may have meant that only the 'elite' became Jews. This is very likely, as the few Jews involved would only interact with leaders, and Judaism regards ordinary people with revulsion and contempt.   And likely because the same strategy has been used since, in the Netherlands, England, France, Japan, Russia and China.


Map of Russia and Poland - Red dots indicate Khazaria

Francis Dvornik's The Making of Central and Eastern Europe, 1949, published by 'The Polish Research Centre Ltd, London' may be a Catholic-funded post-war volume; or it may not.

Khazars from the 1910/1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, chosen because it pre-dates the 1913 Federal Reserve Act in the USA. A few sentences added on possible sorce of Jewish hatred for Slavs and/or Russians.

Expulsion idea is in Frank Britton's book Behind Communism; but he adds
By 1500 all of Western Europe except northern Italy, parts of Germany, and the Papal possessions around Avignon, had been rid of the Jewish invasion. For a while, at least, Europe was free of the Jews; not until 1650 did they return in any numbers. Says Encyclopedia Britannica: [page 57-58, vol. 13 - 1947.] "The great mass of the Jewish people were thus to be found once more in the East, in the Polish and Turkish empires . . The few communities suffered to remain in western Europe were meanwhile subjected at last to all the restrictions which earlier ages had usually allowed to remain as an ideal; so that in a sense, the Jewish dark ages may be said to begin with the Renaissance."
      [Note added by RW: this is E Michael Jones on Poland: Largely as a result of the concessions of the Polish crown which began with the Statute of Kalisz, Poland became known throughout Europe as the "paradisus Judeorum," the paradise of the Jews. When persecutions would flare up in the traditionally Jewish sections of Europe, in the German principalities, particularly in the urban centers of the Rhein valley, as they frequently did throughout the middle ages, the Jews who wished to escape persecution inevitably headed east toward Poland, taking their language, "juedische Deutsch," or Yiddish with them. Jones does not state whether the 'concession' was made to Jews already in Poland, as the Khazar hypothesis would suggest is likely.]

H. G. Wells in his great Outline of History:
      "The Jewish idea was and is a curious combination of theological breadth and an intense racial patriotism. The Jews looked for a special saviour, a Messiah, who was to redeem mankind by the agreeable process of restoring the fabulous glories of David and Solomon, and bringing the whole world at last under the benevolent but firm Jewish heel. As the political power of the peoples declined as Carthage followed Tyre into the darkness and Spain became a Roman province, this dream grew and spread. There can be little doubt that the scattered Phoenicians in Spain and Africa and throughout the Mediterranean, speaking as they did a language closely akin to Hebrew and being deprived of their authentic political rights, became proselytes to Judaism. For phases of vigorous proselytism alternated with phases of exclusive jealousy in Jewish history. On one occasion the Idumeans, being conquered, were all forcibly made Jews. (Josephus). There were Arab tribes who were Jews in the time of Muhammad, and a Turkish people who were mainly Jews in South Russia in the ninth century. Judaism is indeed the reconstructed political ideal of many shattered peoples—mainly Semitic. It is to the Phoenician contingent and to Aramean accessions in Babylon that the financial and commercial tradition of the Jews is to be ascribed. But as a result of these coalescences and assimilations, almost everywhere in the towns throughout the Roman Empire, and far beyond it in the east, Jewish communities traded and flourished, and were kept in touch through the Bible, and through a religious and educational organization. The main part of Jewry never was in Judea and had never come out of Judea." [Outline of History page 493-494, third edition, by H. G. Wells. Section 'Christianity and Islam', with a footnote recommending the Cambridge Medieval History.-RW]


FROM NUKE-LIES forum (so 2011 or early 2012)

Revisionism: Khazar / Jewish History, including DNA Evidence

Postby rerevisionist » 10 Sep 2011 22:00

ADDED TO THIS THREAD by REREVISIONIST on 9TH FEB 2013: --

Gene study settles debate over origin of European Jews by AFP
Posted Thursday, January 17 2013 at 03:57

Jews of European origin are a mix of ancestries, with many hailing from tribes in the Caucasus who converted to Judaism and created an empire that lasted half a millennium, according to a gene study published on Thursday.

The investigation, its author says, should settle a debate that has been roiling for more than two centuries.

Jews of European descent, often called Ashkenazis, account for some 90 percent of the more than 13 million Jews in the world today.

According to the so-called Rhineland Hypothesis, Ashkenazis descended from Jews who progressively fled Palestine after the Moslem conquest of 638 AD.

They settled in southern Europe and then, in the late Middle Ages, about 50,000 of them moved from the Rhineland in Germany into eastern Europe, according to the hypothesis.

But detractors say this idea is implausible.

Barring a miracle --which some supporters of the Rhineland Hypothesis have in fact suggested -- the scenario would have been demographically impossible.

It would mean that the population of Eastern European Jews leapt from 50,000 in the 15th century to around eight million at the start of the 20th century.

That birth rate would have been 10 times greater than that of the local non-Jewish population. And it would have occurred despite economic hardship, disease, wars and pogroms [Red Flag here! - Rerev. See https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/05/08/revisiting-the-19th-century-russian-pogroms-part-1-russias-jewish-question/] that ravaged Jewish communities.

Seeking new light in the argument, a study published in the British journal Genome Biology and Evolution, compares the genomes of 1,287 unrelated individuals who hail from eight Jewish and 74 non-Jewish populations.

Geneticist Eran Elhaik of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, trawled through this small mountain of data in search of single changes in the DNA code that are linked to a group's geographical origins.

Such telltales have been used in past research to delve into the origins of the Basque people and the pygmy people of central Africa.

Among European Jews, Elhaik found ancestral signatures that pointed clearly to the Caucasus and also, but to a smaller degree, the Middle East.

The results, said Elhaik, give sound backing for the rival theory -- the "Khazarian Hypothesis."

Under this concept, eastern European Jews descended from the Khazars, a hotchpotch of Turkic clans that settled the Caucasus in the early centuries AD and, influenced by Jews from Palestine, converted to Judaism in the 8th century.

The Judeo-Khazars built a flourishing empire, drawing in Jews from Mesopotamia and imperial Byzantium.

They became so successful that they sent offshoots into Hungary and Romania, planting the seeds of a great diaspora.

But Khazaria collapsed in the 13th century when it was attacked by the Mongols and became weakened by outbreaks of the Black Death.

NOTE ON KHAZARS and SUPPOSED GENETICS DISPROOF

Sorry to bore people with this. Just more dubious stuff. ...

The following comment was made on the BNPideas website by 'Ed' (who I think may be Arthur Kemp - he might be described as a white 'race historian' and though very sound will have nothing to do with 'conspiracy theories', apart from climate change, and the forcing of immigration into white countries; he has no science background). This is what 'Ed' said re the Khazar idea, very possibly copying it from somewhere else in his own writings:-
The “Khazar” theory has been thoroughly disproved by modern genetics. It is a myth.

The Khazars were a central Asian tribe. DNA studies of modern Jewish populations have shown that 12% of Ashkenazim Jews do have a central Asian DNA strand.

There is however no evidence that this 12% strain — which exists among a small group of male Ashkenazim Jews — is actually Khazarian in origin.

This DNA strand could be of any origin — but even if it is Khazar (and it is worth repeating that there is no proof for this) then it still comprises only 12% of Ashkenazim Jews, and therefore less than 6% of all Jews (Ashkenazim and Sephardic). Be careful not to propagate easily disproved lies as it will affect the credibility of all your arguments.

Source: “The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East,” Almut Nebel,1 Dvora Filon,2 Bernd Brinkmann,4 Partha P. Majumder,5 Marina Faerman,3 and Ariella Oppenheim1, by The American Society of Human Genetics, Am J Hum Genet. 2001 November; 69(5): 1095–1112.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1274378/


This was a 2001 piece of work. It's perhaps too long to include here; maybe some other time.

I replied to the BNP site--
Yes, thanks, ed. The fact is there’s a lot hanging on this issue. And another fact is that Jews have a long history of scientific fraud. I don’t think there’s any serious doubt about the Khazar conversion, or the large numbers of the Khazar population who migrated, mainly north, in subsequent centuries. Short of using a time machine to revisit the Khazar lands in the 8th century to take samples, to find “a central Asian DNA strand”, evidence remains inconclusive. The whole authorship and writing style of that paper in unimpressive.


I subsequently found on https://www.khazaria.com there's an explicit comment that the Khazar link hasn't been tested ('It is important to note that Khazarian skeletons and North Caucasian Turks have not yet been used to compare Jewish genes with likely traces of the Khazars. Thus, the Khazar theory has not really been put to the genetic test yet. Some historians and scientists recognized the need for specifically testing the Khazar theory, rather than generalizing based on studies of other non-Khazar populations') and that piece is dated at least 2006. (I'm not claiming to have checked e.g. with British researchers, if indeed any of them have views on the issue).

My comment that the work is phoney is based on a number of things, including the poor quality of modern cell biology research (not specifically a Jewish thing) and scientific fraud (unquestionably Jewish-linked). Additional factors include: the small sample of relevant 'Jews' (526 Y chromosomes representing six Middle Eastern populations - Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Kurdish Jews from Israel; Muslim Kurds; Muslim Arabs from Israel and the Palestinian Authority Area; and Bedouin from the Negev - was analyzed for 13 binary polymorphisms and six microsatellite loci, their self-selected nature, the restriction only to one Y chromosome, the fact that testing appears not even to be double-blind. It seems to have been organised at a haematology depratment in Jerusalem. Note it states it was 'Received June 18, 2001; Accepted August 27, 2001'.
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40
Top

Re: Revisionism: Khazar / Jewish History inc. DNA Evidence

Postby rerevisionist » 11 Sep 2011 00:26

Out of sequence, really. If one knows something, one tends to assume others do - maybe this mistake is a weakness of white races. This is a rough summary of the Khazar hypothesis----

Re Arthur Koestler (Hungarian Jew, I believe, who moved to Britain, believed in 'the Holocaust', wrote several novels including one on the 'Russian Revolution' - code phrase for Jewish coup, funded or helped establish a chair in the 'Paranormal'. at I think Edinburgh University). He wrote 'The Thirteenth Tribe', in English, published 1977 I think, which is probably online, though I doubt it has copyright permission to be there. The material NOT original with him. The story is the documented conversion of the Khazar empire to Judaism, postdating Islam and Christianity. Koestler regards 'Ashkenazim' as Khazar descendants, and 'Sephardim' as the far fewer descendants of the small tribe of genuine Jews. This means - as 'Jews' noted - that 'Jews' have no right to Israel, and indeed aren't biologically 'Jews' at all. It's worth reading online reviews in Amazon to see the impact this book made, in an unpublicised way. Unsurprisingly, there has been censorship and lies and all the rest of the propaganda circus.

Post by Sorensen731 » 08 Sep 2011 20:28
I seriously distrust Koestler thesis.

[Mentions another book - Identity of the religions called druidical and Hebrew... (1829)]

Why do you trust a jew, Koestler? It's disinformation.


Koestler only popularised the idea, and I mention his book because it is fairly easily available - it's not that I trust him. Koestler did NOT originate the Khazar idea. Russians, and some Poles, and Hungarians, did, at least in the 20th century. Koestler mentions his sources, but at no stage clearly lists them - you have to read through the whole book to pick up clues - but it's clear the idea predates these people, who were in effect rediscovering the idea. If I can find the time, I'll try to make a list of them. I have a Polish book, in English, pre-dating Koestler, which includes the Khazars. H G Wells's 1920s Outline of History has material on this too. So it's not an idea of Koestler's - though it is likely he misrepresented the previous writers in a way flattering to Jews.

The strength of the Khazar theory is that (i) It explains numbers- how could some tiny exclusivist tribe populate big chunks of central and eastern Europe? (ii) It explains the geography - if there was a 'diaspora' of some sort, why would they all move north east? (iii) The language - I assume Koestler, familiar with Hungarian and other languages, made some link with central European languages and Yiddish. (iv) It seems consistent with a political mass conversion postdating the rise of Islam, and makes sense as an ideology for a narrow group.


But rerevisionist, the truth is that Jews ruled England, and France and America too, not "the East", the central and Eastern Europeans were anti-Semites, the Russians specially, and the Germans, so, how can that be? And how came to be that Britain and France loved them and had them in government and always together?
It's disinformation, Jews may have come, or traveled from the East, maybe, but their power wasn't there, it was in Britain and France, and the US.

It's not the numbers, but the powers, where do they got power and where were they put in ghettos (In Eastern Europe, because they didn't like or trust them).

I recommend the book I pointed out. [See the other thread for this - rerev.] The Khazar theory makes no sense.


I may be missing your point here. But---

* I take it that there were 'Hebrews' who may have been defined by language and/or some area in the eastern Mediterranean, and/or may have been a violent group hiding in mountains and preying on cities in plains, and/or may have been wholly or partly religious in the sense of having books/scrolls/ practices. They may have had connections with Babylon or other places, may have had a language related to (e.g.) Chaldean. They may have been arranged by something like castes. Their 'priests' may, or may not, have been learned in some sense - possibly including astronomical and calendar matters. Their books may have been intended as truth and/or made up as propaganda.

* I don't think there's much doubt that the Khazar conversion took place. Any other 'Jews' - or whatever they called themselves - may not have recognised them as Jews. But in a de facto sense they were Jews. It's perfectly possible they were savages compared with genuine Jews, and possibly the general brutality of these modern 'Jews' was not shared with authentic 'Jews'.

* I think* Jewish power was a matter of organisation and learning and calculation. (Christian power had an analogous basis, including its own language, which settled down into Latin, and a clerisy if that's the right word).

* The money side of things of the Khazars seems to have been based on trade, facilitated by a common language which mutated into Yiddish, and straddled a large area in northern Asia.

* More or less modern banking seems to have been started by Italians and Venetians, but because of the divide with northern Europe and Germanic tribes and the Reformation etc it seems to have been Jewish in northern Europe. I *guess* if there were traditional Jews in France, England etc they would have allied with Khazar Jews.

* In Spain, there's the complication of the Islamic invasions, the Reconquista, and Jews there too.

* Going back to the 'dark ages', I'm personally agnostic. For instance, it's *possible* that skilled traders could have claimed or pretended to be 'Jews' by adopting some fanciful mannerisms to impress people. A bit like actors putting on white coats in TV ads, pretending to be scientists.


Sorensen731---
Yes here, there may seem to be a difference with "old" Jews, anti-Zionist and "modern" Jews.

I do accept that the ground for modern Jews could be the East, where they split or some refuse to change into modern Jews and go to dominate the World (Europe).

But I still add that the Rothschild [sc. dynasty] could not have rise up so easily, neither the Jews just with money-lending, I believe their rabbis and kabbalah gave them the upper hand, call it psychology, manipulation, or just ancient knowledge. The druids moved to the Church very easily and continue in power, change one robe for another, the prophets in the desert with their sticks, sacrifices, and power to speak with the Gods... is the same, in Mesopotamia and in Celtic Druids.

It's truth it's a hard question, where did they came from, it they came, because they seem to be everywhere already, mostly, specially after the country's adoption of Christianity, which was very fast in Celtic-countries and late in Germanic-Nordic-Slavic ones.

Templars were in cahoots with the Jews, a banking empire, with laws of their own, the Jesuits too where above the law, their ships going unchecked by the Spanish Crown.

I get almost angry with the "blame it on the Russians or the Khazars"... No, I blame it on the British, until they get their shiny temple, London is and has been their headquarters for the last centuries.

Yes, the book is a bit complicated, it was the one I had most handy about the subject, search others about the same idea if you prefer. The best I have on this are in Spanish...
User avatar
rerevisionist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40
Top

Re: Revisionism: Khazar / Jewish History including DNA Evidence

Postby rerevisionist » 16 Oct 2011 22:31

Interesting remark ...
... Lenin was in the process of murdering the middle classes when he died. Trotsky was meant to succeed and deliver up Russia on a plate to the bankers. But when the Georgian Stalin gained power he could not be completely co-opted {not surprising as Georgians and the false Ashkenazi {false Jews as Churchill called them} were neighbours and the story of the Khazar warriors adopting Judaism in 740 A.D. is common knowledge there. ...

from britishnationalistblogspot, someone called 'anonymous' (some spelling and capitalisation changes). It hadn't occurred to me that geographical regions near what was the Khazar area would know about the conversion to Judaism, or believe it as a folk story. In fact, if it a conversion was undertaken for reasons of state, it would have been well-known over a wide area. In fact, maybe Koestler became aware of the idea much earlier in his life from people from these areas. Note also a 'Jewish homeland' of Birobidzhan was established, the size of Switzerland.



1976?: THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE
[2006 note: I'm rather unhappy with this book; Rise/ Conversion/ Decline/ Fall/ Exodus/ Where From?/ Cross-Currents/ Race and Myth. The Khazars became prominent in about the 7th century; or perhaps were simply noticed, since they were in the path of Islam trying to conquer northwards. For about 4 or 500 years they were important; then the 'golden hordes' of Genghis Khan absorbed or wiped them out.
There's material about what happened to them.
But Koestler gives no indication how much evidence survives; why did he select the bits he did? How did he find out about the documents? Where did the idea come from? - All this is omitted or perhaps mentioned en passant with little emphasis.
See my books downloads for more info including plain text version and some extracts of scholarly names.
Koestler of course has no idea, or says he has no idea, the 'holocaust' was a fake.]



- LETTER TO JONATHAN SACKS, CHIEF RABBI (Prob c. 2 Aug 1993):-
Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Mr Rae West
c/o Cambridge Alumni Magazine 58 Littleton Road
10 Trumpington Street ASHFORD
CAMBRIDGE Middx
CB2 1QA TW15 1QA
Tel: 0784-246428
Dear Jonathan Sacks,
Inquiry about Arthur Koestler's 'Thirteenth Tribe.'
Firstly, let me apologise for writing out of the blue like this. I'm prompted to write by your interesting article in CAM, 'The Cambridge Alumni Magazine', about 60s Cambridge and your subsequent activities: I'd like to ask your opinion on a matter which struck me as important since I became aware of it, namely Koestler's book attributing the origin of Eastern European Jews to a state conversion. I don't have a copy of the book at present, and I forget the century he ascribed this event to; 7th or 8th I imagine, since Islam was also involved. I wondered if anyone has answered Koestler, in the two decades or so that have elapsed since he published, and whether any conclusions were arrived at? His book's attractive combination of racy stories in multilingual style seemed convincing, but of course it's incredibly difficult to hunt out reviews of, and replies to, such books, since they tend to be scattered throughout magazines, journals, supplements and all the rest.
I'd be very grateful for any information you have on this subject.

Best wishes, Rae West.





<
From: mshalev (Mel)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,alt.archaeology
Subject: Re: the jewish khazars
Date: 29 May 1996 19:35:01 GMT
References:

In article <4nvadh$m9t@news.nyu.edu>, gans@scholar.chem.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans) says:
>
>John Ritson (john@jritson.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>[deletions]
>: Yes, as far as I recall from reading the book decades ago, the
>: *evidence* for the connection was that the Eastern European Jews had to
>: have come from somewhere, and Koestler could find no documentation of
>: any mass migration from the obvious starting point . Germany . and so
>: the obvious conclusion was that they *must* have been Khazar refugees.

In fact several waves of immigration from central Europe are known . the
largest perhaps during the persecutions that came with the bubonic plague.
The lack of signficant traces of Turkish in the vernacular of the Eastern
European Jews points to just how dubious Koestler's theory is. There seems
to be little doubt that Eastern European Jewry originated principally in
Central Europe and more remotely from migrations from Roman Italy.

The 'Mountain Jews', who come the Caucas mountains (close to where the
Khazar kingdom once stood) and who speak a Turkish tongue, may be a
remnant of the Khazars. It is also not altogether certain that the
majority of Khazars converted to Judaism, and that those that did, remained
Jews for the longer term.

Considering the speculative pseudo.sholarly nature of Koeslter's theory
one can only wonder if he had an ideological motivation in writing his
book "the 13th Tribe"...

M Shalev

----
From: kennedy@quark.phys.ufl.edu (Dallas Kennedy)
Subject: Re: the jewish khazars
Date: 26 May 1996 00:24:04 GMT
Organization: University of Florida
References: <4nno62$el6@netnews.upenn.edu> <4nofi6$igm@no.names.nerdc.ufl.edu> <4nok44$2rp@news.inforamp.net>

I wasn't sure if _Kuzari_ was named after the Khazars, but that is part
of the dialogue, no? I don't what the root KZR means in Hebrew.

......
From: sbavli@i.2000.com
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: the jewish khazars
Date: 27 May 1996 03:56:43 GMT
References: <4o88b4$f50@no.names.nerdc.ufl.edu>

> kennedy@quark.phys.ufl.edu (Dallas Kennedy) writes:
>
> I wasn't sure if _Kuzari_ was named after the Khazars, but that is part
> of the dialogue, no? I don't what the root KZR means in Hebrew.

KZR does not have any meaning in Hebrew. It is not a Hebrew root.
The Hebrew word Kuzari refers only to a member of the Khazar nation.

SB
.......
From: ayma@tip.nl
Subject: Re: the jewish khazars
Organization: The Internet Plaza
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 02:33:33 GMT

hagen@delta.hut.fi (fleur.de.lis) wrote:

>One book you might try is Ian Heath's "Armies of the Dark Ages 600.1066".
>One source described the Khazars as "unusually devious even as nomads who
>adopted Judaism as a political ploy to meddle in.between the Christian
>Byzantines and Muslim Arabs."

The latter is true. Books and articles on the Khazars:

Elmer Bendiner . "The rise and fall of paradise", Putnam's Sons, New
York, 1983
D.M. Dunlop . "The history of the jewish khazars", Princeton University Press 1954
Nicolas Soteri . " A forgotten jewish empire", in: History Today, april 1995

-----
From: netvision.net.il@TelAviv.netvision.net.il
Subject: Re: the jewish khazares
Date: Wed, 29 May 96 10:13:55 PDT

also the leading israeli writer a. b. yheshua supose to publish in the next months a historical novels about the age of the khazares. probebly,like all of his recent novels it will immediately translate to english.

> after much search i found several novels wich deal with the khazares, for all i know they are the only novels in the english language wich deal with this subject.

> "the wondrous tale of alroy" ( alternate titles " alroy" and " david alroy") by benjamin disraeli.
> disraeli was a 19th century prime minister of england. in the book he told the story of the rise and fall of a 12th century khazar jew wich claimed to be the messiah. this claimant conquared much moslem teritories till he was betrayed and killed. though the book is based on a historical incident it is very fantastic and romantic.

> "the lost kingdom, or the passing of the khazars" by samuel gordon. a historical romance about the destraction of the khazares by the russians.

> "the khazares dictionary" by miloard pavic. consider to be the greates and most internationaly famous literary work in the serbo.croatic language. this is an imaginary "dictionary" of the khazar culture and the people wich invenstigate it. the book actualy comprise 3 "dictionaries" of the jews, christians and moslems .each present the khazares from a completly view.point.actualy the khazars of pavich are almost utterly invented culture ( in the maner of tolkein middel earth) wich symbolize the mysterious and the unknow. very interensting is his discription of the disciplin of khazar studies ,wich tough have no relation to the real discipline, is quit convincing.

> a novel only margarinaly realated to the khazares but very interensting in his oun right is " eaters of the dead" by michael chrichton (author of jurassic park). the novel is presented as a recently descovered manuscript of the arab traveler ibn fadlan. ibn fadlan was a real person and is one of our main sources of information about the khazares and their world. he got out to his travels to the bulgarians with the purpose of creating with them alliance aginst the khazars wich were then the bulgarians overlords. chricton however ignor in his novel the khazares and narrates (in ibn fadlan words) an edventure with a viking group ,wich is uctualy a retele of the beuvolf strory ratinalizied by chricton as a meeting with a surviving tribe of neadertals.it is quite interensting to compare the descripition of ibn fadlan real voyege in kostler book about the khazares "the thirteenth tribe" with chricton fictional,but convincingly presented (including scholary appendix and bibeliography) novel. >>


==============================================================
AMAZON REVIEWS [copied 5 Feb 2009]

42 of 45 people found the following review helpful:
Still a must for anyone interested in Judaism, despite recent genetic research, November 7, 2006 By Karl Krokar . See all my reviews

This book is dated but is still a masterpiece also because the subject matter is (fortunately) presented in a popularised, non academic fashion. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in getting closer to the truth regarding the origin of the vast majority of 'Jews' in the world today. These issues are however politically sensitive and this inevitably results in controversy.

The commonly available theory of the origin of the Ashkenazis, or East.European Jews, is the Renanian Theory (see e.g. Wikipedia). Namely, the Ashkenazis would descend from refugees of Crusade. and Black.Death.time persecutions of 'authentic' Jews from western Germany who sought a new life in faraway Poland. However, this theory does not hold to antropomorphic considerations, considerations of numbers of refugees and size of ensuing communities in the East and, most importantly, to a lingustic analysis of the ashkenazi Yiddish language (which points rather to a Southeast.Germany, Slavic and Turkik origin of that idiom). The standard theory also does not explain most of the peculiar customs and surnames of the Ashkenazis and their historical and economical development in continuous conflict with the populace of the host countries.

Koestler, following an earlier proposal by Hugo von Kutschera (1910) . but also in accordance with Jewish Encyclopedia pre.1917 articles . rekindles the Khazar Theory of the ashkenazi origins in this book. Potential readers can follow the existent reviews to learn about the details, so it suffices to state that according to this theory the bulk of the Ashkenazis would be the descendants of a turkik tribe (the medieval Khazars) who at the end of the first millenium held an important (and little mentioned) empire in Southern Russia and converted en masse to (rabbinic) Judaism for political and commercial convenience. The empire was however ephimeral and further invasions, both from the early Russians and from newcomer turko.mongol tribes from Central Asia, swept the jewish Khazars away from history (some scholars say BECAUSE of their conversion to Judaism).

But did the new converts really disappear? Koestler proposes not, that these people in fact eventually turned into the Ashkenazis of Poland.Lithuania, Hungary, the Ukraine, Russia and even of Germany and Austria. Later, these 'Jews' moved to France, England, the USA, Israel, the world over. So, are the great majority of Jews really akin to the people of the Bible? Opponents of the Khazar Theory claim the jewish Khazars disappeared from history due to the onslaught of kievian Rus' and of tribes from the East: Pechenegs, Kumans (Kipchaks) and Mongols. Strange, because cartographers of Venice Polo Family's travels to Central Asia report a 'Gazaria' and a 'Cumania' in existence around 1250 after the mongol invasions. The Pope's envoy to the mongol court, Giovanni da Piano Carpini, reported encountering a jewish tribe among the constellation of peoples associated with the Mongols. Genoese traders knew the Crimea peninsula with the name 'Gaziria' well into the 1350s. Indeed, the last jewish Khazars left the Crimea (Krym in Russian) as Karaim during imperial russian control of the region. As others have pointed out, the geographic contours of the jewish Pale of Settelments under russian imperial rule overlap significantly the contours of the reduced khazarian province after the Mongols (Gazaria). So what is more natural than these jewish Gaziri turning into the Ashkenazis? That is the shocking thesis of the vonKutschera.Koestler theory.

Indeed, why only the jewish Khazars ought to have disappeared? All of their imperial confederate peoples still live on: the Magyars turned into the Hungarians (taking with them the judaic Kabars); the Bulghars turned into the (danubian) Bulgarians and the Volga Bulghars (now Bashkiri, Chuvashi, ...); the Kumans turned into Kipchaki in the East and then Cumani (Kun) in the West (playing a role in the formation of modern Romania and Hungary). Take the Alans (also allied to the Khazars): have they also disappeared? They turned into the Alamanni (a mixture of Alans and germanic southwestern tribes), into the modern Catalans (Goth.Alans) and survive the ancient 'As' people (as known to the Persians) in loco as modern Ossetians. Likewise, the Khazars did not disappear.

Koestler explains: they were divided into Ak.Khazars (more sedentary casts) and Kara.Khazars (more nomadic ones, warrior casts). The first converted and eventually turned into the Ashkenazis, the second group remained nomadic.

Together with other nomadic groups from the Kipchaks and the Bulghars they eventually formed those former mercenaries of the steppes called Kazakhi in Russian: the Cossacks! These accepted slavic fugitives from medieval serfdom in their midst and thus turned orthodox christian, becoming the scourge of the Ashkenazis many times over and . peculiarly . staunch supporters of the Tzars.

The steppes of Eurasia are the strangest place on Earth and reserve us peculiar surprises, so why not jewish Turks? As the reader will learn, some of the Kipchak and some of the Seljuk Turks also converted to Judaism in former times, forming a base for Jews in Romania and in modern Turkey.

More recent objections to the Khazar Theory come from modern genetic research, as some reviewers have rebuked. They jump to rushed conclusions. As some experts have remarked, sample populations in these studies were small and not randomly selected, and thus the results may not be statistically significant.

We may never know what percentages of 'semitic blood' and of 'turanic blood' the Ashkenazis do carry, and the question is ill.founded since we shall never be able to genetically test vastly mixed populations that moved their settlement regions sometimes many times over. Indeed one should test not only Ashkenazis, Sephardis and their host populations, but also true accepted descendants of the Khazar, Kuman and Seljuk Turks. Until this is done, these genetic studies are meaningless even when their statistical basis is improved. Not surprisingly the conclusions of these studies are simplistic and in clear contradiction with each other: first the 'few founding middle.eastern fathers' scenario, then a 'communities formed by unions between Jewish men and local women' scenario, more recently the 4.women (!) scenario: 'the Ashkenazi population as descended matrilineally from just four women, likely from a Hebrew/Levantine mtDNA pool originating in the Near East in the first and second centuries CE'. It's hard to believe such hasty conclusions drawn from studies on statistically restricted (and ethnically selected) population samples. Has the genetic approach been tested on accepted, uncontroversial situations? The Khazar Theory is important and very well described in Koestler's book. It's important not only in the context of Israel's founding myths (which however Koestler duly considers), but as a unique key to understanding Eastern Europe's (and the world's) medieval and modern history. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




67 of 75 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting theory of the origin of East European Jews, November 26, 1997
By A Customer
It is curious that in Israel, where I am from, the Khazar's history is only briefly mentioned in school. We did study "letters to the Khazar" by Jehuda Halevi, but more as a literary piece that in context with the Khazars. That is the reason that the book was so interesting for me: It presents a theory which is quite unacceptable to the religious population in Israel. (and outside as well). Are all the eastern european Jews in essence converts? It makes the whole question, so much dealt with in Israel, of "who is a Jew" rather ironical. Are the religious Jews the "real" Jews? And how can they be so much against conversions to judaism, if they themselves are converts? Interesting! Of course, the theory the book presents that ALL the east european Jews are descendants of the Khazars is only a theory, but Koestler surely presents some interesting arguments! Fascinating reading! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




37 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
Another angle on this book, October 18, 2002 By R Bell (Dun Eideann/Edinburgh Scotland) . See all my reviews

Others have written on the whole argument of whether today's Ashkenazi are Khazars or not. However, leaving that aside, this is a must for anyone interested in general Jewish history and the Black Sea region esp. southern Russia and the Ukraine. Books on the Khazars are hard to come by, and this is fairly readable.
(There is also an unusual novel on these folk "The Dictionary of the Khazars" . have a look at that on Amazon and see what you think). Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




31 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
FASCINATING AND LITTLE-KNOWN HISTORY, February 4, 2007 By Theresa Welsh "The Seeker" (Ferndale, Michigan, USA) . See all my reviews


Arthur Koestler tackled an obscure but potentially explosive topic in this little book about the Khazars, a people who lived in the area between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea in the decades before 1000 AD. Their story make fascinating reading, as the author delves into the limited number of sources that mention them. They wielded great influence in the world of their time, which . as in the present . included conflict between different religious groups. There were Muslims, Jews and Christians who lived in the vicinity and the Khazars were tolerant of all. But the Khazar leaders, who originally had a traditional religion from their nomadic roots, were interested in the three major religions. Folklore has it that they called together the wise men of each religion and asked about its beliefs and practices. When they found that both the Muslims and Christians honored the Jewish God and that the Jewish religion was the oldest, they decided to adopt Judaism. The Khazars became Jews.

It is the contention of this book that these Khazar Jews are the ancestors of the Jews of Eastern Europe who were persecuted by Hitler and who eventually founded the modern state of Israel. These Ashkenazi Jews, according to this theory, are not a Semitic people, as are the Sephardic Jews. They do not descend from "God's chosen people," but rather from the nomadic tribes of the Caucasus. The Khazar empire disappeared in the years following the first millennium, wiped out by the Mongol tribes, who formed an alliance with Byzantium. The Khazars and their control of trade routes became irrelevant after that and many migrated to what is now Poland, Hungary and Germany and founded "shetls" . small villages, where they continued to practice the Jewish religion and contributed to the culture of Eastern Europe.

You can argue whether these Khazar Jews were "true Jews" but there clearly were Jews from the Diaspora living in the Khazar territory at the time of their conversion, and it seems clear that the Khazar Jews were a mixture. Koestler discusses the high rate of intermarriage between Jews and non.Jews throughout all historic periods. Oddly enough, intermarriage slowed only when Jews were forced to live in ghettoes, with limited contact with non.Jews. There were also many births resulting from rape of Jewish women during the years of brutal pogroms. So all Jews are of mixed origins.

It appears to me that Koestler did not write this meticulously researched book to support anti.Jewish or anti.Israel sentiment. He was simply interested in the origin of the Jewish people and felt that the history of the Khazars was little.known and had possibly been suppressed. His later chapters deal with the perception of ethnicity ("I can always tell a Jew when I see one."). He says culture, not genes, produces characteristics of a people. Some people claim they can always tell an American, even though Americans descend from a melting pot. His contention is that ethnicity is largely nonsense and it is the language and culture and shared values that make "a people." He makes the point that Israelis are a people, since they now share a country, a language and a culture. Although some Israelis may believe that "God gave this land to me," that is not what gives Israel the right to exist. The country was legally constituted by the united Nations and is today a country of people who mainly identify themselves as Jewish. Does it really matter who their ancestors were? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (2)




15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
A thought provoking book, October 29, 2007 By Aeneas . See all my reviews

Unlike other reviewers I found this to be a very interesting book. Despite being labeled anti.semitic by some reviewers Arthur Koestler was himself of Ashkenazi Jewish descent and proud of it. His book quotes many sources and his thesis should not be dismissed out of hand. In itself it is of historical interest to learn of the Khazar empire that ruled for several hundred years and who were a power equal to the Byzantine empire and one that stopped the Muslim onslaught against Byzantium. I can strongly encourage others to read this book and make up their own mind.

Another fascinating read regarding history which deals more with the Khazars, but also historical figures such as Sargon the Great, who established the first semitic dynasty in Mesopotamia, is a book by Laura Knight.Jadczyk called "The secret history of the world". Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




156 of 193 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting thesis, highly popularized though!, December 12, 1999 By Stuart W. Mirsky "swm" (New York, USA) . See all my reviews

Koestler wrote an intriguing, popularized account, in this book, of the theory that many of today's Jews (mostly those of Eastern European descent) are of non.Semitic origin. Essentially the book recounts the tale of the Khazars, a middle Asian Turkic tribe, or tribal group, which settled in the southern steppes of what is today's Russia, during the seventh and eighth centuries, and adopted Judaism (in reaction to the conflicting demands of nearby 'great powers' espousing Christianity and Islam).

In the process of telling this tale, Koestler concludes that the conversion of the Khazars, which seems to be historically documented, explains the significant presence of Jews in Eastern Europe at the end of the Middle Ages (since extant records do not show them arriving from the Mediterranean world, or even western Europe, in any great numbers in ancient or later times). This theory is a quite rational one though it poses problems for Orthodox Jewry since the premise of the faith depends so much (though not exclusively) on the historical link to Abraham, a Semite. Complicating the matter is the suspicion that the Khazar conversion may not have been a 'kosher' one. Orthodox Jews have not, accordingly, been quick to embrace the Khazar thesis and others tend to shy away from it for this and other reasons. However, the facts do seem to indicate that modern Jews are a mixture of many different genetic influences (just look at the physical evidence).

But if the Khazars did contribute substantially to the Jewish gene pool, they didn't do so exclusively as modern scientific research indicates that there are clear genetic markers which connect modern Jews (Orthodox and otherwise) to a single source which spans both the Eastern European and Sephardic Jewish heritages, suggesting that the Khazar influence was limited at best. But even if this research did not exist, so what? The record also suggests that there were Semitic Jews (from Constantinople and Persia) living among the Khazars before and after the conversion who certainly would have intermingled with a "Jewish" Khazar population in whose midst they lived. And no one knows what method the conversion may have taken in any case, whether rabbincally sanctioned at the outset or only after the fact, or not at all. Just as people from all pagan backgrounds quite legitimately enrolled in the Christian and Muslim folds from ancient times going forward, so there is no reason to deny the Judaism of Jews whose ancestors may have been non.Semites but who embraced the religion which traces its roots back to Abraham and Moses.

Now there are those who seize on the existence of the Khazars to deny modern Jews their claim to Jewishness. This is absurd, even if there is a substantial genetic link with a non.Semitic Turkic people in the Jewish past. Still others see the Khazars as a convenient hook on which to hang negative aspersions they wish to cast on modern Jews, suggesting that Jews are descended from a cruel and barbaric middle Asian horde, not fit to stand with the great civilizations and cultures of history. Jews, in this view, are not the ancient people of the covenant we find in the bible but rather historical imposters. But this is just as absurd as using the Khazar connection to deny modern Jews their link to their heritage. Like the Khazars, other European groups came from middle Asia at different historical times and intermixed with many different groups. If some adopted Christianity while others chose Judaism, there is yet no reason to suggest that the one group was better than the other. In fact the historical record shows that, while the Khazars were nomadic tribesmen in Byzantine times, they were no worse than the more 'civilized' Christian peoples of the Byzantine Empire in terms of their dealings with friends and enemies (and possibly they were better as they were a good deal more tolerant and less intrusive on their subjects' lives). Yes, the Khazar empire blew away without leaving a trace .. unless one seeks and finds that trace in the European mores and culture of the Jews coming out of that region (big fur hats and long coats, for instance, may have been a carry.over from the nomadic Khazar horsemen). However, the record, such as it is, also suggests that the Khazars were unusually enlightened 'conquerors' who treated their subject peoples with great mildness. In fact, this very mildness may have been the source of their downfall since they did not ruthlessly suppress their enemies or enforce any sort of cultural hegemony which might have created a unified state capable of withstanding the Russians who eventually overran them. Or the Pecheneg horsemen who were much more brutal and benighted. Or the Mongols, who came after, about whom little more need be said.

As to Koestler's book, it does present a very simplified version of all this, largely derived from the the work of the scholar, D. M. Dunlop of Columbia University who wrote a much better one (THE HISTORY OF THE JEWISH KHAZARS) some years before. Most of Koestler's information seems to have come from Dunlop's book though, in many cases, he over.simplified or simply got his facts wrong. So, if you're interested in the Khazar thesis I'd suggest you check out Dunlop's book first, although Koestler's is an easier read and adds to the case Koestler's own, not unreasonable, speculation about the relationship of the Khazars to modern Jewry (Dunlop doesn't go there). But as an easy introduction to this particular line of thinking, Koestler's book is alright. Just beware the oversimplifications and errors.

SWM Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)




67 of 83 people found the following review helpful:
Hold the Strudel and Pass the Baklava, December 23, 2004 By Robert S. Newman "Bob Newman" (Marblehead, Massachusetts USA) . See all my reviews

Back in the 1970s, Arthur Koestler, author of "Darkness at Noon", wrote this amazingly innovative book. I read it in Rarotonga in 1980...a suitably exotic place to read a serious book on a rather exotic topic. Recently I returned to it, though I long ago disagreed with the author's main conclusions.

In the first 121 pages, Koestler describes the history of a long.vanished, Turkic people called the Khazars, whose ruler, faced with pressure from both Muslim and Christian nations around them, took the radical step of converting to Judaism. As this is one of the very few instances (if not the single one) in history of such a royal move, the Khazars have attracted scholarly attention ever since, particularly, but not only, from Jews. Indeed, you can log on to a Khazar Studies website today. For another, less factual view of this interesting tribe, you can read Milorad Pavic's poetic, absurdist novel "Dictionary of the Khazars". In any case, Koestler's history makes fascinating reading, containing accounts by ancient Arab travellers, stories of Jewish crusaders in northern Iraq, and descriptions of the links to Vikings, Byzantium, Islam, and Magyars. I have no professional knowledge as to how accurate it all is, but if I were awarding stars for good history writing, I'd give five here.

However, THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE is not just a history. In the remainder of the book, Koestler constructs an argument for the Eastern European Jews' being the descendants of these Khazars. He asks where the Khazars all disappeared to. He says population statistics from the period 1300.1500 bear evidence that there could not have been so many Jews to be killed by the brutal Bogdan Khmielnitsky in the great massacres of 1648.49 in the Ukraine unless the Khazars had become the Polish.Ukrainian Jews by then. He deals in some dubious racial theorizing, throws in a few arguments based on place names, and concludes that the "original stock" of the Jews was predominantly Turkish. This theorizing turned me off back in 1980 and it still does. As an anthropologist, I have to ask: in all cases known in history, when a people converts en masse to another religion, a large body of pre.existing language and culture always remains. Why not with the supposed Khazar.Jews ? Is there an element of Turkish in Yiddish ? No. Are there any kinds of nomadic or Turkish cultural behaviors among the Eastern European Jews ? The answer is no. This would be just about impossible if Koestler's theory were correct. Secondly, to rely on statistics gleaned from medieval records is extremely dubioius especially when the Jews were hardly deemed members of European society and may never have been counted. Numbers of people killed or born were routinely exaggerated or ignored all over Europe. I rejected Koestler's theory 24 years ago. Since then, DNA research, unknown at the time, has shown that most Eastern European Jews have a mixed Semitic and European heritage. Despite the passage of many centuries, genetically the closest people to them are still the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians. Koestler's theory remains only an interesting thought. It is worth reading for the historical part and to see how convincing incorrect theories can still be.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




21 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
An interesting hypothesis, October 20, 2004 By Jill Malter (jillmalter@aol.com) . See all my reviews

Arthur Koestler had a long and illustrious writing career. Many of us were captivated by "Darkness at Noon," "Thieves in the Night," Promise and Fulfilment," "The Sleepwalkers," "The Trail of the Dinosaur," and many other great works. This book, from 1976, is about the Khazars, a people of Turkish stock that lived to the northeast of the Black Sea and converted to Judaism in the eighth century AD.

The obvious question, which had been asked by many people prior to Koestler, is to what extent the Khazars are the ancestors of the Ashkenazic Jews. Koestler suspected it is to a great extent.

I think there is substantial evidence that many Khazars did in fact convert to Judaism. And there is also some evidence that the initial number of Jews who wound up in the major Jewish population centers of Eastern Europe via the Middle East and Germany was rather small. That suggested to Koestler that the presumably more numerous Khazars dominated the Jewish population in Eastern Europe 1000 years ago and that they are the principal ancestors of today's Ashkenazic Jews. However, it seems that recent scholarship has not given much support to this guess. On the contrary, genetic evidence has strongly indicated that the small number of Jews coming from Germany may well have been by far the main ancestors of today's Ashkenazim.

As Koestler feared, his hypothesis has been quoted by those trying to find an excuse to deny present.day Israelis their rights to their homes. That is why Koestler explains that whether the genes of Israel's people are of Khazar, Spanish, Roman, or Semitic origin is irrelevant. It "cannot affect Israel's right to exist . nor the moral obligation of any civilized person, Gentile or Jew . to defend that right."

In any case, I found the book interesting. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (3)




27 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
shakes up accepted views of jewish ancestry, May 23, 1999 By wbutler8@compuserve.com (San Juan,Puerto Rico) . See all my reviews

Like Emmanuel Velikovsky (on different fascinating subjects), Koestler goes where conventional thinkers fear to tread.My personal criteria for a book or theory that breaks new ground is to ask myself what was the author's motivation. If I decide the author approaches the subject with an open mind,I am highly inclined toward their view. But then I am predisposed to the contrarian view. Without innovators willing to take risks, civilization would still be in the Dark Ages. The Thirteenth Tribe is tall on research, solid on its historical base regarding the Khazar conversion to Judaism and credible in its conclusion theory of the Khazar migration. Koestler, being a Jew, knew the hornet's nest he would stir up with his theory and proceeded with his version of the truth of the matter. I can think of no better argument that he believed very strongly in the veracity of his conclusions than that he was willing to take the vehement criticism from his own people as a cost of getting his theory into the public domain. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




25 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
An Outstanding Primer, July 29, 2004 By Scott gru.Bell (Fort Mill, SC, USA) . See all my reviews

Koestler's book is an outstanding primer to the history of Eastern Europe and Russia during the Middle Ages. For this reason alone, it is worth reading with diligence.

The premise of the book centers around yet another mass conversion to Judiasm, something similiar to that which took place in the Middle East during the 200 BCE to 100 CE period, when Judiasm more than doubled due to conversions.

The conclusion, drawn by the author, is that the vast majority of Jews today are descendants of the conversion in Khazaria during the eighth century CE. This implies that today's Jews, particularly in the USA and Israel, have no Abrahamic promise to the Holy Land. Such an implication will naturally be resisted and condemned by American and Israeli Jews. This, in turn, sparks negative book reviews concerning this text.

I do not know how factual The Thirteenth Tribe is, for I am but a layman on this topic. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the book is a must read for anyone interested in American or Israeli.Palestinian politics. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment

18 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
The Thirteenth Tribe, January 9, 2007 By Enver Khorasanee . See all my reviews

Since this book was written and researched by none other than the head of the History Department of the Univercity of Tel Aviv it is a extremely revealing and therefore a must read for seekers of truth. Enver Khorasanee Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




24 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
History of the Khazar Empire, May 30, 2003
By A Customer
Intellectually challenging study of the Khazar Empire, its conversion to Judaism, and its (mostly warlike) interactions and intermarriages with the Rus, Magyar, and Bulgar tribes to the North and West, and with the Muslims and Byzantines to the South. Original Muslim sources are quoted when the empire was at its height, from the 9th.11th Century. The Empire was known as far away as Spain. After this time, it was defeated by the Rus Empire centered in Kiev, descendents of the Vikings, and the rest of the book is devoted to possible dispersion theories, suggesting that most of the Khazars dispersed to the newly forming cities of Eastern Europe. Koestler gives detailed evidence for this, part of which is that the Jews have always been much more populous in Eastern Europe than they ever were in Western Europe. The last part of the book discusses genetic variation which was a consequence of the Jewish concentration in the ghettos of Eastern European cities. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




31 of 39 people found the following review helpful:
An Explosive Book, January 30, 2006 By A Reader . See all my reviews

This is a book on a topic that is still very touchy for modern day liberal westerners, keeping in view their guilt for centuries of Jew.baiting which culminated in what Hitler did. But this book would be very interesting as a study in genealogy alone, if nothing else. Two facts make this book unimpeachable: One, that Koestler was himself a proud Jew of Khazarian descent, and so would never demean his own roots; and two, his impeccable literary credentials in the British literary establishment also preclude anything fishy. Added to this, one may say, was his and his wife's brutal and still unexplained murder in their apartment in 1983. Obviously, there were "interests" which were loath at Mr.Koestler's impeccable expose of the truth about them, and they wanted to get rid of him. But their foul act in itself reinforced the validity of what they were desparately trying to put a stop to.
This book details for the beginner in lucid yet scholarly prose the murky and deliberately overlooked, yet crucially important history of a medieval Turkic Asiatic Jewish kingdom called Khazaria lying between Byzantium (modern Turkey) and the Capian Sea (which is still referred to in Persian as "Bahr.i.Khazar" or "the Khazar Sea"). and spanning much of southern Russia. The author establishes that this crafty Turkic race converted to Judaism out of political expediency in order to protect its interests from Christianity and Islam which were then "on the rampage" in the area. Their empire existed for a few hundred years, before being finally ended by the hordes of Genghis Khan (to whose Mongols the Khazars were also distantly related through the Huns, another North Asian Turkic tribe). Koestler then goes on to establish that after its dispersal in the Dark Ages, the Khazar population started migrating to the traditional modern day centres of European Jewry: various Ukrainian and Belorussian cities, Poland and Germany . where their descendants today make up the Ashkenazi population of Jews, which is the branch which constitutes the bulk of modern Jewry (85 to 90%). Hence, it can be deduced that Koestler's investigation proved that the bulk of modern day European Jews (apart from the Sephardic and Arabian Jews) are actually "Asiatics" and not the descendants of the Children of Israel as they would have the world believe. That in turn, invalidates their claim to their forced occupation of Palestinian territory as Israel... This is an explosive conclusion, as I said earlier, and one can see why the man had to pay for it with his life and that of his wife's... In addition, he says that the present day Palestinian Arabs are largely the actual genetic desendants of the original Israelites. The reader is left to draw his own conclusions from all this evidence. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




24 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
Good job Mr. Koestler, October 18, 2005 By John McKinney "John" (Texas) . See all my reviews

The only problem I had with the book is that it was sort of drawn out and wordy, but the content I think important. Ashkenazim (90% of modern Jews) was a son of Gomer and Gomer a son of Japheth, son of Noah. Shem was the son of Noah where the term semite (shemite) is derived. Thus modern Jews in mass are not Semites. But as the other reviewers have agreed, the world nation of the Jews are a mixture of many peoples, including the Khazars, which inturn became a mixed people. What I find revalent is that in Deut. 23:2 of the Bible, it states that a bastard cannot enter into the Kingdom of the Lord for 10 generations. The word bastard translates into the Hebrew as mamzer. Mamzer means mongrel, mixed. Thus Koesler's work is extremely significant. The Jews living in the land of Palentine today, by God's declaration, are legally not the children of the promise, they are still mixed to this day. It is easy to see why Koestler was murdered shortly after the release of this book. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




21 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting possibility but very short on hard evidence., September 8, 2004 By Mike Walsh (Delmar, NY) . See all my reviews

I read the NY Times review of this book when I was too young to buy it and have only now caught up. It posits that the leaders of the long.lost Turkic empire of Khazaria chose Judaism as a third way to maintain their independence from both Christian Byzantium and the Muslim east, which hemmed them in from each side, and that the Turkic Khazar peoples, not actual middle easterners, are the ancestoral population of the modern Ashkenazy Jewish communitites in the West.

Apparently the thesis has been bandied about a great deal since by people unsympathic to the Jews, but it seems clear that Koestler himself meant the book purely as a scholarly inquiry into the history of his own people.

I used to wonder why the study of history seemed to focus so narrowly on certains cultures at certain times, and now ascribe that tendency mostly to the simple scarcity of written or other hard evidence for so much of the world's past. There are plenty of sources for one more book about the ancient Greeks or Romans, but trying reading a book about the Celts, whoever they may or may not have been, and you feel stranded in fog.

That principal holds true in spades for "The Thirteen Tribe" but I am not inclined to blame the author. There is simply nothing left of the Khazars but a handful of second.hand references, so while Koestler trots out some interesting possibilties here, his central thesis is never firmly established.

More believable are the sections of the book which detail how Jewish communities around the world are genetically closer to their host populations than to each other, thus strongly refuting the notion that the Jews constitute a distinct "race". Some may find that unsettling, but it squares nicely with modern Jewish struggles against racism of various sorts.

By all means read the book if you can; it presents an interesting if sketchy history of a part of the world we never hear about and will fill a few gaps in your knowledge of the ancient world, and Koestler does write well.

But as for the central premise, that modern Ashkenazy communities are descended from the Khazars, take it more as a possibility than as an established truth. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
Genetic Studies Prove Koestler Correct: True Hebrews/Palestinians Are The SAME race, February 16, 2008 By Photobug . See all my reviews

Recent genetic studies have shown Koestler was correct. Genetic studies are continuing to prove conclusively that the Ashkenazi (common European/Western Jew) have no genetic connection with the semitic peoples of the middle east. In fact, the middle eastern Hebrews and the Palestinians are the SAME genetic race .. which is NOT related to the Ashkenazi Jews, who never occupied the middle east. Genetic studies also are proving that Ashkenazi Jews (Khazars) are not a semitic race.

Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/25/medicalscience.genetics
Excerpts:
"In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the
idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in
the region.(middle east) In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be
inherited."

"Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene
pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically
separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is
therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic
differences', they conclude." Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
Book was ok., June 29, 2006 By Jabulani (Kansas City, Missouri United States) . See all my reviews

Not bad information. Some people are always afraid to face the facts. Half the truth has not been told about this issue. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




15 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
History of the Khazar Empire, May 30, 2003 By Drew S. Spears (Springtown, Pa. United States) . See all my reviews

Intellectually challenging study of the Khazar Empire, its conversion to Judaism, and its (mostly warlike) interactions and intermarriages with the Rus, Magyar, and Bulgar tribes to the North and West, and with the Muslims and Byzantines to the South. Original Muslim sources are quoted when the empire was at its height, from the 9th.11th Century. After this time, it was defeated by the Rus Empire centered in Kiev and the rest of the book is devoted to possible dispersion theories, suggesting that most of the Khazars dispersed to the newly forming cities of Eastern Europe. Koestler gives detailed evidence for this, part of which is that the Jews were much more populous in Eastern Europe than they ever were in Western Europe. The last part of the book discusses genetic variation which was a consequence of the Jewish concentration in the ghettos of Eastern Europe. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




25 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
Amazing book!, October 17, 2005 By Charlie Atan (Sane People's Hospital) . See all my reviews

The most convincing part of this book is that you can't find it in any mainstream bookstores! I wonder why not? Why are they keeping it out of the public eye? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
An enlightening account of a forgotten people, despite its poor central thesis, April 25, 2008 By Scott George Mccombe (UK) . See all my reviews

Arthur Koestler has been subject to much vilification since the publication of `The Thirteenth Tribe', which sets forward the thesis that the majority of Jews today are not of Semitic origin, but should be traced back to the forgotten Khazar Empire. I think that much of this is justified regarding Koestler's racial conclusions, but not on the bulk of his chronology of the Khzaria.

The central argument of `The Thirteenth Tribe' is that the bulk of modern Jewry can be traced back to the seemingly unheard of Khazar Empire, which flourished during the 8th century, before gradually disintegrating in the 10th century. Koestler details the rise of this nomadic nation, and the eventual difficulties produced from being settled between the Christian Byzantine Empire on the West, and the Islamic powers to the East. Refusing to be dominated by either the Roman Emperor or the Caliph of Baghdad, as well as motivations by an onslaught of Jewish refugees, Koestler details the unusual decision taken by the Kazhar nobility to convert to Judaism. The eventual defeat of this power is chronicled, as is the dispersal of the Khazar Jews throughout the world.

The rise of the Khazars is certainly well documented, as is the conversion of the upper.classes to Judaism. Less documented by Koestler is the evidence for the lower classes following this example, or the substance supporting the conversion of the nobility having any real significance on the genetics of Ashkenazi Jews. Considering Jewish Koestler was an atheist, and taking note of his stated desire to seperate modern Jewry from both the 'Chosen People' and 'Christ.Killer' label, it seems apparent that he was less than objective in formulating his theory; something that is seen clearly in the chapters attempting to describe the racial attributes of Jews.

However, `The Thirteenth Tribe' is certainly a provoking read, which should interest anyone curious in Early Middle Age political manouving.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment



19 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
Regardless Of All The Arguments..., December 5, 2005 By Caesar M. Warrington (Lansdowne, PA United States) . See all my reviews


Koestler researches and documents the history and culture of an obscure but quite fascinating Turkic tribe. Arguing over who are "true" Jews is not only irrelevent but silly and shows an ignorance of the history and religion of the Hebrew peoples.
Hebrews and Jews were a heterogeneous lot long before the Khazars arrived on the historical scene and adopted Judaism as their religion. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




12 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
Ignorance Survives, January 6, 2007 By B. Tupper (Ramona, CA United States) . See all my reviews

I have little problem with the main outlines of Koestler's thesis..however much I might quibble with some of the details. I am comfortable with the idea that the gene pool of modern Ashkenazy Jewry results largely from a melding of Jews from Western Europe (refugees from the Middle East) and Khazars who converted to Judaism, of whatever variety. Modern DNA studies propose that the Ashkenazy genetic material is about 40% of Middle East origin. To the extent that such genetic research is accurate, that leaves about 60% to be filled by Khazar, Germanic and Slavic inheritance. People do intermarry. The Jewish people have always absorbed from the neighboring population. Even Moses had a non.Jewish wife.

My purpose in this review is to point out the absurdity of the review posted last September by [Space Intelligences "Space Intelligences"]. Not enough that he apparently beliees in space aliens, but he writes that Iranians are Semites. Any high school student who ever looked into a decent encyclopedia should know better. The Persians, and many of their neighbors, are NOT Semites. They are Indo.Europeans.

Such glaring violation of established fact should indicate the value of the whole. As always, the discriminating reader must beware. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




35 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
The Khazars and Judaic proselytism!, January 20, 2000 By O. B. Makhubela (South Africa) . See all my reviews

Indeed, this is a 5 star book: well researched, unbias, logical and convicing reasons and arguments

The boook deals with the conversion of the Khazars (ancient Turks) to Judaism, their (Khazars) history, their power, their reason of conversion to Judaism, and many more!

This Khazars, as Koestler argues and is supported by independent historians, formed the bulk of Eastern Europe Jewry and the majority of the world jewry (to this day).

Koestler also includes an excellent analysis of the modern Jews: the "hooked" nose, blood resemblance of various Jews, and many more interesting features.

It is very clear that at the end the author does adopt a hostile attitude towards the Diaspora Jews . if you follow his/her argument, you can also raise the question: What if the Jesws in Palestine are also to a significant extent a Diaspora? Get the book, even if it does not answer the BIG question: who then is the true genuine Semetic Jew? Also, Koestler calls the Falasha of Ethiopia, "the Falasha of Abyssinia". This is the MOST correct designation as used by Koestler, viz. Abyssinia! Such little things make a difference! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Koestler to the rescue, July 30, 2008 By David H. Muse "Tigermuse" (Salt Lake City, Utah) . See all my reviews

Koestler, and other Khazars, who have the courage to come forward and expose the fraud perpetuated by our corrupt education system, main stream media and bogus religious institutions, deserve a special place in whatever the here after has to offer. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




10 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
A thought.provoking essay on the nature of Jewishness, April 21, 1998
By A Customer
I am not a good enough historian to know whether the author's main thesis . that the Khazars converted to Judaism . is credible. What I thought more interesting was his comment that there might be no such thing as a Jewish "race" in any usual sense in which the word is used. He notes the awful irony of that in relation to the holocaust. This is definitely not an anti.semitic book, just one that takes an unconventional view . a trademark of Koestler's writing. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




Khazar, August 7, 2006 By Shaneece E. Norris . See all my reviews

The book delivered the information I was looking for. There were times that I got lost trying to follow the nomadic patterns of the tribe. Overall, the book is a good read, and I recommend it to others. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




45 of 70 people found the following review helpful:
The truth about history's greatest & most enduring deception, July 20, 2002 By Charles "cyconsulting" (Miami, Florida United States) . See all my reviews

I had read this important book years ago and now have found it again. It sets right the story of a people who have long used a false identity that has served them well, a fact that should have become obvious because of their lack of Semitic attributes. The blue eyes & red hair often found in so.called modern "Jews" is a dead giveaway of this.
Koestler documents and analyzes how the movement of Jews into Europe never reached farther east than the western edge of Germany and how these few (according to "Jewish" census sources)
left the area due to the pressures and violence related to the Plague epidemics when many were killed. When masses of "Jews"
from Poland, Lithuania, Russia and Prussia moved into Eastern Germany after the twelfth century, the amounts were prodigious
. not the few stragglers that might have been found had they remained in Germany and moved East after the Bubonic Plagues.
The so.called Jewish Pale actually comprised much of the territory that had been the domain of the Khazars since late in the fifth century AD, basically the same people in the same area.
One should remember that the conversion to Judaism was political and not religious, so that most of the converted Khazars remained
pagan or atheistic. Centuries later, Irving Kristol in his book Neo.Conservatism stated that "the Jewish people discovered in the XVIII century that there was no god." As B'Nai B'Rith documentaries shown on PBS attest, modern "Judaism" is more than anything else a way of life . except for the minority among the Ashkenazi (Khazars) who had become Orthodox "Jews" . whose religion is the basis for their lives.
The Koestler comment that the modern "Jews" are more related to
Attila than to Solomon and David is of course true. A team of
archaeologists sent by the state of Israel to verify Koestler's claims, found about the same facts that the writer had.
It is a pity that the Bolsheviks in Russia, themselves for the most part . the overwhelming part . Khazar "Jews", found it convenient to flood the existing Khazar fortress of Sarkel, perhaps to eradicate any possibility of it being found where their own roots lied.
NOTE: In the fifth century AD, Leo III, the Isaurian, emperor
of Byzantium had the Jews remaining around the Mediterranean after the Roman destruction of Israel/Judea in AD70 and after the Bar Kohba uprising, c.AD135, picked up and sent to Khazaria, but these numbers were a tiny drop into the one million or more
Khazars and their allies . which had been the Pecheneg, the Maggyar, the Alani, the Huns, Turks, and others . all of them scattered over an area larger than the United States. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




26 of 41 people found the following review helpful:
Good, but be skeptical, March 21, 2001 By "epeysakh" (New York, NY United States) . See all my reviews

Although a good book, take this work with a grain of salt. Koestler comes to many conclusions that are debatable and thinly founded. "The Thirteenth Tribe" is better for proposing ideas and possibilities than for defining truths. If you are interested in the Khazars, I would recommend Kevin Alan Brook's "The Jews of Khazaria" .. which supports some of Koestler's conclusions, but refutes others.

I agree with Edgar that Ashkenazi Judaism has nothing in common with Caucasian customs and very much in direct contradiction. However, I do not recall Koestler ever stating that the Khazars ever had caucasian customs. Although Caucasians and Khazars definitely mixed (to what extent, who can know?), Caucasian peoples lived in and around the Caucasus mountains long before the Khazars.

Nevertheless, it leads to an important question about the presence of Judaism in the Caucasus and around the Black Sea long before the Khazars. Koestler does a poor job of discussing these peoples, their background, where they came from and their customs .. while he quickly comes to a conclusion that most Jews today are descended from the Khazars, a conclusion which is at best hypothetical.

Read "The Thirteenth Tribe", you'll probably enjoy it, then continue to read Kevin Alan Brook's "The Jews of Khazaria," and check as many of the sources of both works as possible.

More information and more study on this subject will bring us closer to reality .. which is what I would guess most people reading these works are looking for. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
It continued my journey, November 2, 2008 By Max Heffler (Houston, TX USA) . See all my reviews

It continued my journey into learning about the Khazarian royalty that I could be descended from. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
Kind of ruins that whole "anti.Semitism" thing, October 3, 2008 By Cwn_Annwn (Copenhagen, Denmark) . See all my reviews

When this book came out it caused a big controversy although I'm not quite sure how anybody could rationally critique what Koestler put forth here. I don't think any sane human being that knows how to read could say that the good bulk of the European/Eastern European Jews are descended from the biblical Israelites. Koestler documents how these European Jews came out the Khazar tribe of southeast Russia/Khazakistan who even back then were a mixed race people mainly of Turko.Armenian type racial stock with some Asian, that later mixed with other various peoples. It really strikes me as odd when Jews like to refer to themselves as a race, which is a card they like to play when its to thier advantage, when there are Jews from literally every race on the planet. I mean you have the stereotypical Ashkenazi type Jew, the middle eastern/Sephardic type of Semitic Jew, but you also have Asian Jews, the African Jews who are an Ethiopian/Somolian racial type, many of the Jews with ancestry that came out of of Germany are indistingguishable from blonde haired blue eyed nothern Europeans (the Jewess actress Alicia Silverstone or the actor Kirk Douglas are good examples), there was even some South American Indian tribe that called themselves Jews that were allowed to immigrate to Israel a few ago. So my point being, to call the Jews a race, or to say that there is any chance that any but a tiny percentage of them have even the slighest chance that they have some lineage with the Jews of the old Testament is ludicrous. If they want to call themselves the chosen of the Yahweh demon thats their own business I suppose but when fables and historical falsehoods are used as justifications for global political maneuverings that more often than not have seriously negative ramifications for the majority of the people on this planet then I begin to have a problem with it.

Koestler also documents the whole process of conversion of the Khazars to Judaism, which from my research seems mainly to have been a political/economic move because of the Khazars land being right in the middle of a major trade route between the middle east and Europe. Because there was often crusades and warfare between the Muslims in the middle east and the Christians to the north the Khazars chose a religion that would allow them to play both sides of the card and not have to choose sides when problems arose. You also get a lot of interesting general history of the area that the Khazars came out of using various sources, in particular Ibn Fadlan who is best known for his writings on the Viking Rus that were in that area during the time he was. Overall this is one of the better books you can read if you are studying Ashkenazi Jews. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




16 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
Koestler's work should be taken with a grain of salt, March 13, 1998 By forstadt@fas.harvard.edu (Providence, RI) . See all my reviews

This review is from: The Thirteenth Tribe (Hardcover)
The "Thirteenth Tribe," by Arthur Koestler, is certainly a fascinating read and must be considered an essential source for anyone interested in the history of the Khazars. Unfortunately, Koestler's conclusions about the genesis of East European Jewish communities are not warranted even on the basis of his own evidence. The Khazars' conversion to Judaism is an amazing historical fact, but their contribution to the gene pool of Eastern Europe is uncertain. We still don't know to what degree the bulk of the Khazar population (other than its leaders) adopted the Jewish faith, but we do know that a significant Jewish presence in Eastern Europe predated (and indeed influenced) the Khazar conversion. Extremists on both sides of the Khazar issue have chosen either to adopt Koestler's view wholesale or reject it completely. The answer seems to be somewhere in the middle. The story of Khazars should properly be relegated to the realm of historical, rather than political, interest. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




14 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
Most Excellent, September 15, 2005 By Muhammad Ashakur "nicemetal" (Chicago, IL) . See all my reviews

I finally overstand the history that has our nation in such a misfortunate scenario. This must be considered required reading reading for all Americans. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




21 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
Koestler Is a Man of Truth! , March 6, 2006 By TREE.NATTY "HRU CHA" (NEWARK, NJ) . See all my reviews

This book really open my eyes wide! I have been in contact with many people claiming to be "orginal" jews/hebrews. Koestler's work is far beyond any doubt that this Khazar empire existed. Especially to have it written by someone who was studying his own culture and background to begin with! I love some of the reveiws this book has gotten. And his untimly death is proof that what he has shown to the world. Was critical for in understand our past so we can move forward. In my own studying of anicent cultures such as Egyptian in particular. This book answers alot of question that acadamecia has tried to suppress when "validating" the modern jewish hertiage. As I have told many people the word "jewish" is a "johnny.come.lately" name! A good reason why it not even mention in the Torah or bible! But the one country that was mention MORE THAN ANY OTHER IN THE TORAH/BIBLE is Egypt!?! So European Jews are not in ancient history at all under the cloak of Judaism. They're not there! But Koestler book shows where they were! And the main tiff I have with this book is why these descendents of Khazar don't recongize their own ancestory? This action alone should be looked at carefully! For a people to completely or almost completely rid themselves of their own history. And adopted anew history, without any regard to the people, who still exist, of who history and culture they're adopting! This will remain a true blog in so.called jewish history for me. Because the Beta Israel of East Africa can still show lineage from Israel to Ethiopia in accord to the books of Genesis, Exodus, & Kings in the Bible. Where jewish schlors cannot give anyone a clue as to the history of the Kings of Israel after Solomon. There is 2500 yrs of blank history!!
The true and revealing fact that is now confirm, once again, is the racial make.up of the Hebrews from the Torah. As we all know the Ancient Egyptians were African in looks and features. As the story goes with Joseph, his brothers didn't know him as their own brother among the Egyptians. So Joseph was just as African, in features and looks, as the Khamites (Egyptians). And now these same people went from African features to Polish, German, and Turkish features???? Ok somebody forgot to tell me about when the aliens came. LOL! I must have skiped that part in the bible. So basically this book burst open that unspoken of taboo's of jewish ancestory wide open. I have no problem with ANYONE adopting a way of life or religion. But PLEASE don't go as far to say "WE ARE THE ORIGINAL FROM so & so". Because thats a LIE! Be proud of who you are before and after! Because when you're not proud or don't show pride in who you are. What difference does it make what you call yourself! Because underneith it all you are still ashamed! Of who you are and where you come from. And thats something you can't erase unless you face the facts. Until than you are running away from yourself! Give thanks to the Lord of Host for the Life of Koestler! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




3 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting read from what I read, January 26, 2008 By " Anti Microchip " "Jesus Christ can ... (Desolation America) . See all my reviews

Well first off I have to admit I didn't finish this book. I could only bore myself through the first 100 or so pages until my brain couldn't bare it any longer. Honestly, this book could bore the deceased. Koestler is NOT a good story teller, which is unfortunate since this saga is worth researching.

The premise of the book (besides giving those of us who are alive an excuse to read this book as opposed to acquiring prescription sleep medication) is that the modern day Jews are in fact NOT Jews. They are (according to the author) from the khazarian empire (did I spell that right). Through the first 100 or so pages I did glean a little bit of knowledge. First, these Khazar's basicly stood in between the Muslim's of the Middle East and the Christians of Europe. This helped to set up a (for lack of a better term) wall between the christians of Europe and the Muslim's of the middle east (and if you think about it they probably stopped a muslim invasion throughout much of the world for awhile). This book describes how these people adopted Jewish doctrine, and their eventual fall to Genghis Khan. This is really interesting history, and a book I will eventually finish (I'll update this review later if I do). However, as I said before, Koestler in my opinion is a horrible story teller. That being said this history of modern day Judaism may very well lay within these pages. According to Arthur Koestler those that practice modern day Judaism arn't Jews at all. The information is worth your time if you don't fall asleep first. Ok, did I write in a totally non.interesting writing syle that makes you say, "What?" Yes? Well that's why I didn't finish the book. Torture pure torture!!!

P.S. If you can finish this book more power to you. If you can pull it off I believe it would be worth it. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (8)




26 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
A GREAT PIECE OF WORK . ENLIGHTENING AND SCHOLARLY, January 28, 2000 By Ken (Quantico, VA) . See all my reviews

My personal studies of cultural history and research into the peoples of the Bible in the "biblical" lands of Canaan, caused me to question, not Jewish.European's claim to Judaism as a religious/cultural heritage, but rather Jewish.European's claims to be the Biblical descendents of the "Children of Israel". This book was the first scholarly, non.racist, work I came across that put things into perspective. I understand the implications that this work raises about commonly accepted beliefs concerning "racial" and cultural identities. In some ways it is a direct threat to the very identity of a segment of Jewish.Europeans who say they as a people are "Jews", as identified in the writings of the prophets and apostles. I feel "swmirky" gave an absolutely outstanding review of this book. However, in the end it doesn't as much matter if the book, or anyone's' work is oversimplified, overpoularized, or 100% error free. What matters is if that particular body of knowledge contributes to ones understanding of Truth. Truth not necessarily as one believes it to be, but Truth in terms of `what is'. The "possible" truth in the matter Kosetler brings up has to do with the commonly held belief that Western Jewry/Jewish.Europeans (German, Polish, etc.) and their descendants are not the "Jews" of the Bible. Some people cannot and will not even consider those implications. It is worthy of consideration however, for anyone that puts any credence whatsoever in the "Judeo.Christian" belief systems. It is an absolutely necessary consideration, for anyone that puts any credence in God's (YAH's) Truth as it pertains to his relationship to mankind. Koestler's book serves as an outstanding catalyst for considering an alternative perspective on truth. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




0 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
fascinating exploration, March 17, 2006 By Jon W. Graham (Miami, Fl USA) . See all my reviews

If you ever wondered where the high pink cheeks and blue eyes came from, or the obvious syntactic differences between Yiddish and its ostensible German origin, Koestler's book is a great place to start an exploration...or maybe even satisfy your curiousity. Penned by a writer with scholarship (rather than a scholar who writes), it packs a difficult history of cross migrating tribes, Huns and Mongols and Vikings, of an occult middle kingdom into a readable package, without any of the self conscious and specious scholasticism of more recent tomes. There is some dated, politically incorrect but amusing exploration in a later chapter concerning Semitic features the predates recent DNA tracings, but all in all, it's thoroughly enjoyable and certainly a great subject for the book club, and a jump off into ancient geopolitics that still resonate today. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




11 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
Certainly an interesting idea., July 16, 1997
By A Customer
I admit to having read this book. I do not admit to being a crackpot. I say that because of the three people that I know who have read this book, two are crackpots and I'm not one of them. (Please read the other two reviews.) They are slightly more interesting than the book. The book has a point to make: Eastern European Jews are not descendants of David. My thought on that? Whew, that let's me off the hook! Now I can't be blamed for the death of Jesus. Is there any way that we can take back the Holocaust, the pogroms, the nasty comments, the insults, the Inquisition and some of the teachings of the Catholic Church? Uh... I didn't think so. I've long ago gotten over any discomfort I might have felt when hearing a Jew joke. As a matter of fact, after visiting the Holocaust memorial in Washington, I sent a friend a postcard with this message: Wishing you were here. There... that feels better. Now what was I saying about crackpots Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




6 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting, but facts may not be completely accurate, November 20, 2006 By Martin C. Shapiro "Marty Epilog" (Connecticut) . See all my reviews

I read this book when it came out in the '70's and again, just a short time
ago. In the interim, I have read other writers on this subject, from more
recent research, and finds. If you are interested in the Khazars, their
conversion to Judiasm at the end of the 7th or beginning of the 8th century,
this is an excellent first primar. I find the story rudely interupted by
footnotes and bibliographical notations. The main story is absolutly true
and facinating. Some of the side bars may or may not be completely accurate.
I definitely recommend this book as an initial survey of the subject of the
Jews of Khazaria from the late 7th century to their decline in the 11th century. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




16 of 36 people found the following review helpful:
amezing, September 27, 1999
By A Customer
never in history we see such big bulk f jews in the Rihne aera or arround, that will form the quantity of european jews of our time. this make me belive that Koestler theory is correct. her is no evidence that such a big quantity of jews from the part of palestine of to daymoved to the north. My beilive is that the sepharadic jews are the real remain of the jews, since we know so much of ther histoty and emigration to north Africa and Spain from the middle east, if you want more prouve ,raed Dunlop"s theory as well\ Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




21 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
Who are the true Jews?, September 19, 2000
By A Customer
I read the book The Thirteenth tribe, it is an excellent book by Arthur Koestler. This book is provocative to some, to others vindication. In my opinion this book was well research, The author of this book who happens to be a hungarian Jew, research the archives of Russia, Hungary and other countries in the region pertaining to the History of the Khazars. If the author is right, and these Ashkenazi Jews are converts, they cannot claim any rights to be of Semitic decent. To be Semitic you must be of the linage of the biblical Shem Noah's first son. see Genesis 6 vs 10 (KJV) these Eastern European Jews are not decending from Shem but from Japheth, Noah's third son. See Genesis 6 vs 10 (KJV) how ironically these converted Jews from Eastern Europe call themselves Ashkennazi the name "Ashkenaz" happens to be the name of Japheth's grandson. see Genesis 10 vs 3 (KJV) Japheth happen to be the Patriarch of all those who are descendants of Europe. Now if Mr Koestler is right, then who are the true Jews? could the blacks in Ethiopia be the true Jews? or could the black peoples living in the west, be the descendants of the true Jews? According to the Bible God told the ancient Hebrews or Jews that if they did not obey him they would be put back into slavery, this time with ships. See Deuteronomy 28 vs 68. (KJV) To my knowledge the only people in the history of Humanity to ever been put on ships and sent around the world as slaves are the black peoples of Africa... Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)





40 of 83 people found the following review helpful:
Out of date and disproven by new evidence, October 4, 2001 By J. A Magill (Sacramento, CA USA) . See all my reviews


The culture of the Khazars, a central asian tribe that adopted Judaism over 1000 years ago and was then destroyed by Gengis Khan, is a facinating subject worthy of study. Sadly, it always gets mixed up with an old 19th century idea that modern European Jews are decended from the Khazars and not the biblical Jews. That theory, highly popular in the middle 19th century served the duel use of, for some, proving that the Jews around Europe were not the same as those of the Hebrew Bible, giving great comfort to anti.semitic Christians. For others, they wanted to prove that Jesus was not Jewish, a strange branch of racist psudo.theory that goes on even today.

In the 19th century Jews could simply role their eyes but had no evidence to disprove the theory. The best evidence against the Khazar theory was lingustic, as neither Hebrew nor Yiddish seems to contain any trace of a cetral asian language. Now, with gentic evidence, we can positively identify common ancestry of Jews from areas as far flung as Germany, Spain, Yemen, and Russia. Identical Y chromosome markers can be found among members of every community. While it may be that some Khazars married into the larger Jewish community, the evidence indicates that it never happened in overwhelming number. Indeed, their is considerable historic evidence that the Khazar were largely cut off from the rest of the Jewish world.

Many reviwers point to the idea that many European Jews show non.middle eastern features (blue eyes, blond hair, etc.) However, the existance of large scale conversion to Judaism is a clear historical fact. Particularly before Christianity became firmly rooted in Eastern and South Eastern Europe, many locals converted to Judaism. Many of the modern Jewish attitudes against conversion are in fact reasonably recent, tracable to the strong and often violent action Christians took against communities where individuals chose to become Jews.

Given the vast amount of genetic evidence against the theory one has to wonder why it still gets so much play. After all, if all Jews contain common genetic markers from locations across the world, what possible evidence could be for this strange theory? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (6)

==================
Initial post: Nov 8, 2006 8:51 AM PST
Karl Krokar says:
Just a comment on the genetic studies: don't be fooled.
David Goldstein of Duke University has argued that sample populations in these studies were small and not randomly selected, and that the results may not be statistically significant. Besides, can we really believe in the resulting scenarios of 'few founding fathers' or 'four founding mothers'?
The Khazars did not vanish, why should they have? After all their Ashena ruling class provided administrators for the Mongols both as Uyghurs in Central Asia and as Ashkenazis and Kipchaks in Eastern Europe. By all means don't use Koestler's work politically, but keep to its great historical value.

Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse
10 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you?

Posted on Jan 8, 2007 10:01 AM PST
Encompassed Runner says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion.]
This should be one of the Amazon Spotlight Reviews for this book so popular among Jew haters.
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse
1 of 12 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you?


In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2007 6:53 PM PDT
pebe says:
You sound like a broken record, E.R. Precisely because the genetic evidence is inconclusive, the above review should not be in the spotlight ...and you should discrad your "Jew hater" mantra.

Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse
3 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2007 2:34 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 7, 2007 2:38 PM PDT
World Music Fan says:
Thank you for that clarification. I'm always skeptical when I continue to read statements that claim "it was proven" about anything but with no hard evidence presented. We're just supposed to accept that "it was proven" and not ask questions, basically like the "Protocols" were "proven" to be a forgery, when as I suspected (because I investigated it), that's not true either.

But I am finding this book to be fascinating because it shows you that a simple change in thinking can produce a different kind of people and that it has nothing to do with "race" or "ethnicity" or skin color.
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse
5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you?


In reply to an earlier post on Sep 21, 2007 9:11 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 25, 2007 7:29 PM PDT
Caesar M. Warrington says:
Mr. Magill:
While it is true that the Turkic Khazars were always a minority within their empire, which was destroyed by later Turco.Mongol peoples, the question still lingers as to where they had gone. Considering the tenacity of the Jews to cling to their faith and customs, not too many of these Khazars could have simply adopted Islam and faded into the populations of Central Asia.

Furthermore, as you yourself admit... there were many conversions of Eastern European and Central Asian peoples to Judaism. Even before the Khazars rode into history, the Jewish community within the Roman Empire, prior to its adoption of Christianity, was attracting gentiles to its religion. Today, Ashkenazis make up around 80% of world Jewry, whether they predominately derive from Turkic origins or Slavic doesn't contradict the charge (admitedlly, often made for anti.semitic reasons) that the majority of todays Jews are not the descendents of those of Biblical and Greco.Roman times.

==================


15 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
Who then are the true Hebrews/Jews?, July 15, 1997
By A Customer
Since I have read "The Thirteenth Tribe", much of the confussion I had relating modern Jewry's history to the prophesies of the Old Testement is now cleared up. In the book of Deuteronomy, chapter 28, all of those prophesies was not fullfilled by them. Moses wrote that strangers shall get above the Jews very high and the stranger will lend to Jews and the Jews will always be borrowing, Deut. 28:43.44. According to Arthur Koestler, the converted Kharzars were always the head, controlling economics, etc. outside of Israel. The book of Deut. chapter 28 states that the Jews would be carried by ships into captivity and eventually scattered around the world as slaves. I read another book named "From Babylon to Timbuktu" by Rudolph R.Windsor and he believes the descendants of the ancient Hebrews/Jews are the black people who were captured and scattered around the world as slaves. It seem to me that the Blacks history does agree with Deut 28. I don't agree with all of Windsor's writing but he does make a point. There is also, a lot of African American Hebrew groups on the internet claiming that they are descendants of the original Hebrews. If most of the European Jews are decendant from Ashkenaz the son of Gomer, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah; then, WHO ARE THE TRUE DESCENDANTS OF THE HEBREWS? The next people that fit the bible description of the history of Jews, who were scattered world wide are the descendants of the slaves. This litature make me say, Hmmmmmmm! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




28 of 63 people found the following review helpful:
unknown in chicago, January 28, 2002
By A Customer
I read the book and I read the bible I went to Deuternomy the 28th chapter, I read the blessing and the curse, and it would appear that Israel is under the curse not the blessing. And if Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Jesus is to be beleived the Nation of Israel should remain in captivity untile Jesus come back to set.up is kingdom on earth. Most of the people who are proclaiming themselves to be Jew are mostly European or biblical known as Gentile (see Genesis 10th chapter). If this too hard to believe just compare their (Europeon Jews) history to what to what happened to the true children of Israel. I always wonder why out of the 12 Tribe of Isreal meaning there is Reuben, Simeon, Levi,Judah and so on they can find only one tribe out of 12? According to history the last known tribe was taken out in 70Ad. God, said the 12 tirbes will not be back until he's coming. So, my questinion is who those people in the Holy Land? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




21 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting but disproven, May 10, 2000
By A Customer
Even though this book was well.written and contains a lot of fascinating information about the Khazarian Empire, I have to rate it one star because its thesis .. which is what most people take away from it .. has been completely disproven. Just yesterday (May 10) the New York Times ran an article in its science section about DNA testing on certain markers in the Y chromosome that are present in the majority of Jews in ALL communities .. Sephardic and Ashkenazic. (The markers on Ethiopian Jews are not so clear.cut.) As the article itself stated, these tests finally disprove theories that the majority of Ashkenazic Jews are descended from converts. In fact, the studies show that a surprisingly SMALL number of Jews are descended from converts .. less even than most Orthodox Jews would have assumed. I do not think there is anything "less valid" about being descended from a convert, so Koestler's theory didn't bother me that much even before I read about these tests. But now that the book has been so conclusively proven wrong, it should be reprinted with an appropriate disclaimer. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (2)




28 of 66 people found the following review helpful:
Completely Disproven by Genetic Evidence, August 28, 2001 By "mench_2000" . See all my reviews

Koestler, a novelist, here writes a piece of psudo academic work. His thesis, that European Jews are descended from the Khazars, a central Asian tribe that may have converted to Judaism in the 11th century is not new. This theory gained great attention in the 19th century as so.called "racial scientists" tried to prove that: One, Jews were a "mongrel race" and, two, that Jesus wasn't really Jewish. The theory was hardly provable, but helped racists deal with a logical contradiction of loving Jesus and hating Jews. Since WWII, the theory gained great admiration among Arabs seeking to deligitimize Israel. The problem is that genetic evidence has proven the theory of Khazar decent completely false. Genes on the Y chromosome have demonstrated that Jews from areas as far a flung as Poland, Yemen, and Africa all share a common ancestor. Moreover, Levities, decedents of the Jewish priestly caste found in among all Jewish communities were also shown to have a common ancestor. All of this evidence demonstrates conclusively that the Khazar theory for European Jewish ancestry is false. Jews, despite their differences, share a common ancestor. Anti.Semites will have to move on and beat another dead horse. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (2)




16 of 44 people found the following review helpful:
the real hebrews the blackman in america., September 18, 1999
By A Customer
reviewers please read jer.13.19 acts 7.6 gen 15.13 deut.28.68 also there are jews who are notjews but claim to be read rev.2.9& 3.9 this refering to the european so called jews there is no bible proof that will connect you to the hebrews you people are converts in 135.bc and the finale convert.was in 740.ad now hebrews were in slavery for four hundred years if they wre not black when they came they were when they left egypt.africa lets use are brains here people no other people have been scattered around the world except the blackman the proof in the bible and history why dont you check it out the truth is there was not moses mistaken for an egyptian and was not paul mistaken for an egyptian acts 21.38 .39 now we know the egyptians are black and simon was known as the blackman also jesus had hair like lambs wool only the blackman has hair like this wakeup people and smell the truth in the book of hosesa my people perish for lack of knowledge read rev.1.14.15 now show us your proof. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




3 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
Historically Interesting, Conclusion Value Poor, July 26, 2006 By Grey Wolffe "Zeb Kantrowitz" (North Waltham, MA United States) . See all my reviews

From circa 700 ce to 1100 ce, there was a Khazar Empire that existed north of the Caucasus Mts between the Black and Caspian Seas, that controlled the Volga.Don River portage. They were a bullwark against tribes moving east to the Ukraine and the European plains; against the moslems moving north from Persia; and the Viking.Rus moving south from Muscovy/Kiev.

Since it had to be the most dangerous geographic area, next to Constantinople/Byzantine Empire, it makes sense that the nobility decided to convert to judaism. By doing so they put themselves out of the forces of conversion (both Latin and Islamic) but still placed themselves outside from the pagans.

The coverage of the history of the Khazars is good but like everything in the book, published in 1976, dated. Worst of all is his discussion of the 'Heritage' of the Khazars, implying that the majority of world jewry (the Ashkenazim) and their decendents and therefore non.semetic. He makes the statement based on the following statistic, that at the time of the book that world jewry was made up of 11 million ashkenazis and 1/2 million sephardim.

In actuality, it's more like 50/50, and in Israel the sefardim are now the majority. After WW2 over three million jews emigrated to Israel from North Africa and the Middle East/Asia. Most had lived in these countries for generations, those in Iraq had been there since the destruction of the First Temple. It would be hard to make the point that they weren't semites and therefore part of the original tribes. Poor conclusion. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)




20 of 58 people found the following review helpful:
The Truth, June 22, 2003 By Francisca levy (Houston, TX) . See all my reviews

I have read this book and find it quiet true! But, people are dwelling on who's a true Jew or not and really you should be more concerned with wether your a true descendant from the 12 tribes of Isreal! Many may claim to be Jew's but there hearitage dosn't allow them to participate in the gifts of the Kingdom of JAHOVAH,JAH,YEHWEH,YAHAWAH. There are many translation of the most highs name, but many do not even mention one translation of his name which is sad, because by calling on is name and praying in the name of savior Christ Jesus,(YAHAWASHY)is the only way to obtain salvation. All the descendants of the 12 tribes of Isreal need to speak hewbrew and learn about their hearitage and stop bickering with other religons as to what they believe. "We shall come to know the truth and the truth shall set us free". Remember those hating other religion and people are of satan, because Jesus spoke of peace and loving kindness. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (2)




9 of 36 people found the following review helpful:
Interesting but inaccurate, March 20, 1999
By A Customer
This review is from: Thirteenth Tribe (Picador Books) (Paperback)
While Koestler presents an intriguing theory and a well written book, there is absolutely no credibility to his ideas. No serious historian will use his book when researching the history of Eastern European Jews. For example the vast majority of the Jews in that area were not converts from Khazaria but rather moved into Eastern Europe from Germany and other Central European countries. That this book is even considered serious to some is a disgace of history. Not that Koestler is entirely incorrect. There was a country called Khazaria and its leaders did convert to Judaism, and there are most likely Jews today who came from Khazarian ancestry, but frankly there the known facts end. This may have well been historical fiction. Hopefully one day someone with a famous name will write a book that tells the truth about Jews in the area. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)




5 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
outdated book, October 22, 2007 By Steven W. Rothenberg "retired PD" (Westchester, NY) . See all my reviews

The book is interesting, and at the time of its publishing was probably very controversial but his theory that most Ashkenazi Jews are descendents from the Khazar empire and not from the middle east has been proven false by genetic testing in the last 2 decades. (see the excellent work "Jews of Khazaria" Kevin Alan Brook, "DNA, & Tradition the genetic link to the ancient Hebrews", and hundreds of other scientific papers. This book belongs in the flat earth society library.
Don't waste your money if you are interested in scholarly learning about the Khazars.


Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment



9 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
Debunked, psuedo history, March 22, 2006
A Kid's Review
Koestler would not have survived any peer review in the first page and it gets worse throughout the text. OK we know all the genetic work of the past ten years as completly exposed the Khazar.Ashkenazi (or Turkic .Ashkenazi) link as tiny and meaningless compared to more prevelent Asheknazi Kurdish, Armenian and Greek genetic links. Does this mean we shuld no argue that the Greeks are the lost tribe of Israel? Or that the Ashkenazi are closest to the Greeks? Where Koestler falls down here is in failing to recognize that the haplotype links are 1) extremely marginal; b) easily explained through common ancestros going back 20,000 to 30,000 years, which is to say going back to relationships that drive common haplotype between East Africans and Japanese!

This is hardly a good starting point, but Koestler uses it to rewrite all the serious scholarship in the fields of known archeology, linguistics, and primary material concerning the Khazars.

What next for Koestler? Explaining the Sephardim are really the Atlantians? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)




4 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
A 'second the motion'review , February 1, 2005 By Shalom Freedman "Shalom Freedman" (Jerusalem,Israel) . See all my reviews

I 'second the motion' of the review written by Mr. Mirsky. I think he analyzes in a very good way the whole thrust of Koestler's argument in trying to prove that Ashkenazi Jews are fundamentally not a Semitic people. He also brings to bear what I understand to be , the genetic testing on that matter which do show that Jews of all type have some kind of 'genetic connection between them.'
I do not however understand one major thing i.e. why for Koestler it is important to show that the Jews are not Semitic. Is this to show that they are allegedly strangers in the Middle East, and so have no ' genetic right' (if there is such a thing) to the land of Israel.
I join Mr. Mirsky in thinking that in some way the whole controversy aroused by this book, as to where the Jews have their origin is irrelevant. Judaism is a question of sharing a common tradition, faith, culture and therefore its 'racial component or preferably biological component' is secondary. What's important in regard to geography and every Jew, including Jewish converts is not what region of the world their ancestors may have come from but whether the eyes, minds and hearts are devoted to realizing the Biblical promise of return to the land of Israel. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (3)




1 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
And the gaping hole in this theory is..., June 30, 2006 By Too Much Coffee Woman (Nottingham) . See all my reviews

only the Khazar elite converted to the Jewish faith there are plenty of archeological expeditions that have uncovered burials from the same period that are monotheistic in origin. the experts of Molecular Population Genetics would also have something to say on the matter. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment




11 of 58 people found the following review helpful:
The Next Hate War, April 5, 2003
By A Customer
This book has become a sort of Bible of Anti.semitism and the so called "Chrisitan Identity" movement. The premise is that pagans and barbarians are the true ancesters of the so.called Ashkenazi Jew (European/ American Jew). This means that the true Jews of Jesus Christ day, the Israelites and Hebrews of the Bible are in no way related to the Jews we see today in America and Israel, who are in fact, Huns,Turks, Magyars and other "mud race" derivatives that populated Eastern Europe.
Where are the Jews of Jesus' day? They migrated to Europe and the sons of Yacob (Sax.sons) became the Anglo.Saxons and Scandinavians and other proper Aryan derivatives. Thus, hating the Jews is really akin to hating the brutal Khazars who co.opted the Jewish religion during the Dark Ages. Thus, the Aryan Nations do not hate Jews but using this book and others like it, can show that they are the true descendents of the Hebrews. Read this book if you like historical revisionism, but beware of the hatred that this book causes as it becomes the basis for a worldwide attack on Khazars, "false jews", "Orthodox jews, etc.
STOP HATRED! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comments (3)




6 of 72 people found the following review helpful:
a defamation text, February 25, 2004 By Seth J. Frantzman (Jerusalem, Israel) . See all my reviews


This is actually an anti.simitic text that claims that Judaism is descended from the Khazars. One problem with this argument is that many Jews actually do resemble their arab and Simitic cousins in the middle east. Many Palistinians have fair, blond, features, but that doesn't mean they are not Arabs, it just means they intermingled with europeans crusaders. The reality is that the Khazars NEVER immigrated to Khazaria, they were whiped out by the mongols. Most of the tribes of the Caucuses were not emigratory tribes, like the armenians and Georgians and Chechens, they were sedintary and like the Khazars they weathered the storm of invasion. Unfortunatly the Khazars did not weather the storm very well and they disappeared, but they NEVER moved to europe and this book is full of hateful remarks and polemics against the Judiasm, very offensive. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink
Comment (1)





NB: tape recordings made in the British Libray; pre-Internet and hugely inefficient!]
- Koestler's book: I have some notes on tape.
3 parts; map at front; part 1 rise and fall of the Khazars; part 2 the heritage; 4 appendices: spelling sources, the correspondence, some implications. References, bibliography, index.
Map shows Khazaria as a space so to speak balanced above the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, stretching almost to the Sea of Aral. Above it are the Ural mountains with the Bulgars, and below it Georgia with the Caucasus mountains, and the Carpathians seem to hem it in over to the west.
Unfortunately Koestler doesn't have any sort of summary so you have to plough through and make inferences as you go.
He also has no chronology; this is confusing. (And could very easily have been included!)

These are my notes on the book; I dictated in the British Library from many of the sections:- NB May 97: how very inefficient compared with computer transmission! And see how I tired towards the end, increasingly impatient of dictating spellings..)

RISE
About the time when Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West, the eastern confines of Europe between the Caucasus and the Volga were ruled by a Jewish state, known as the Khazar Empire. At the peak of its power, from the 7th to the 10th C AD, it played a significant part in shaping the destinies of medieval and consequently modern Europe. The Byzantine Emperor and historian, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, 913-959, must have been well aware of this when he recorded in his treatise on court protocol that letters addressed to the Pope in Rome and similarly those to the Emperor in the west had a gold seal worth 2 solidi attached to them, whereas messages to the King of the Khazars displayed a seal worth three solidi. This was not flattery, but realpolitik. In the period with which we are concerned wrote J B Bury 1912 it is probable the Khan of the Khazars was of little less importance in view of the imperial foreign policy than Charles the Great and his successors. The country of the Khazars a people of Turkish stock, occupied a strategic position at a key gateway between the Black Sea and the Caspian, where the great eastern powers of the period confronted each other. It acted as a buffer protecting Byzantium against invasion by the lusty barbarian tribesmen of the northern steppes, Bulgars, Magyars, Peshaneks etc, and later the Vikings and the Russians. But equally or even more important, both from the point of view of Byzantine diplomacy and of European history, it is a fact that the Khazar armies effectively blocked the Arab avalanche's most devastating early stages, and thus prevented the Muslim conquest of eastern Europe. Professor Dunlop of Columbia University, a leading authority on the history of the Khazars, has given a concise summary of this decisive yet virtually unknown episode. The Khazar country lay across the natural line of advance of the Arabs within a few years of the death of Mohammed AD 632. The armies of the Caliphate sweeping northward through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before them, reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus. This barrier once passed the road lay open to the lands of eastern Europe. As it was, on the line of the Caucasus, the Arabs met the forces of an organised military power which effectively prevented them from extending their conquests in that direction. The wars of the Arabs and the Khazars which lasted more than a hundred years though little known are thus of considerable historical importance. The Franks of Charles Martel on the field of Tours turned the tide of Arab invasion at about the same time the threat to Europe in the east was hardly less acute the victorious Muslims were met and held by the forces of the Khazar kingdom. We can scarcely doubt that, but for the existence of the Khazars in the region north of the Caucasus, Byzantium, the bulwark of European civilization in the east, would have found itself outflanked by the Arabs and the history of Christendom and Islam might well have been different from what we know. It is perhaps not surprising, given these circumstances, that in 732 after a resounding Khazar victory over the Arabs, the future Emperor Constantine V married a Khazar princess. In due time their son became Emperor Leo IV, known as Leo the Khazar. Ironically, the last battle in the war, AD 737, ended in a Khazar defeat but by that time the impetus of the Muslim holy war was spent, the Caliphate was rocked by internal dissensions, and the Arab invaders retraced their steps across the Caucasus without having gained a permanent foothold in the north, whereas the Khazars became more powerful than they had previously been. A few years later, probably AD 740, the king, his court and the military ruling class embraced the Jewish faith, and Judaism became the state religion of the Khazars. No doubt their contemporaries were as astonished by this decision as modern scholars were when they came across the evidence in the Arab, Byzantine, Russian, and Hebrew sources. One of the most recent comments is to be found in a work by the Hungarian Marxist historian Dr ?Antel ?Bartar. His book on the Magyar society in the 8th and 9th C (1968, p 35) has several chapters on the Khazars, as during most of that period the Hungarians were ruled by them. Yet their conversion to Judaism is discussed in a single paragraph with obvious embarrassment. It reads: our investigations cannot go into problems pertaining to the history of ideas. We must call the reader's attention to the matter of the Khazar Kingdom's state religion. It was the Jewish faith which became the official religion of the ruling strata of society. Needless to say the acceptance of the Jewish faith as the state religion of an ethnically non-Jewish people could be the subject of interesting speculations. We shall however confine ourselves to the remark that this official conversion in defiance of Christian proselytising by Byzantium, the Muslim influence from the east, and in spite of the political pressure of these two powers, to a religion which had no support from any political power, but which was persecuted by nearly all, has come as a surprise to all historians concerned with the Khazars. It cannot be considered as accidental, but must be regarded as a sign of the independent policy pursued by that kingdom. [Actual reference something like: R ix-x Cazardeem Magyar Tarsadolom, Hungarian Society in the 9th and 10th Centuries, published in Budapest.] That extract leaves us only slightly more bewildered than before. Yet whereas the sources differ in minor detail, the major facts are beyond dispute. What is in dispute is the fate of the Jewish Khazars after the destruction of the empire in the 11th, the ?end of the 12th, or 13th C. On this problem the sources are scant, but various late medieval Khazar settlements are mentioned in the Crimea, the Ukraine, in Hungary, Poland, and Lithuania. The general picture that emerges from these fragmentary pieces of information is that of a migration of Khazar tribes and communities into those regions of eastern Europe, mainly Russia and Poland, where at the dawn of the modern age the greatest concentration of Jews were found. This has led several historians to conjecture that a substantial part and perhaps a majority of eastern Jews, hence of world Jewry, might be of Khazar, not of Semitic, origin. The far-reaching implications of this hypothesis may explain the great caution exercised by historians in approaching this subject if they do not avoid it altogether. Thus the 1973 edition of the Encyclopedia Judaica, the article Khazars is signed by Dunlop. There is a separate section dealing with Khazar Jews after the fall of the kingdom signed by the editors, and written with the obvious intent to avoid upsetting believers in the dogma of the chosen race. [Quotes:] The Turkish speaking Karaites, a fundamentalist Jewish sect, of the Crimea, Poland and elsewhere, have affirmed a connection with the Khazars which is perhaps confirmed by evidence from folklore and anthropology as well as language. There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence attesting to a continued presence in Europe of descendants of the Khazars. How important in quantitative terms is that presence of the Caucasian sons of Japheth in the tents of Shem? One of the most radical propounders of the hypothesis concerning the Khazar origins of Jews is the professor of medieval Jewish history at Tel Aviv University, A N ?Poliak. His book, Khazaria the History of a Jewish Kingdom in Europe, in Hebrew, was published [by ?Mossad ?Byalik Tel Aviv] in 1944 in Tel Aviv, with a second edition in 1951. In his introduction [presumably translated by Koestler] he writes that the facts demand a new approach both to the problem of the relations between the Khazar Jewry and other Jewish communities, and to the question of how far we can go in regarding this Khazar Jewry as the nucleus of the large Jewish settlement in eastern Europe. The descendants of this settlement, those who stayed where they were, those who emigrated to the US or to other countries, and those who went to Israel, constitute now the large majority of world Jewry. This was written before the full extent of the holocaust was known, but that does not alter the fact that the large majority of surviving Jews in the world is of eastern European, and thus perhaps mainly of Khazar origin. If so this would mean that their ancestors came not from Jordan but from the Volga, not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once believed to be the cradle of the Aryan race, and that genetically they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur, and of Magyar tribes than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Should this turn out to be he case, then the term 'anti-Semitism' would become void of meaning, based on a misapprehension shared by both the killers and their victim. The story of the Khazar empire as it slowly emerges from the past begins to look like the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated. Attila, was, after all, merely the king of the Kingdom of Tents, his state passed away, whereas the despised city of Constantinople remained a power. The tents vanished, the towns remained. The Huns' state was a whirlwind. This is a quotation from ?Kassel. [Paulus Kassel wrote: Magyarische Alterts Humer, published 1847, Berlin; Der Chasarische Konigsbrief Aus Dem 10 Jahr Hundert, 1876] Plainly the Khazars shared for similar reasons a similar fate [i.e. as Attila the Hun] yet the Hun presence on the European scene lasted a mere 80 years, from about 382 to 453, when Attila died, whereas the King of the Khazars held his own for the best part of 4 centuries. They too lived in tents but the also had large urban settlements are were in the process of transformation from a tribe of nomadic warriors into a nation of farmers, cattle breeders, fishermen, vine growers, traders, and skilled craftsmen. Soviet archaeologists have unearthed evidence for a relatively advanced civilisation which is altogether different from the Hun whirlwind. They found the traces of villages extending over several miles with houses connecting by galleries to huge cattle sheds, sheep pens, and stables, measuring 3 to 3 1/2 by 10 to 14 metres and supported by columns. Some remaining ox-ploughs showed remarkable craftsmanship. So did the preserved artifacts, buckles, clasps, ornamental saddle-plates. Of particular interest were the foundations sunk into the ground of houses built in a circular shape. According to the Soviet archaeologist these were found all over the territories inhabited by the Khazars or an earlier date than their normal rectangular buildings. Obviously [says Koestler] the round houses symbolise the transition from the portable dome-shaped tents to permanent dwellings, from the nomadic to the settled, or rather the semi-settled, existence. The contemporary Arab sources tell us that the Khazars only stayed in the towns, including even their capital, ?Itil, during the winter. Come spring, they packed their tents, left their houses and sallied forth with their sheep or cattle into the steppes, or camped in the cornfields or vineyards. The excavations show that the Kingdom was, during its later period, surrounded by an elaborate chain of fortifications, dating from the 8th and 9th Cs, which protected its northern frontiers, facing the open steppes. These fortresses formed a rough semicircular arc from the Crimea, which the Khazars ruled for a time, across the lower reaches of the Donetz and the Don to the Volga, while towards the south they were protected by the Caucasus, to the west by the Black Sea, and to the east by the Khazar Sea, the Caspian. [Footnote: To this day the Muslims recalling the Arab terror of the Khazar raids, still call the Caspian, a sea as shifting as the nomads, and washing their steppeland ?parts, Bahr-ul-Khazar, the Khazar Sea.] [NB: I looked up these fortifications on his map, but it's a bit vague as to where they actually are] However, the northern chain of fortifications merely marked an inner ring protecting the stable core of the Khazar country. The actual boundaries of their rule over other tribes fluctuated according to the fortunes of war. At the peak of their power, they controlled or exacted tribute from some thirty different nations and tribes inhabiting the vast territories between the Caucasus, the Ural Sea, the Ural Mountains, the town of Kiev and the Ukrainian steppes. People under Khazar suzerainty included the Bulgars, ?Bertars, Khuz, Magyars, Gothic and Greek colonies of the Crimea, and the Slavonic tribes in the north western woodlands. Beyond these extended dominions, Khazar armies also raided Georgia and Armenia, penetrated the Arab Caliphate as far as Mosul. In the words of the Soviet archaeologist M I Artarmonov, 'until the 9th century the Khazars had no rivals to their supremacy in the regions north of the Black Sea, and the adjoining steppe and forest regions of the Dnieper. The Khazars were the supreme masters of the southern half of eastern Europe for a century and a half, and presented a mighty bulwark, blocking the Ural-Caspian gateway from Asia into Europe. During this whole period they held back the onslaught of the nomadic tribes from the east.' [Artarmanov, M I, [difft spelling sic] 'Studies in Ancient Khazar History', written in Russian, Leningrad 1936. Also wrote 'Khazar History', 1962, Leningrad] Taking a bird's eye view of the history of the great nomadic empires of the east, the Khazar kingdom occupies an intermediary position in time, size, and degree of civilization between the Hun and the Avar empires which preceded it, and the Mongol empire that succeeded it.
Section 3: But who were these remarkable people, remarkable as much by their power and achievements as by their conversion to a religion of outcasts? The descriptions that have come down to us originate in hostile sources and cannot be taken at face value. 'As to the Khazars,' an Arab chronicler writes, 'they are to the north of the inhabited earth towards the seventh clime, having over their heads the constellation of the plough. Their land is cold and wet. Their complexions are white, their eyes blue, their hairs flowing and predominantly reddish, their bodies are large, and their natures cold. Their general aspect is wild.' After a century of warfare, the Arab writer obviously had no great sympathy for the Khazars. Nor had the Georgian or Armenian scribes, whose countries of a much older culture had been repeatedly devastated by the Khazar horsemen. The Georgian Chronicle, echoing an ancient tradition, identifies them with the hosts of Gog and Magog, wild men with hideous faces and the manner of wild beasts, eaters of blood. An Armenian writer refers to the horrible multitude of the Khazars with insolent, broad, lashless faces and long falling hair like women. Lastly, the Arab geographer Istakhri [edited by de Goeje, Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum] one of the main Arab sources, has this to say: 'The Khazars do not resemble the Turks. They are black-haired and are of two kinds. One called the ?Khora-Khazars, black Khazars, who are swarthy verging on deep black as if they were a kind of Indian, and the white kind, ?Al-Khazars, who are strikingly handsome.' This is more flattering, but only out of the confusion of ?. It is customary among Turkish peoples to refer to their ruling classes or clans as white, to the lower strata as black. Istakhri's black-skinned Khazars, as in much else in his writings and his colleagues', was based on hearsay and legends, so we are none the wiser. The ethnic origins can only be answered in a vague and general way. .. It's equally frustrating to enquire into the origin of the Huns, Alans, Avars, Bulgars, Magyars, Bashkirs, ?Burtars, ?Sabhirs, ?Urgirs, ?Saragers, ?Oregers, ?Utigers, ?Kutrigers, Tanyaks, Cootrigars, Khabaz, Zabinders, Peshaneks, Khuz, and Khumans, and ?Khipchaks, and dozens of other tribes or people who at one time or another passed through the turnstiles of those migratory playgrounds. Even the Huns, who we know much more of, are of uncertain origin, named apparently from the Chinese ?Hieng-Nu, meaning warlike nomads. In the 1st C AD, the Chinese drove them westward, and started one of those periodic avalanches which swept for centuries from Asia to the West. From the 5th C on, many of these westbound tribes were called by the generic name of Turks, .. supposed to be a Chinese name derived from the name of a hill, and was used to refer to all tribes who spoke languages with certain common characteristics, the Turkic language group. The term Turk in the sense it was used by medieval writers and modern ethnologists refers to the language, not to race. The Huns and Khazars were Turkic in this sense, not the Magyars, whose language belongs to the Finno-Ugrian language group. .. The Khazar language was supposedly a Chuvash dialect of Turkish, which still survives in the autonomous Chuvash Soviet republic, between the Volga and the ?Sura. The Chuvash people are actually believed to be the descendants of the Bulgars, who spoke a dialect similar to the Khazars. But all these connections are rather tenuous. All we can say with safety is that the Khazars were a Turkic tribe who irrupted from the Asian steppes in about the 5th C in our era. The origin of the name Khazar and the modern derivations to which it gives rise has been the subject of much speculation. Most likely it is derived from a Turkish root, ?gaz to wander, which simply means nomad. Of greater interest to non-specialists are some alleged modern derivations, one of them the Russian Cossack, and the Hungarian Huszar [sic], both signifying martial horsemen. And also the German ketzer, heretic, i.e. Jew. Huszar is probably derived via the Serbo-Croat, from Greek references to Khazars. If these derivations are correct they would show that the Khazars had considerable impact on the imagination of a variety of peoples in the Middle Ages.
Some Persian and Arab chronicles provide an attractive combination of legend and gossip column. They may start with the creation and end with stop press tit-bits. Thus Yacoubi, a 9th C Arab historian, traces the origin of the Khazars back to Japheth, third son of Noah. The Japheth motive recurs frequently in the literature, while other legends connect them with Abraham or Alexander the Great. Some of the earliest factual references to the Khazars occur in a Syriac chronicle, by 'Zacharia Rhetor', dating from the middle of the 6th C. It mentions the Khazars in a list of people who inhabit the region of the Caucasus. Other sources indicated they were much in evidence a century earlier. In AD 448, the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II sent an embassy to Attila, which included a rhetorician by the name of Priscus. He kept a minute account, not only of the diplomatic negotiations, but also of the court goings-on and intrigues in Attila's sumptuous banqueting hall. He was in fact the perfect gossip columnist, and is still one of the main sources of information about Hun customs and habits. But Priscus also has anecdotes to tell about the peoples subject to the Huns, whom he calls ?Acatzirs. That is very likely the ?Ac-Khazars or white Khazars, as distinct from the black ?kara-Khazars. The Byzantine Emperor, Priscus tells us, was trying to win this warrior race over to his side, but the greedy Khazar chieftain named ?Karadakh considered the bribe offered to him inadequate, and sided with the Huns. Attila defeated ?Karadakh's rival chieftains and installed him as sole ruler of the ?Acatzirs, and invited him to his court. ?Karadakh thanked him profusely for the invitation, and went on to say that it would be to hard on a mortal man to look into the face of a God, for as one cannot stare into the sun's disc, even less could one look into the face of the greatest god without suffering injury. Attila must have been pleased, for he confirmed ?Karadakh in his rule. .. Priscus's chronicle confirms the Khazars appeared about the middle of the 5th C. The collapse of the Hun Empire after Attila's death left a power vacuum in eastern europe, through which once more wave after wave of nomadic hordes swept from east to west, the ?Uigars and ?Avars prominent among them. the khazars during most of this period seem to be happily occupied with raiding the rich transcaucasian regions of Georgia and Armenia, and collecting plunder. During the second half of the 6th C they became the dominant force among the tribes north of the caucasus. A number of these tribes - Sabirs, Surragirs, Samanders, Bellangars, and so on are from this date no longer mentioned by name in the sources. They had been subdued or absorbed by the Khazars. The toughest resistance apparently was offered by the powerful Bulgars, but they too were defeated in 641 approximately, and as a result the nation was split in two. Some of them migrated west to the Danube, into the region of modern Bulgaria, others north eastwards to the middle Volga, the latter remaining under Khazar suzerainty. Before becoming a sovereign state, the Khazars still had to serve their apprenticeship under another short-lived power, the so-called West Turkish empire or Turkut Kingdom. It was a confederation of tribes held together by a ruler, the Kagan or ?Khogan, a title which Khazar rulers too were subsequently to adopt. This first Turkish state, if one may call it that, lasted for a century, 550 - 650, and then fell apart leaving hardly any trace. However, it was only after the establishment of this kingdom that the name 'Turk' was used to apply to a specific nation, as distinct from other Turkic speaking peoples, like the Khazars and Bulgars.
Thus during the first few decades of the 7th C, just before the Muslim hurricane was unleashed from Arabia, the Middle East was dominated by a triangle of powers, Byzantium, Persia, and the West Turkish Empire. The first two of these had been waging intermittent war against each other for a century, and both seemed on the verge of collapse. In the sequel, Byzantium recovered but the Persian kingdom was soon to meet its doom, and the Khazars were actually in on the kill. They were still nominally under the suzerainty of he West Turkish kingdom within which they represented the strongest effective force and to which they would soon succeed. ? in 627 the Roman Emperor Heraclius concluded a military alliance with the Khazars, the first of several to follow, in preparing his decisive campaign against Persia. There are several versions of the role played by the Khazars in that campaign, which seems to have been somewhat inglorious, but the principal facts are well-established. The Khazars provided Heraclius with 40,000 horsemen under a chieftain named Zebel, who participated in the advance into Persia but then presumably fed up with the cautious strategy of the Greeks turned back to lay siege on Tiflis. This was unsuccessful, but the next year they again joined forces with Heraclius, took the Georgian capital, and returned to the rich plunder. Gibbon has given a colourful description based on Theophanes of the first meeting between the Roman Emperor and the Khazar chieftain. 'To the hostile league of Chosroes were the Avars. The Roman Emperor opposed the useful and honourable alliance of the Turks. At his liberal invitation, the hoard of ?Chosars transported their tents from the plains of the Volga to the mountains of Georgia. Heraclius received them in the neighbourhood of Tiflis and the Khan with his nobles dismounted from their horses ? the Greeks and fell prostrate on the ground to adore the purple of the Caesar. Such voluntary homage and important aid were entitled to the warmest acknowledgements, and the Emperor, taking off his own diadem, placed it on the head of the Turkish prince whom he saluted with a tender embrace and the appellation of a son. After a sumptuous banquet, he presented ?Zebel with the plate and ornaments, the gold, the gems and the silver, which had been used at the imperial table, and with his own hand distributed rich jewels and earrings to his new allies. In a secret interview, he produced the portrait of his daughter Eudosia condescended to flatter the barbarian with a promise of a fair and ?cust bride, and obtained the immediate succour of 40,000 horse. Eudosia, or Epiphenia, was the only daughter of Heraclius by his first wife, who promised to give her in marriage to the Turk, indicates once more the high value set by the Byzantine court on the Khazar alliance. However, the marriage came to nought because Zebel died while Eudosia and her suite were on their way to him. There is also an ambivalent reference in Theophanes to the effect that Zebel presented his son a beardless boy to the emperor as quid pro quo? There is another picturesque passage in an Armenian chronicle quoting the text of what might be called an order of mobilization issued by the Khazar ruler for the second campaign against Persia addressed to all tribes and peoples under Khazar authority. Inhabitants of the mountains and the plains living under roofs or the open sky having their heads shaved or wearing their hair long this gives us a first intimation of the heterogeneous ethnic mosaic who were to compose the Khazar empire. The real Khazars who ruled probably was a minority as the Austrians were in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. In the first 20 years of the Hegira, Mohammed's flight to Medina in 622, with which the Arab calendar starts, the Muslims had conquered Persia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and surrounded the Byzantine heartland, present-day Turkey, in a deadly semi-circle which extended from the Mediterranean to the Caucasus and the southern shores of the Caspian. The Caucasus was a formidable natural obstacle but no more forbidding than the Pyrenees. It could be negotiated by the Pass of ?Dariel, which is now called the Kasbek Pass or bypass to the defile of Darband along the Caspian shore. This fortified defile, called by the Arabs, Bab al Abwab, the Gate of Gates, is a kind of historic turnstile through which the Khazars and other marauding tribes had from time immemorial attacked the countries of the south and retreated again. Now it was the turn of the Arabs. Between 642 and 652 they repeatedly broke through the Darband Gate and advanced deep into Khazaria, attempting to capture ?Balanjar the nearest town, and thus secure a foothold on the European side of the Caucasus. They were beaten back on every occasion in this first phase of the Arab-Khazar war. The last time, in 652, a great battle in which both sides used artillery, catapults and ballistae, 4000 Arabs were killed including their commander, ?Abd al Rahman bin Rabia. The rest fled in disorder across the mountains. For the next 30 or 40 years, the Arabs did not attempt any further incursions into the Khazar stronghold. Their main attacks were now aimed at Byzantium. On several occasions, between 669 and 718, they laid siege to Constantinople, by land and by sea. Had they been able to outflank the capital across the Caucasus around the Black Sea the fate of the Roman Empire would probably have been sealed. The Khazars in the meantime having subjugated the Bulgars and Magyars completed their western expansion to the Ukraine and the Crimea. But these were no longer haphazard raids to amass booty and prisoners. They were wars of conquest, incorporating the conquered people into an empire with stable administration ruled by the mighty Kagan who appointed his provincial governors to administer and levy taxes in the conquered territories. At the beginning of the 8th C, their state was sufficiently consolidated for the Khazars to take the offensive against the Arabs. From a distance of more than a thousand years, the period of intermittent warfare that followed, the so-called Second Arab War, 722-737, looks like a series of tedious episodes on a local scale following the same repetitive pattern: the Khazar cavalry in their heavy armour breaking through the Pass of Dariel or the Gate of Darband into the Caliph's domain to the south, followed by Arabs' counterthrusts to the same pass or defile towards the Volga and back again. Looking thus through the wrong end of the telescope one is reminded of the old jingle about The Grand Old Duke of York Who Had Ten Thousand Men. In fact the Arab sources, although they often exaggerate, speak of armies of 100,000, even of 300,000 men engaged on either side, probably outnumbering the armies which decided the fate of the western world at the battle of Tours at about the same time. The death-defying fanaticism which characterized these wars is illustrated by episodes such as the suicide by fire of whole Khazar towns as an alternative to surrender, the poisoning of the water-supply of Bab-el-Abwab by an Arab general, or by the traditional extortion which would halt the route of the defeated Arab army and make it fight elsewhere. To the garden, Muslims, not the fire. The joys of Paradise being assured, every Muslim soldier killed in the Holy War. At one stage during these fifteen years of fighting the Khazars between Georgia and Armenia the Khazars overran Georgia and Armenia inflicting a total defeat on the Arab army at he battle of ?Ardabil, AD 730, advanced as far as Mosul and Duiar-al-Bakir, more than half-way to Damascus, capital of the Caliphate. But a freshly-raised Muslim army stemmed the tide and the Khazars retreated homewards across the mountains. The next year ?Mas-lar-ibn-un-al-malik, the most famed Arab general of his time, who had formerly commanded the seige of Constantinople, took ?Ballingar and even got as far as ?Salmandar, a large Khazar town further north. Once more the invaders were unable to establish a permanent garrison, and once more they were forced to retreat across the Caucasus. The sigh of relief experienced in the Roman Empire assumed a tangible form through another dynastic alliance when the heir to the throne was married to the Khazar ? Princess, whose son was to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. The last Arab campaign was led by the future Caliph Marwan II and ended in a Pyrrhic victory. Marwan made an offer of alliance to the Khazar Kagan, then attacked by surprise through both passes. The Khazar army, unable to recover from the initial shock, retreated as far as the Volga. The Kagan was forced to ask for terms. Marwan in accordance with the routine followed in other conquered countries requested the Kagan's conversion to the true faith. The Kagan complied, but his conversion to Islam must have been an act of lip-service, for no more is heard of the episode in Arab or Byzantine sources, in contrast to the lasting effects of the [tape ran out here; later conversion to Judaism?]

During the long lull between the First and Second Arab wars the Khazars became involved in one of the more lurid episodes in Byzantine history, characteristic of the times and of the role the Khazars played in it. In AD 685, Justinian II became east Roman emperor at the age of 16. Gibbon says he was foolish and feeble.. after ten years he provoked a rebellion and had his nose chopped off. ... Justinian.. 704-711.. proved worse than the first. He considered the axe, the cord and the rack the only instruments of royalty. He became mentally unbalanced and obsessed with hatred against the inhabitants of a place called Cherson. .. citizens were ?burned/burnt and drowned.. He sent a second expedition in order to raze the city to the ground. However, this time, his troops were halted by a mighty Khazar army. Justinian ? in the Crimea a certain ?Bardanes changed sides and joined the Khazars. A demoralized expeditionary force abjured its allegiance to Justinian, and elected ?Bardanes as emperor under the name of Philippicus. But since Philippicus was in Khazar hands, the insurgents had to pay a heavy ransom to the Kagan to get their new emperor back. When the expeditionary force returned to Constantinople, Justinian and his son were assassinated and Philippicus greeted as a liberator ? installed on the throne, only to be deposed and blinded a couple of years later. The point of this gory tale is to show the influence which the Khazars at this stage exercised over the role and the destinies of the east Roman empire. ... It does not seem an exaggeration to say that at this juncture the Kagan was able practically to give a new ruler to the Greek Empire. The next event should be the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism round AD 740, but to see that remarkable event in its proper perspective one should have at least some sketchy idea of the habits, customs and everyday life of the Khazars prior to the conversion. Alas, we have no lively eye-witness reports such as Priscus' description of Attila's court. What we do have are mainly second-hand accounts and compilations by Byzantine and Arab chroniclers, which are schematic and fragmentary [sic; can they really be both?], with two exceptions: one is a letter, reportedly from a Khazar king, to be discussed in chapter 2. The other is a travelogue by an observant Arab traveller, ibn-?fadl-al who like Priscus was a member of a diplomatic mission from a civilised court to the barbarians of the north. The court was that of the Caliph ?Al-Mukh-Tardir, and the diplomatic mission travelled from Baghdad through Persia and ?Bukhara to the land of the Volga Bulgars. The official pretext for this grandiose expedition was the letter of invitation from a Bulgar king, who asked the Caliph (a) for religious instructors to convert his people to Islam, and (b) to build him a fortress, which would enable him to defy his overlord, the King of the Khazars. The invitation, which was no doubt pre-arranged by earlier diplomatic contacts, also provided an opportunity to create goodwill among the various Turkish tribes inhabiting territories through which the mission had to pass, by preaching the message of the Koran and distributing huge amounts of gold ?bakh sheesh. The opening paragraphs [sic] of our traveller's account [Footnote: based on ?Zecki ?Balidi ?Turgan's German translation of the Arabic text, and an English translation of extracts, by Blake and Fry] read: 'This is the book of ?Ahmed ibn Fadlahn ibn al Abbas ibn Rassid ibn Hammad, an official in the service of (General) Mohammed ibn Suleiman, the ambassador of (Caliph) al ?Mukhtadir to the King of the Bulgars, in which he relates what he saw in the land of the Turks, the Khazars, the Rus, the Bulgars, the Bashkirs, and others, their varied kinds of religion, the history of their kings and their conduct in many walks of life. The letter of the King of the Bulgars reached the Commander of the Faithful, al ?Mukhtadir. He asked him therein to send him someone to give him religious instruction, and acquaint him with the laws of Islam, to build him a mosque and a pulpit, so that he may carry out his mission of converting the people all over his country. He also entreated the Caliph to bring him a fortress to defend himself against hostile kings, i.e. the King of the Khazars. ... Everything that the King asked for was granted by the Caliph. I was chosen to read the Caliph's message to the King, to hand over the gifts the Caliph sent him and to supervise the work of the teachers and interpreters of the law. ? financing.. names of the participants.. and so we started on Thursday 11th of ?Saphar, of the year 309, [which Koestler says is June 21 AD 921] from the City of Peace [that is, Baghdad, capital of the Caliphate]. The date of the expedition is much later than the events described in the previous section, as will be noted, but as far as the customs and institutions of the Khazars' pagan neighbours are concerned, this probably makes not much difference, and the glimpses we get of the life of these nomadic tribes gives at least some idea of what life ? the Khazars may have been during that earlier period before the conversion, when they adhered to a form of Shamanism somewhat similar to that still practised by their neighbours in ibn-?Fadalan's time. The progress of the mission was slow and apparently uneventful until it reached ?Qarizim, a border province of the Caliphate south of the Sea of Aral. Here the governor in charge tried to prevent them from proceeding further by arguing that between his country and the King of the Bulgars there were a thousand tribes of disbelievers who were sure to kill them. The fact that his attempts to disregard the Caliph's instructions to let them pass might be due to other motives. He realised the mission was indirectly aimed against the Khazars with whom he maintained a flourishing trade and friendly relations. In the end though he had to give in and the mission was allowed to proceed to ?Girganzh on the estuary of the ?Amodaria. Here they hibernated for three months because of the intense cold a fact which looms large in many Arab travellers' tales. The river was frozen for three months. We looked at the landscape and thought that the gates of the cold hell had been opened for us. Verily I saw that the market place and the streets were totally empty because of the cold. ? when I came out of the bath and got home I saw that my beard had frozen to a lump of ice, and I had to thaw it in front of the fire. I stayed for some days in a house which was inside another house [a compound] in which there stood a Turkish felt tent. I lay inside the tent wrapped in clothes and furs, but nevertheless my cheeks often froze to the cushion. ... [thaw set in] Each of us put on a ?kurtak, a camisole, over that a woollen kaftan, over that a buslin, a fur-lined coat, over that a ?burka, a fur coat, and a fur cap, under which only the eyes could be seen, a simple pair of underpants and a lined pair and trousers .. when one of us mounted a camel, he was unable to move because of his clothes... They are the most repulsive of men, says ibn ?Fadwal. Their language is like the chatter of starlings. ... Another village.. their language is like the croaking of frogs. Next morning one of the Turks met us. He was ugly in built, dirty in appearance, contemptible in manners, base in nature. We were moving through heavy rain and he said halt and the whole caravan of 3000 animals and 5000 men halted. Then he said not a single one of you is allowed to go on. So we halted, obeying his orders. We said we are friends of the ?Khudakhin, the Viceroy. He began to laugh and said Who is the ?Khudakhin? I shit on his beard. Then he said bread. I gave him a few loaves of bread. He took them and said continue your journey, I have taken pity on you. The democratic methods ? influence practiced ? were even more bewildering to the representatives of an authoritarian theocracy. The nomads have houses of felt. They stay for a while in one place then move on. ? I can see their tents dispersed here and there. Moreover the ? according to nomadic custom. .. Oh Lord, what shall I do in this manner? and consults the chieftain. The sexual mores of the Khazars and other tribes were a remarkable mixture of liberalism and savagery. The women wear no veils in the presence of their en or strangers. Nor do the women cover any parts of their bodies in the presence of people. One day we strayed at the pass of the ?Khuz was sitting around. His wife was also present. As we conversed, the woman uncovered her private parts and scratched them and we all saw it. Thereupon we covered our faces and said may God forgive me. The husband laughed and said to the interpreter: tell them we uncover it in your presence so that you may see and restrain yourselves, but it cannot be attained. That is better than when it is covered up yet attainable. Adultery is alien to them. Yet, when they discover that someone is an adulterer, they spilt him in two halves. They do this by bringing together the branches of two trees, tie him to the branches, and let both trees go, so that the man tied to them is torn in two. It doesn't say whether the same punishment was meted out to the guilty woman. Yet Bulgars of both sexes swim naked in rivers. Homosexuality in Arab countries was taken as a matter of course, but was regarded by the Turks as a terrible sin. .. [Lot of stuff about how the traveller can't get used to the dirtiness of the Turks:] they don't wash after defecating or urinating, they don't bath after seminal pollution [sic] or other occasions. They won't have anything to do with water in winter. Their underclothes fall apart from dirt. However, their savagery leaves them indifferent. He describes the Bulgar's punishment for manslaughter: they put the delinquent in a box of birchwood, put him inside, nail the lid on it, put three loaves of bread and a can of water beside it, suspend the box between two tall poles, saying they've put him between heaven and earth that he may be exposed to the sun and the rain, and that the deity may perhaps forgive him. So he remains suspended until time lets him decay and the winds blow him away. .. Also funeral sacrifices of horses and herds of animals and the gruesome ritual killing of a Rus slave girl. .. Bashkir's phallus cult: I came from something similar, and know of no other creators who made me. Some Bashkirs believed in 12 deities, gods for winter, summer, rain, wind, trees, men, horse, water, night, day, death, earth. And the god that dwells in the sky is the greatest amongst them and takes counsel from the others and thus they are all content with each others' doings. Some of them worship snakes, fish, cranes. When they observe a man who excels through quick wittedness and knowledge, the Volga Bulgars say for this one it is more befitting to serve our Lord. They seize him, put a rope round his neck and hang him on a tree and leave him until he rots away. ... Ibn-?Fadlan describes also one of their pagan customs, human sacrifice, by which the most excellent among men were offered as a sacrifice to god. This was probably ? ? ?tabibs or medicine-men, their shamans, whose equivalent among the Bulgars also wielded the power of life and death over people. .. It took the ? expedition nearly a year from June 21 921 to May 12 922 to reach its destination, the land of the Volga Bulgars. ... The narrative switches to a description of the Rus courts known to the Khazar courts.. The King of the Khazars whose name is Kagan. He appears in public only once every four months. They call him the Great Kagan. His deputy is called Kagan ?Bec. He is the one who commands and supplies the armies, manages the affairs of state, appears in public and leads in war. The neighbouring kings obey his orders. He enters every day in the presence of the Great Kagan with deference and modesty, carrying a stick of wood. He makes obeisance, lights the stick, and when it is burnt down he sits down on the throne at the king's right. ... The power to bind or release or mete out punishments or to govern the country belongs to his deputy, the Kagan ?Bek. Further custom .. great King.. when he dies a great building is built for him containing 20 chambers. In each chamber a grave is dug, stones are broken and ?hammered to powder, spread over the floor covered with pitch. beneath this building flows a river. This river is large and rapid. They divert the river water over the grave and they say this is done so that no devil, no man, no ?woman, no creeping creatures will get at him. After he has been buried those who buried him are decapitated so that nobody may know which of the chambers is his grave. .. ? paradise and they have the same scent as paradise. All the chambers are spread with silk brocade interwoven with threads of gold. It is the custom of the king of the Khazars to have 25 wives. Each of the wives is the daughter of a king who owes him allegiance. He takes them by consent or by force. He has 60 girls ? each of them of exquisite beauty. ... [Rather fanciful description of the harem:] each of the wives or concubines has a palace of her own and an attendant or eunuch who at the king's command brings her to his alcove faster than the blinking of an eye. At last we find some factual information. The King has a great city on the River Itil [that's Volga] on both banks. One bank of the Muslims, on the other bank the King and his court. The Muslims are governed by one of the King's officials, himself a Muslim. The law ?suits the Muslims. Living in the Khazar capital the Christian merchants were ? looked after by the official. Nobody else meddles in their affairs or sits in judgement over them. The Khazars had a castle built of burnt brick, houses with roofs of teak, and several mosques with minarets, one with a minaret rising above the royal castle. Their farms stretch 60 or 70 miles. Mainly of these places produce grapes; Caucasian wine is still a delight. The Royal Treasury's main source of income was foreign trade. The sheer volume of the trading caravans between Central Asia and the Volga-Ural region is indicated by ibn-?Fadlan. ... remember that the caravan had 5000 men and 3000 pack animals. It must have been a mighty caravan. We don't know how many of these there were at any time on the move, or what goods they transported. Textiles, fruit, honey, wax and spices seem to have played an important part. Apart from the fertile regions of the south, with vineyards and orchards, the country was poor in natural resources. The only native product they exported was isinglass. The fact remains that their main commercial activity seems to have consisted in reexporting goods brought in from abroad. Honey and candle-wax particularly caught the Arab chronicler's imagination. Thus ?Macoudasi said in Khazaria, sheep, honey and Jews exist in large quantities. One source mentions gold or silver mines on Khazar territory, but their location has not been ascertained. So Khazaria was by no means isolated from the civilized world compared with its tribal neighbours in the north. It was a cosmopolitan country, open to all sorts of cultural and religious influences, yet jealously defending its independence against the two ecclesiastical world powers.
[All this introductory matter is justified by Koestler on the grounds that it gives the background as to what the Khazars were doing when they converted]
Bury wrote: 'The religion of the Hebrews has exercised a profound influence on the creed of Islam, and it had been a basis of Christianity. It had won scattered proselytes, but the conversion of the Khazars to the undiluted religion of Jehovah is unique in history.'
What was the motivation of this unique event? It is not easy to get under the skin of the Khazar prince, covered as it was by a coat of mail. But every reason in terms of power politics which obeys essentially the same rules throughout the ages. A fairly plausible analogy offers itself. At the beginning of the 8 C, the world was polarised between the two superpowers representing Christianity and Islam. [Note:] Their ideological doctrines were welded to power politics pursued by the classical methods of propaganda, subversion, and military conquest. The Khazar empire represented a third force, which had proved equal to either of them, both as adversary and as an ally, but it could only maintain its independence by accepting neither Christianity nor Islam. For either choice would have automatically subordinated it to the authority of the Roman emperor or the ?Caliph of Baghdad. There had been no lack of efforts by either court to convert the Khazars to Christianity or Islam, and all they resulted in was the exchange of diplomatic courtesies, dynastic intermarriages, and shifting military alliances based on mutual self-interest. Relying on its military strength, the Khazar kingdom, with its hinterland of vassal tribes, was determined to preserve its position as the third force, leader of the uncommitted nations of the steppes. At the same time, their intimate contacts with Byzantium and the Caliphate had taught the Khazars that their primitive shamanism was not only barbaric and outdated compared to the great monotheistic creeds, but also unable to confer on the leaders the spiritual and legal authority which the rulers of the two theocratic world powers, the Caliph and the Emperor, enjoyed. Yet the conversion to either creed would have meant submission, the end of independence, and thus would have defeated its purpose. What could have been more logical than to embrace a third creed which was uncommitted towards either of the two yet represented the venerable foundation of both? The apparent logic is of course due to the deceptive clarity of hindsight. In reality the conversion required an act of genius. Yet both the Arab and Hebrew sources on the history of the conversion point to a line of reasoning adhered to above. To quote Bury once more: 'There can be no question that the ruler was actuated by political motives in adopting Judaism. To embrace Mohammedanism would have made him the spiritual dependent of the Caliphs who attempted to press their faith on the Khazars, and in Christianity lay the danger of becoming an ecclesiastical ?vessel of the Roman empire. Judaism was a reputable religion with sacred books which both Christian and Mohammedan respected. It elevated him among the heathen barbarians and secured him against the interference of Caliph or Emperor. But he did not adopt, along with circumcision, the intolerance of the Jewish cult. He allowed the mass of his people to abide in their heathendom and worship their idols.' Though the Khazars' conversion was no doubt politically motivated it would be absurd to imagine they embraced overnight blindly a religion whose tenets were unknown to them. In fact, however, they had been well acquainted with the Jews and their religious observations for at least a century before the conversion, through the continued influx of refugees from religious persecution in Byzantium and to a lesser extent from countries in Asia Minor conquered by the Arabs. Now that Khazaria was a relatively civilized among the barbarians of the north yet not committed to either of the militant creeds, and so it became a natural haven for periodic exodus of Jews under Byzantine rule, threatened by forced conversion and other pressures. Persecution of various forms started with Justinian I, 527-565, and assumed particularly vicious forms under Heraclius in the 7 C, Leo III in the 8th, ?Asilov, Leo IV in the 9th, ?Romanus in the 10th. Thus Leo III who ruled during the two decades immediately preceding the Khazar conversion to Judaism attempted to end the anomaly of the tolerated status of Jews in one blow, by ordering them all to be baptized. That order led to the flight of a considerable number of Jews from Byzantium. ?Mazoudi relates: In this city [Khazaran, Itil] are Moslems, Christians, Jews, and Pagans. The Jews are the King and his attendants and the Khazars of his kind [presumably the 'white' Khazars]. The king of the Khazars had already become a Jew in the Caliphate of Haroun-al-Raschid, i.e. between 786 and 809. It is generally assumed that Mazoudi used a convenient historical landmark, and that the conversion was actually 740. He was joined by Jews from all the lands of Islam, and from the country of the Greeks [Byzantium]. Indeed, the king of the Greeks at the present time, the year of the Hegira, 332, [AD 943-4] has converted the Jews in his kingdom to Christianity by coercion. Thus many Jews took flight from the country of the Greeks to Khazaria.' The last two sentences referring to events 200 years after the Khazar conversion show how persistently the waves of persecution have followed each other over the centuries. But the Jews were equally persistent. Many endured torture and those who did not have the strength to resist returned later on to their faith, 'like dogs to their vomit' as one Christian chronicler put it.
...
This was an age when converting unbelievers by force or persuasion was the foremost concern. The Jews also indulged in it. ? ? Justinian Byzantine law threatened severe punishments for the attempt to convert Christians to Judaism. ? Jews molesting converts to Christianity the penalty was death by fire. How did they force them? [This is the Emperor Basil against the Jewish community] of ?Orian, southern Italy. Anyone refusing was placed in an olive mill under a wooden press and squeezed the way olives are squeezed. From Khazaria, the Hebrew script seemed to have spread to neighbouring countries. Thus ?Kwalson reports that inscriptions in a non-Semitic language using Hebrew characters were found on two gravestones from ?Thanagoria, ? in the Crimea. They have not been deciphered yet. Crimea was, as we have seen, intermittently under Khazar rule, but also had an old-established Jewish community. The inscriptions may even pre-date the conversion. Some Hebrew letters, shin and ?sardi, also found their way into the Cyrillic alphabet, and furthermore many Polish silver coins have been found, dating from the 12 or 13 C, which have Polish inscriptions in Hebrew lettering, e.g. ?les sec krol polski, Les sec King of Poland, side by side with coins inscribed in the Latin alphabet. These coins are the final evidence for the spreading of the Hebrew script from Khazaria to the neighbouring Slavonic countries. The use of these coins was not related to any question of religion. They were minted because many of the Polish people were more used to this type of script than to the Roman script, not considering it specifically Jewish.
...
This account by Al-Bakri, The Book of Kingdoms and Roads, 11 C: 'the reason for the conversion to Judaism of the King of the Khazars that had previously been a pagan is as follows: He adopted Christianity. [No other source, Koestler says, mentions this; it may be a substitution more palatable to Moslem readers for the Kagan's short-lived adoption of Islam prior to Judaism]. Then he recognized its falsehood and discussed this matter which greatly worried him with one of his high officials ? said to him, 'O king, those in possession of sacred scriptures fall into three groups. Summon them and ask them to state their case, and follow the one who is in possession of the truth.' So he sent to the Christians for a bishop. Now there was with the king a Jew skilled in argument who engaged him in disputation. He asked the Bishop: what do you say of Moses, the son of Amran, and the Torah, which was revealed to him? The Bishop replied Moses is a prophet, and the Torah speaks the truth. Then the Jew said to the King: He has already admitted the truth of my creed. Ask him now what he believes in. So the king asked him what he believed, and he replied I say that Jesus the Messiah is the son of Mary. He is the word, and he has revealed the mysteries and the name of god. Then said the Jew to the King of the Khazars: he preaches a doctrine which I know not, while he accepts my propositions. The Bishop was not strong in producing evidence. Then the King asked for a Moslem, and they sent him a scholarly clever man who was good at arguments, but the Jew hired someone who poisoned him on the journey and he died. So the Jew succeeded in winning the King for his faith, so that he embraced Judaism.' The Arab historian certainly had a gift for sugaring the pill. Had the Moslem scholar been able to participate in the debate, he would have fallen into the same trap as the Bishop, for both accepted the truth of the Old Testament, whereas the upholders of the New Testament and of the Koran were each outvoted two to one. The King's approval of this reasoning is symbolic: he is only willing to accept doctrines which are shared by all three, their common denominator, and refuses to accept for himself any of the rival claims which go beyond that. It is once more the principle of the uncommitted world applied in theology. The story also implies, as Bury has pointed out, that the Jewish influence at the Khazar court must already have been strong before the formal conversion, for the Bishop and the Moslem scholar had to be sent for, whereas the Jew was already with him, the King.
..
We turn from the principal Arab source on the conversion to the principle Jewish source. This is the so-called Khazar correspondence, an exchange of letters in Hebrew between Hasdai-ibn-Shaprut, the Jewish chief minister of the Caliph of Cordoba, and Joseph, king of the Khazars, or rather between their respective scribes. The authenticity of the correspondence has been the subject of controversy, but it is now generally accepted with due allowance made for the vagaries of later copyists. [Appendices: The Khazar Correspondence is described here.. passage dated 1161.. 'you will find congregations of Israel spread abroad from the town of ?Salah, at the extremity of the ?Maghreeb, as far as ?Tahat at its commencement. The extremity of Africa, ?Frequia [? = Tunis], in all Africa, Egypt, the country of the ?Sabeans, Arabia, Babylonia, Elam, Persia, ?Didam, the country of the ?Girgashites which is called ?Zherzhan, ?Tabaristan as far as ?Dalam and the river ?Itur, where live the Khazar peoples who became proselytes. Their king Joseph sent a letter to our Hasdai, the Prince Bar Isaac ben Shaprut, and informed him that he and all his people followed the Rabbinite faith. ?We see near Toledo some of their descendants pupils of the wise and they told us that the remnant of them followed the rabbinite faith.'
...
[Several biographies here: Abraham N Poliak, whose name is not mentioned in the Encyclopedia Judaica 1971. Born in 1910 in Kiev, went to Palestine in 1923, occupied the chair of Medieval Jewish History at Tel Aviv University. He was the author of a lot of books in Hebrew: The History of the Arabs, Feudalism in Egypt, Geopolitics of Israel and the Middle East, and so on. He wrote an essay on the Khazar conversion to Judaism in 1941, in the Hebrew periodical Zion. His book 'Khazaria' was published in 1944 and received with hostility as an attempt to undermine the sacred tradition concerning the descent of modern Jewry from the Biblical tribe.
...
Matthias Mieses: whose views on the origin of eastern Jewry and the Yiddish language I have quoted. He was held in high academic esteem. Born 1880.. Galicia.. studied linguistics.. became a pioneer of Yiddish philology, though he wrote mainly in German, Persian, and Hebrew. He is an outstanding figure at the first conference on the Yiddish language at Chernowitz in 1908. Two books: 'Die ?Entschdewung ?su ?zacker de Judischen Dialecte', 1915, and 'Die Yiddische Sprache' 1924. He spent his last years in Krakow. Was deported in 1945 to Auschwitz and died on the journey.
...
Hugo Freiherr von ?Kutscherer, 1847-1910, one of the early propounders of the theory of the Khazar origin of eastern Jewry. Son of a high-ranking Austrian civil servant, he was destined to a diplomatic career and studied at the oriental academy in Vienna, where he became an expert linguist, mastering Turkish, Arabic, Persian, and other eastern languages. He served as an attache at the Austro-Hungarian embassy at Constantinople, and became in 1882 a director of administration in Sarajevo, ?over the provinces of Bosnia, Herzegovina, recently occupied by Austro-Hungary. His familiarity with oriental ways of life made him a popular figure amongst the Muslims at Bosnia, and contributed to the relative pacification of the province. He was awarded the title of Freiherr Baron ? ?. When he retired in 1909 he devoted his days to his lifelong hobby, the connection between European Jews and the Khazars. He had been struck by the contrast between Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews in Turkey and the Balkans. The study of ancient sources on the history of the Khazars led to a growing conviction they provided at least a partial answer to this problem. He was an amateur historian though a quasi-professional linguist. His Arab erudition was remarkable. There is hardly an Arabic source known before 1910 missing. Unfortunately he died before he had time to provide the bibliography and references to 'Die Chasaren Historische Studie', which was published posthumously in 1910. Though it went into a second edition it is rarely mentioned by historians.]
...
[Start of section on DECLINE:]
[Philology:] Cyril is credited by tradition with having devised the Cyrillic and also the ?Glacolytic alphabet. The latter was used in Croatia till the 17 C. It is indebted to the Hebrew alphabet in at least eleven characters, representing in part the Slavonic sounds. It has long been recognised ? characters a, b, v, g, e, k, p, r, s, sh, sch, and t [says Koestler] which seems to confirm what has been said earlier about the influence of the Khazars.
[DECLINE:] It was, wrote ?D ?Sinor, in the second half of the 8 C that the Khazar empire reached the acme of its glory, between the conversion of ?Boulin and the religious reforms under Obadiah. This is not meant to imply the Khazars owed their good fortune to the Jewish religion. It is rather the other way around: they could afford to be Jews because they were economically and militarily strong. Emperor Leo the Khazar who ruled Byzantium in 775-780, named after his mother the Khazar princess flower .. the one who created a new fashion at court.. with the cloak and dagger intrigues, dynastic marriages, could be dangerous. They gave cause, or provided pretexts, for a war. The pattern was set by Attila in 450.. He is said to have received a message, accompanied by an engagement ring, from Honoria, sister of the West Roman emperor, Valentinian III. This romantic lady begged the Hun chief to rescue her from a fate worse than death, a forced marriage to an old senator. .. She sent him a ring. He claimed his bride, together with half the empire as her dowry. When Valentinian refused, Attila invaded Gaul. Several variations on this quasi-archetypal theme crop up throughout Khazar history. The fury of the Bulgar king about the abduction of his daughter, and ...
No more is heard about Khazar-Arab fighting after the end of the 8 C. .. Ominous episodes in 833..
[End of tape] CB2 1QA TW15 1QA Tel: 0784-246428 Dear Jonathan Sacks, Inquiry about Arthur Koestler's 'Thirteenth Tribe.' Firstly, let me apologise for writing out of the blue like this. I'm prompted to write by your interesting article in CAM, 'The Cambridge Alumni Magazine', about 60s Cambridge and your subsequent activities: I'd like to ask your opinion on a matter which struck me as important since I became aware of it, namely Koestler's book attributing the origin of Eastern European Jews to a state conversion. I don't have a copy of the book at present, and I forget the century he ascribed this event to; 7th or 8th I imagine, since Islam was also involved. I wondered if anyone has answered Koestler, in the two decades or so that have elapsed since he published, and whether any conclusions were arrived at? His book's attractive combination of racy stories in multilingual style seemed convincing, but of course it's incredibly difficult to hunt out reviews of, and replies to, such books, since they tend to be scattered throughout magazines, journals, supplements and all the rest. I'd be very grateful for any information you have on this subject. Best wishes, Rae West. < In article <4nvadh$m9t@news.nyu.edu>, gans@scholar.chem.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans) says: > >John Ritson (john@jritson.demon.co.uk) wrote: >[deletions] >: Yes, as far as I recall from reading the book decades ago, the >: *evidence* for the connection was that the Eastern European Jews had to >: have come from somewhere, and Koestler could find no documentation of >: any mass migration from the obvious starting point . Germany . and so >: the obvious conclusion was that they *must* have been Khazar refugees. In fact several waves of immigration from central Europe are known . the largest perhaps during the persecutions that came with the bubonic plague. The lack of signficant traces of Turkish in the vernacular of the Eastern European Jews points to just how dubious Koestler's theory is. There seems to be little doubt that Eastern European Jewry originated principally in Central Europe and more remotely from migrations from Roman Italy. The 'Mountain Jews', who come the Caucas mountains (close to where the Khazar kingdom once stood) and who speak a Turkish tongue, may be a remnant of the Khazars. It is also not altogether certain that the majority of Khazars converted to Judaism, and that those that did, remained Jews for the longer term. Considering the speculative pseudo.sholarly nature of Koeslter's theory one can only wonder if he had an ideological motivation in writing his book "the 13th Tribe"... M Shalev ---- From: kennedy@quark.phys.ufl.edu (Dallas Kennedy) Subject: Re: the jewish khazars Date: 26 May 1996 00:24:04 GMT Organization: University of Florida References: <4nno62$el6@netnews.upenn.edu> <4nofi6$igm@no.names.nerdc.ufl.edu> <4nok44$2rp@news.inforamp.net> I wasn't sure if _Kuzari_ was named after the Khazars, but that is part of the dialogue, no? I don't what the root KZR means in Hebrew. ...... From: sbavli@i.2000.com Newsgroups: sci.archaeology Subject: Re: the jewish khazars Date: 27 May 1996 03:56:43 GMT References: <4o88b4$f50@no.names.nerdc.ufl.edu> > kennedy@quark.phys.ufl.edu (Dallas Kennedy) writes: > > I wasn't sure if _Kuzari_ was named after the Khazars, but that is part > of the dialogue, no? I don't what the root KZR means in Hebrew. KZR does not have any meaning in Hebrew. It is not a Hebrew root. The Hebrew word Kuzari refers only to a member of the Khazar nation. SB ....... From: ayma@tip.nl Subject: Re: the jewish khazars Organization: The Internet Plaza Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 02:33:33 GMT hagen@delta.hut.fi (fleur.de.lis) wrote: >One book you might try is Ian Heath's "Armies of the Dark Ages 600.1066". >One source described the Khazars as "unusually devious even as nomads who >adopted Judaism as a political ploy to meddle in.between the Christian >Byzantines and Muslim Arabs." The latter is true. Books and articles on the Khazars: Elmer Bendiner . "The rise and fall of paradise", Putnam's Sons, New York, 1983 D.M. Dunlop . "The history of the jewish khazars", Princeton University Press 1954 Nicolas Soteri . " A forgotten jewish empire", in: History Today, april 1995 ----- From: netvision.net.il@TelAviv.netvision.net.il Subject: Re: the jewish khazares Date: Wed, 29 May 96 10:13:55 PDT also the leading israeli writer a. b. yheshua supose to publish in the next months a historical novels about the age of the khazares. probebly,like all of his recent novels it will immediately translate to english. > after much search i found several novels wich deal with the khazares, for all i know they are the only novels in the english language wich deal with this subject. > "the wondrous tale of alroy" ( alternate titles " alroy" and " david alroy") by benjamin disraeli. > disraeli was a 19th century prime minister of england. in the book he told the story of the rise and fall of a 12th century khazar jew wich claimed to be the messiah. this claimant conquared much moslem teritories till he was betrayed and killed. though the book is based on a historical incident it is very fantastic and romantic. > "the lost kingdom, or the passing of the khazars" by samuel gordon. a historical romance about the destraction of the khazares by the russians. > "the khazares dictionary" by miloard pavic. consider to be the greates and most internationaly famous literary work in the serbo.croatic language. this is an imaginary "dictionary" of the khazar culture and the people wich invenstigate it. the book actualy comprise 3 "dictionaries" of the jews, christians and moslems .each present the khazares from a completly view.point.actualy the khazars of pavich are almost utterly invented culture ( in the maner of tolkein middel earth) wich symbolize the mysterious and the unknow. very interensting is his discription of the disciplin of khazar studies ,wich tough have no relation to the real discipline, is quit convincing. > a novel only margarinaly realated to the khazares but very interensting in his oun right is " eaters of the dead" by michael chrichton (author of jurassic park). the novel is presented as a recently descovered manuscript of the arab traveler ibn fadlan. ibn fadlan was a real person and is one of our main sources of information about the khazares and their world. he got out to his travels to the bulgarians with the purpose of creating with them alliance aginst the khazars wich were then the bulgarians overlords. chricton however ignor in his novel the khazares and narrates (in ibn fadlan words) an edventure with a viking group ,wich is uctualy a retele of the beuvolf strory ratinalizied by chricton as a meeting with a surviving tribe of neadertals.it is quite interensting to compare the descripition of ibn fadlan real voyege in kostler book about the khazares "the thirteenth tribe" with chricton fictional,but convincingly presented (including scholary appendix and bibeliography) novel. >> ============================================================== AMAZON REVIEWS [copied 5 Feb 2009] 42 of 45 people found the following review helpful: Still a must for anyone interested in Judaism, despite recent genetic research, November 7, 2006 By Karl Krokar . See all my reviews This book is dated but is still a masterpiece also because the subject matter is (fortunately) presented in a popularised, non academic fashion. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in getting closer to the truth regarding the origin of the vast majority of 'Jews' in the world today. These issues are however politically sensitive and this inevitably results in controversy. The commonly available theory of the origin of the Ashkenazis, or East.European Jews, is the Renanian Theory (see e.g. Wikipedia). Namely, the Ashkenazis would descend from refugees of Crusade. and Black.Death.time persecutions of 'authentic' Jews from western Germany who sought a new life in faraway Poland. However, this theory does not hold to antropomorphic considerations, considerations of numbers of refugees and size of ensuing communities in the East and, most importantly, to a lingustic analysis of the ashkenazi Yiddish language (which points rather to a Southeast.Germany, Slavic and Turkik origin of that idiom). The standard theory also does not explain most of the peculiar customs and surnames of the Ashkenazis and their historical and economical development in continuous conflict with the populace of the host countries. Koestler, following an earlier proposal by Hugo von Kutschera (1910) . but also in accordance with Jewish Encyclopedia pre.1917 articles . rekindles the Khazar Theory of the ashkenazi origins in this book. Potential readers can follow the existent reviews to learn about the details, so it suffices to state that according to this theory the bulk of the Ashkenazis would be the descendants of a turkik tribe (the medieval Khazars) who at the end of the first millenium held an important (and little mentioned) empire in Southern Russia and converted en masse to (rabbinic) Judaism for political and commercial convenience. The empire was however ephimeral and further invasions, both from the early Russians and from newcomer turko.mongol tribes from Central Asia, swept the jewish Khazars away from history (some scholars say BECAUSE of their conversion to Judaism). But did the new converts really disappear? Koestler proposes not, that these people in fact eventually turned into the Ashkenazis of Poland.Lithuania, Hungary, the Ukraine, Russia and even of Germany and Austria. Later, these 'Jews' moved to France, England, the USA, Israel, the world over. So, are the great majority of Jews really akin to the people of the Bible? Opponents of the Khazar Theory claim the jewish Khazars disappeared from history due to the onslaught of kievian Rus' and of tribes from the East: Pechenegs, Kumans (Kipchaks) and Mongols. Strange, because cartographers of Venice Polo Family's travels to Central Asia report a 'Gazaria' and a 'Cumania' in existence around 1250 after the mongol invasions. The Pope's envoy to the mongol court, Giovanni da Piano Carpini, reported encountering a jewish tribe among the constellation of peoples associated with the Mongols. Genoese traders knew the Crimea peninsula with the name 'Gaziria' well into the 1350s. Indeed, the last jewish Khazars left the Crimea (Krym in Russian) as Karaim during imperial russian control of the region. As others have pointed out, the geographic contours of the jewish Pale of Settelments under russian imperial rule overlap significantly the contours of the reduced khazarian province after the Mongols (Gazaria). So what is more natural than these jewish Gaziri turning into the Ashkenazis? That is the shocking thesis of the vonKutschera.Koestler theory. Indeed, why only the jewish Khazars ought to have disappeared? All of their imperial confederate peoples still live on: the Magyars turned into the Hungarians (taking with them the judaic Kabars); the Bulghars turned into the (danubian) Bulgarians and the Volga Bulghars (now Bashkiri, Chuvashi, ...); the Kumans turned into Kipchaki in the East and then Cumani (Kun) in the West (playing a role in the formation of modern Romania and Hungary). Take the Alans (also allied to the Khazars): have they also disappeared? They turned into the Alamanni (a mixture of Alans and germanic southwestern tribes), into the modern Catalans (Goth.Alans) and survive the ancient 'As' people (as known to the Persians) in loco as modern Ossetians. Likewise, the Khazars did not disappear. Koestler explains: they were divided into Ak.Khazars (more sedentary casts) and Kara.Khazars (more nomadic ones, warrior casts). The first converted and eventually turned into the Ashkenazis, the second group remained nomadic. Together with other nomadic groups from the Kipchaks and the Bulghars they eventually formed those former mercenaries of the steppes called Kazakhi in Russian: the Cossacks! These accepted slavic fugitives from medieval serfdom in their midst and thus turned orthodox christian, becoming the scourge of the Ashkenazis many times over and . peculiarly . staunch supporters of the Tzars. The steppes of Eurasia are the strangest place on Earth and reserve us peculiar surprises, so why not jewish Turks? As the reader will learn, some of the Kipchak and some of the Seljuk Turks also converted to Judaism in former times, forming a base for Jews in Romania and in modern Turkey. More recent objections to the Khazar Theory come from modern genetic research, as some reviewers have rebuked. They jump to rushed conclusions. As some experts have remarked, sample populations in these studies were small and not randomly selected, and thus the results may not be statistically significant. We may never know what percentages of 'semitic blood' and of 'turanic blood' the Ashkenazis do carry, and the question is ill.founded since we shall never be able to genetically test vastly mixed populations that moved their settlement regions sometimes many times over. Indeed one should test not only Ashkenazis, Sephardis and their host populations, but also true accepted descendants of the Khazar, Kuman and Seljuk Turks. Until this is done, these genetic studies are meaningless even when their statistical basis is improved. Not surprisingly the conclusions of these studies are simplistic and in clear contradiction with each other: first the 'few founding middle.eastern fathers' scenario, then a 'communities formed by unions between Jewish men and local women' scenario, more recently the 4.women (!) scenario: 'the Ashkenazi population as descended matrilineally from just four women, likely from a Hebrew/Levantine mtDNA pool originating in the Near East in the first and second centuries CE'. It's hard to believe such hasty conclusions drawn from studies on statistically restricted (and ethnically selected) population samples. Has the genetic approach been tested on accepted, uncontroversial situations? The Khazar Theory is important and very well described in Koestler's book. It's important not only in the context of Israel's founding myths (which however Koestler duly considers), but as a unique key to understanding Eastern Europe's (and the world's) medieval and modern history. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 67 of 75 people found the following review helpful: Interesting theory of the origin of East European Jews, November 26, 1997 By A Customer It is curious that in Israel, where I am from, the Khazar's history is only briefly mentioned in school. We did study "letters to the Khazar" by Jehuda Halevi, but more as a literary piece that in context with the Khazars. That is the reason that the book was so interesting for me: It presents a theory which is quite unacceptable to the religious population in Israel. (and outside as well). Are all the eastern european Jews in essence converts? It makes the whole question, so much dealt with in Israel, of "who is a Jew" rather ironical. Are the religious Jews the "real" Jews? And how can they be so much against conversions to judaism, if they themselves are converts? Interesting! Of course, the theory the book presents that ALL the east european Jews are descendants of the Khazars is only a theory, but Koestler surely presents some interesting arguments! Fascinating reading! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 37 of 40 people found the following review helpful: Another angle on this book, October 18, 2002 By R Bell (Dun Eideann/Edinburgh Scotland) . See all my reviews Others have written on the whole argument of whether today's Ashkenazi are Khazars or not. However, leaving that aside, this is a must for anyone interested in general Jewish history and the Black Sea region esp. southern Russia and the Ukraine. Books on the Khazars are hard to come by, and this is fairly readable. (There is also an unusual novel on these folk "The Dictionary of the Khazars" . have a look at that on Amazon and see what you think). Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 31 of 33 people found the following review helpful: FASCINATING AND LITTLE.KNOWN HISTORY, February 4, 2007 By Theresa Welsh "The Seeker" (Ferndale, Michigan, USA) . See all my reviews Arthur Koestler tackled an obscure but potentially explosive topic in this little book about the Khazars, a people who lived in the area between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea in the decades before 1000 AD. Their story make fascinating reading, as the author delves into the limited number of sources that mention them. They wielded great influence in the world of their time, which . as in the present . included conflict between different religious groups. There were Muslims, Jews and Christians who lived in the vicinity and the Khazars were tolerant of all. But the Khazar leaders, who originally had a traditional religion from their nomadic roots, were interested in the three major religions. Folklore has it that they called together the wise men of each religion and asked about its beliefs and practices. When they found that both the Muslims and Christians honored the Jewish God and that the Jewish religion was the oldest, they decided to adopt Judaism. The Khazars became Jews. It is the contention of this book that these Khazar Jews are the ancestors of the Jews of Eastern Europe who were persecuted by Hitler and who eventually founded the modern state of Israel. These Ashkenazi Jews, according to this theory, are not a Semitic people, as are the Sephardic Jews. They do not descend from "God's chosen people," but rather from the nomadic tribes of the Caucasus. The Khazar empire disappeared in the years following the first millennium, wiped out by the Mongol tribes, who formed an alliance with Byzantium. The Khazars and their control of trade routes became irrelevant after that and many migrated to what is now Poland, Hungary and Germany and founded "shetls" . small villages, where they continued to practice the Jewish religion and contributed to the culture of Eastern Europe. You can argue whether these Khazar Jews were "true Jews" but there clearly were Jews from the Diaspora living in the Khazar territory at the time of their conversion, and it seems clear that the Khazar Jews were a mixture. Koestler discusses the high rate of intermarriage between Jews and non.Jews throughout all historic periods. Oddly enough, intermarriage slowed only when Jews were forced to live in ghettoes, with limited contact with non.Jews. There were also many births resulting from rape of Jewish women during the years of brutal pogroms. So all Jews are of mixed origins. It appears to me that Koestler did not write this meticulously researched book to support anti.Jewish or anti.Israel sentiment. He was simply interested in the origin of the Jewish people and felt that the history of the Khazars was little.known and had possibly been suppressed. His later chapters deal with the perception of ethnicity ("I can always tell a Jew when I see one."). He says culture, not genes, produces characteristics of a people. Some people claim they can always tell an American, even though Americans descend from a melting pot. His contention is that ethnicity is largely nonsense and it is the language and culture and shared values that make "a people." He makes the point that Israelis are a people, since they now share a country, a language and a culture. Although some Israelis may believe that "God gave this land to me," that is not what gives Israel the right to exist. The country was legally constituted by the united Nations and is today a country of people who mainly identify themselves as Jewish. Does it really matter who their ancestors were? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (2) 15 of 15 people found the following review helpful: A thought provoking book, October 29, 2007 By Aeneas . See all my reviews Unlike other reviewers I found this to be a very interesting book. Despite being labeled anti.semitic by some reviewers Arthur Koestler was himself of Ashkenazi Jewish descent and proud of it. His book quotes many sources and his thesis should not be dismissed out of hand. In itself it is of historical interest to learn of the Khazar empire that ruled for several hundred years and who were a power equal to the Byzantine empire and one that stopped the Muslim onslaught against Byzantium. I can strongly encourage others to read this book and make up their own mind. Another fascinating read regarding history which deals more with the Khazars, but also historical figures such as Sargon the Great, who established the first semitic dynasty in Mesopotamia, is a book by Laura Knight.Jadczyk called "The secret history of the world". Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 156 of 193 people found the following review helpful: Interesting thesis, highly popularized though!, December 12, 1999 By Stuart W. Mirsky "swm" (New York, USA) . See all my reviews Koestler wrote an intriguing, popularized account, in this book, of the theory that many of today's Jews (mostly those of Eastern European descent) are of non.Semitic origin. Essentially the book recounts the tale of the Khazars, a middle Asian Turkic tribe, or tribal group, which settled in the southern steppes of what is today's Russia, during the seventh and eighth centuries, and adopted Judaism (in reaction to the conflicting demands of nearby 'great powers' espousing Christianity and Islam). In the process of telling this tale, Koestler concludes that the conversion of the Khazars, which seems to be historically documented, explains the significant presence of Jews in Eastern Europe at the end of the Middle Ages (since extant records do not show them arriving from the Mediterranean world, or even western Europe, in any great numbers in ancient or later times). This theory is a quite rational one though it poses problems for Orthodox Jewry since the premise of the faith depends so much (though not exclusively) on the historical link to Abraham, a Semite. Complicating the matter is the suspicion that the Khazar conversion may not have been a 'kosher' one. Orthodox Jews have not, accordingly, been quick to embrace the Khazar thesis and others tend to shy away from it for this and other reasons. However, the facts do seem to indicate that modern Jews are a mixture of many different genetic influences (just look at the physical evidence). But if the Khazars did contribute substantially to the Jewish gene pool, they didn't do so exclusively as modern scientific research indicates that there are clear genetic markers which connect modern Jews (Orthodox and otherwise) to a single source which spans both the Eastern European and Sephardic Jewish heritages, suggesting that the Khazar influence was limited at best. But even if this research did not exist, so what? The record also suggests that there were Semitic Jews (from Constantinople and Persia) living among the Khazars before and after the conversion who certainly would have intermingled with a "Jewish" Khazar population in whose midst they lived. And no one knows what method the conversion may have taken in any case, whether rabbincally sanctioned at the outset or only after the fact, or not at all. Just as people from all pagan backgrounds quite legitimately enrolled in the Christian and Muslim folds from ancient times going forward, so there is no reason to deny the Judaism of Jews whose ancestors may have been non.Semites but who embraced the religion which traces its roots back to Abraham and Moses. Now there are those who seize on the existence of the Khazars to deny modern Jews their claim to Jewishness. This is absurd, even if there is a substantial genetic link with a non.Semitic Turkic people in the Jewish past. Still others see the Khazars as a convenient hook on which to hang negative aspersions they wish to cast on modern Jews, suggesting that Jews are descended from a cruel and barbaric middle Asian horde, not fit to stand with the great civilizations and cultures of history. Jews, in this view, are not the ancient people of the covenant we find in the bible but rather historical imposters. But this is just as absurd as using the Khazar connection to deny modern Jews their link to their heritage. Like the Khazars, other European groups came from middle Asia at different historical times and intermixed with many different groups. If some adopted Christianity while others chose Judaism, there is yet no reason to suggest that the one group was better than the other. In fact the historical record shows that, while the Khazars were nomadic tribesmen in Byzantine times, they were no worse than the more 'civilized' Christian peoples of the Byzantine Empire in terms of their dealings with friends and enemies (and possibly they were better as they were a good deal more tolerant and less intrusive on their subjects' lives). Yes, the Khazar empire blew away without leaving a trace .. unless one seeks and finds that trace in the European mores and culture of the Jews coming out of that region (big fur hats and long coats, for instance, may have been a carry.over from the nomadic Khazar horsemen). However, the record, such as it is, also suggests that the Khazars were unusually enlightened 'conquerors' who treated their subject peoples with great mildness. In fact, this very mildness may have been the source of their downfall since they did not ruthlessly suppress their enemies or enforce any sort of cultural hegemony which might have created a unified state capable of withstanding the Russians who eventually overran them. Or the Pecheneg horsemen who were much more brutal and benighted. Or the Mongols, who came after, about whom little more need be said. As to Koestler's book, it does present a very simplified version of all this, largely derived from the the work of the scholar, D. M. Dunlop of Columbia University who wrote a much better one (THE HISTORY OF THE JEWISH KHAZARS) some years before. Most of Koestler's information seems to have come from Dunlop's book though, in many cases, he over.simplified or simply got his facts wrong. So, if you're interested in the Khazar thesis I'd suggest you check out Dunlop's book first, although Koestler's is an easier read and adds to the case Koestler's own, not unreasonable, speculation about the relationship of the Khazars to modern Jewry (Dunlop doesn't go there). But as an easy introduction to this particular line of thinking, Koestler's book is alright. Just beware the oversimplifications and errors. SWM Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) 67 of 83 people found the following review helpful: Hold the Strudel and Pass the Baklava, December 23, 2004 By Robert S. Newman "Bob Newman" (Marblehead, Massachusetts USA) . See all my reviews Back in the 1970s, Arthur Koestler, author of "Darkness at Noon", wrote this amazingly innovative book. I read it in Rarotonga in 1980...a suitably exotic place to read a serious book on a rather exotic topic. Recently I returned to it, though I long ago disagreed with the author's main conclusions. In the first 121 pages, Koestler describes the history of a long.vanished, Turkic people called the Khazars, whose ruler, faced with pressure from both Muslim and Christian nations around them, took the radical step of converting to Judaism. As this is one of the very few instances (if not the single one) in history of such a royal move, the Khazars have attracted scholarly attention ever since, particularly, but not only, from Jews. Indeed, you can log on to a Khazar Studies website today. For another, less factual view of this interesting tribe, you can read Milorad Pavic's poetic, absurdist novel "Dictionary of the Khazars". In any case, Koestler's history makes fascinating reading, containing accounts by ancient Arab travellers, stories of Jewish crusaders in northern Iraq, and descriptions of the links to Vikings, Byzantium, Islam, and Magyars. I have no professional knowledge as to how accurate it all is, but if I were awarding stars for good history writing, I'd give five here. However, THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE is not just a history. In the remainder of the book, Koestler constructs an argument for the Eastern European Jews' being the descendants of these Khazars. He asks where the Khazars all disappeared to. He says population statistics from the period 1300.1500 bear evidence that there could not have been so many Jews to be killed by the brutal Bogdan Khmielnitsky in the great massacres of 1648.49 in the Ukraine unless the Khazars had become the Polish.Ukrainian Jews by then. He deals in some dubious racial theorizing, throws in a few arguments based on place names, and concludes that the "original stock" of the Jews was predominantly Turkish. This theorizing turned me off back in 1980 and it still does. As an anthropologist, I have to ask: in all cases known in history, when a people converts en masse to another religion, a large body of pre.existing language and culture always remains. Why not with the supposed Khazar.Jews ? Is there an element of Turkish in Yiddish ? No. Are there any kinds of nomadic or Turkish cultural behaviors among the Eastern European Jews ? The answer is no. This would be just about impossible if Koestler's theory were correct. Secondly, to rely on statistics gleaned from medieval records is extremely dubioius especially when the Jews were hardly deemed members of European society and may never have been counted. Numbers of people killed or born were routinely exaggerated or ignored all over Europe. I rejected Koestler's theory 24 years ago. Since then, DNA research, unknown at the time, has shown that most Eastern European Jews have a mixed Semitic and European heritage. Despite the passage of many centuries, genetically the closest people to them are still the Palestinians, Lebanese and Syrians. Koestler's theory remains only an interesting thought. It is worth reading for the historical part and to see how convincing incorrect theories can still be. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 21 of 24 people found the following review helpful: An interesting hypothesis, October 20, 2004 By Jill Malter (jillmalter@aol.com) . See all my reviews Arthur Koestler had a long and illustrious writing career. Many of us were captivated by "Darkness at Noon," "Thieves in the Night," Promise and Fulfilment," "The Sleepwalkers," "The Trail of the Dinosaur," and many other great works. This book, from 1976, is about the Khazars, a people of Turkish stock that lived to the northeast of the Black Sea and converted to Judaism in the eighth century AD. The obvious question, which had been asked by many people prior to Koestler, is to what extent the Khazars are the ancestors of the Ashkenazic Jews. Koestler suspected it is to a great extent. I think there is substantial evidence that many Khazars did in fact convert to Judaism. And there is also some evidence that the initial number of Jews who wound up in the major Jewish population centers of Eastern Europe via the Middle East and Germany was rather small. That suggested to Koestler that the presumably more numerous Khazars dominated the Jewish population in Eastern Europe 1000 years ago and that they are the principal ancestors of today's Ashkenazic Jews. However, it seems that recent scholarship has not given much support to this guess. On the contrary, genetic evidence has strongly indicated that the small number of Jews coming from Germany may well have been by far the main ancestors of today's Ashkenazim. As Koestler feared, his hypothesis has been quoted by those trying to find an excuse to deny present.day Israelis their rights to their homes. That is why Koestler explains that whether the genes of Israel's people are of Khazar, Spanish, Roman, or Semitic origin is irrelevant. It "cannot affect Israel's right to exist . nor the moral obligation of any civilized person, Gentile or Jew . to defend that right." In any case, I found the book interesting. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (3) 27 of 32 people found the following review helpful: shakes up accepted views of jewish ancestry, May 23, 1999 By wbutler8@compuserve.com (San Juan,Puerto Rico) . See all my reviews Like Emmanuel Velikovsky (on different fascinating subjects), Koestler goes where conventional thinkers fear to tread.My personal criteria for a book or theory that breaks new ground is to ask myself what was the author's motivation. If I decide the author approaches the subject with an open mind,I am highly inclined toward their view. But then I am predisposed to the contrarian view. Without innovators willing to take risks, civilization would still be in the Dark Ages. The Thirteenth Tribe is tall on research, solid on its historical base regarding the Khazar conversion to Judaism and credible in its conclusion theory of the Khazar migration. Koestler, being a Jew, knew the hornet's nest he would stir up with his theory and proceeded with his version of the truth of the matter. I can think of no better argument that he believed very strongly in the veracity of his conclusions than that he was willing to take the vehement criticism from his own people as a cost of getting his theory into the public domain. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 25 of 30 people found the following review helpful: An Outstanding Primer, July 29, 2004 By Scott gru.Bell (Fort Mill, SC, USA) . See all my reviews Koestler's book is an outstanding primer to the history of Eastern Europe and Russia during the Middle Ages. For this reason alone, it is worth reading with diligence. The premise of the book centers around yet another mass conversion to Judiasm, something similiar to that which took place in the Middle East during the 200 BCE to 100 CE period, when Judiasm more than doubled due to conversions. The conclusion, drawn by the author, is that the vast majority of Jews today are descendants of the conversion in Khazaria during the eighth century CE. This implies that today's Jews, particularly in the USA and Israel, have no Abrahamic promise to the Holy Land. Such an implication will naturally be resisted and condemned by American and Israeli Jews. This, in turn, sparks negative book reviews concerning this text. I do not know how factual The Thirteenth Tribe is, for I am but a layman on this topic. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the book is a must read for anyone interested in American or Israeli.Palestinian politics. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 18 of 21 people found the following review helpful: The Thirteenth Tribe, January 9, 2007 By Enver Khorasanee . See all my reviews Since this book was written and researched by none other than the head of the History Department of the Univercity of Tel Aviv it is a extremely revealing and therefore a must read for seekers of truth. Enver Khorasanee Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 24 of 29 people found the following review helpful: History of the Khazar Empire, May 30, 2003 By A Customer Intellectually challenging study of the Khazar Empire, its conversion to Judaism, and its (mostly warlike) interactions and intermarriages with the Rus, Magyar, and Bulgar tribes to the North and West, and with the Muslims and Byzantines to the South. Original Muslim sources are quoted when the empire was at its height, from the 9th.11th Century. The Empire was known as far away as Spain. After this time, it was defeated by the Rus Empire centered in Kiev, descendents of the Vikings, and the rest of the book is devoted to possible dispersion theories, suggesting that most of the Khazars dispersed to the newly forming cities of Eastern Europe. Koestler gives detailed evidence for this, part of which is that the Jews have always been much more populous in Eastern Europe than they ever were in Western Europe. The last part of the book discusses genetic variation which was a consequence of the Jewish concentration in the ghettos of Eastern European cities. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 31 of 39 people found the following review helpful: An Explosive Book, January 30, 2006 By A Reader . See all my reviews This is a book on a topic that is still very touchy for modern day liberal westerners, keeping in view their guilt for centuries of Jew.baiting which culminated in what Hitler did. But this book would be very interesting as a study in genealogy alone, if nothing else. Two facts make this book unimpeachable: One, that Koestler was himself a proud Jew of Khazarian descent, and so would never demean his own roots; and two, his impeccable literary credentials in the British literary establishment also preclude anything fishy. Added to this, one may say, was his and his wife's brutal and still unexplained murder in their apartment in 1983. Obviously, there were "interests" which were loath at Mr.Koestler's impeccable expose of the truth about them, and they wanted to get rid of him. But their foul act in itself reinforced the validity of what they were desparately trying to put a stop to. This book details for the beginner in lucid yet scholarly prose the murky and deliberately overlooked, yet crucially important history of a medieval Turkic Asiatic Jewish kingdom called Khazaria lying between Byzantium (modern Turkey) and the Capian Sea (which is still referred to in Persian as "Bahr.i.Khazar" or "the Khazar Sea"). and spanning much of southern Russia. The author establishes that this crafty Turkic race converted to Judaism out of political expediency in order to protect its interests from Christianity and Islam which were then "on the rampage" in the area. Their empire existed for a few hundred years, before being finally ended by the hordes of Genghis Khan (to whose Mongols the Khazars were also distantly related through the Huns, another North Asian Turkic tribe). Koestler then goes on to establish that after its dispersal in the Dark Ages, the Khazar population started migrating to the traditional modern day centres of European Jewry: various Ukrainian and Belorussian cities, Poland and Germany . where their descendants today make up the Ashkenazi population of Jews, which is the branch which constitutes the bulk of modern Jewry (85 to 90%). Hence, it can be deduced that Koestler's investigation proved that the bulk of modern day European Jews (apart from the Sephardic and Arabian Jews) are actually "Asiatics" and not the descendants of the Children of Israel as they would have the world believe. That in turn, invalidates their claim to their forced occupation of Palestinian territory as Israel... This is an explosive conclusion, as I said earlier, and one can see why the man had to pay for it with his life and that of his wife's... In addition, he says that the present day Palestinian Arabs are largely the actual genetic desendants of the original Israelites. The reader is left to draw his own conclusions from all this evidence. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 24 of 30 people found the following review helpful: Good job Mr. Koestler, October 18, 2005 By John McKinney "John" (Texas) . See all my reviews The only problem I had with the book is that it was sort of drawn out and wordy, but the content I think important. Ashkenazim (90% of modern Jews) was a son of Gomer and Gomer a son of Japheth, son of Noah. Shem was the son of Noah where the term semite (shemite) is derived. Thus modern Jews in mass are not Semites. But as the other reviewers have agreed, the world nation of the Jews are a mixture of many peoples, including the Khazars, which inturn became a mixed people. What I find revalent is that in Deut. 23:2 of the Bible, it states that a bastard cannot enter into the Kingdom of the Lord for 10 generations. The word bastard translates into the Hebrew as mamzer. Mamzer means mongrel, mixed. Thus Koesler's work is extremely significant. The Jews living in the land of Palentine today, by God's declaration, are legally not the children of the promise, they are still mixed to this day. It is easy to see why Koestler was murdered shortly after the release of this book. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 21 of 27 people found the following review helpful: Interesting possibility but very short on hard evidence., September 8, 2004 By Mike Walsh (Delmar, NY) . See all my reviews I read the NY Times review of this book when I was too young to buy it and have only now caught up. It posits that the leaders of the long.lost Turkic empire of Khazaria chose Judaism as a third way to maintain their independence from both Christian Byzantium and the Muslim east, which hemmed them in from each side, and that the Turkic Khazar peoples, not actual middle easterners, are the ancestoral population of the modern Ashkenazy Jewish communitites in the West. Apparently the thesis has been bandied about a great deal since by people unsympathic to the Jews, but it seems clear that Koestler himself meant the book purely as a scholarly inquiry into the history of his own people. I used to wonder why the study of history seemed to focus so narrowly on certains cultures at certain times, and now ascribe that tendency mostly to the simple scarcity of written or other hard evidence for so much of the world's past. There are plenty of sources for one more book about the ancient Greeks or Romans, but trying reading a book about the Celts, whoever they may or may not have been, and you feel stranded in fog. That principal holds true in spades for "The Thirteen Tribe" but I am not inclined to blame the author. There is simply nothing left of the Khazars but a handful of second.hand references, so while Koestler trots out some interesting possibilties here, his central thesis is never firmly established. More believable are the sections of the book which detail how Jewish communities around the world are genetically closer to their host populations than to each other, thus strongly refuting the notion that the Jews constitute a distinct "race". Some may find that unsettling, but it squares nicely with modern Jewish struggles against racism of various sorts. By all means read the book if you can; it presents an interesting if sketchy history of a part of the world we never hear about and will fill a few gaps in your knowledge of the ancient world, and Koestler does write well. But as for the central premise, that modern Ashkenazy communities are descended from the Khazars, take it more as a possibility than as an established truth. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 10 of 12 people found the following review helpful: Genetic Studies Prove Koestler Correct: True Hebrews/Palestinians Are The SAME race, February 16, 2008 By Photobug . See all my reviews Recent genetic studies have shown Koestler was correct. Genetic studies are continuing to prove conclusively that the Ashkenazi (common European/Western Jew) have no genetic connection with the semitic peoples of the middle east. In fact, the middle eastern Hebrews and the Palestinians are the SAME genetic race .. which is NOT related to the Ashkenazi Jews, who never occupied the middle east. Genetic studies also are proving that Ashkenazi Jews (Khazars) are not a semitic race. Journal axes gene research on Jews and Palestinians http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/25/medicalscience.genetics Excerpts: "In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in the region.(middle east) In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited." "Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences', they conclude." Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 10 of 12 people found the following review helpful: Book was ok., June 29, 2006 By Jabulani (Kansas City, Missouri United States) . See all my reviews Not bad information. Some people are always afraid to face the facts. Half the truth has not been told about this issue. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 15 of 19 people found the following review helpful: History of the Khazar Empire, May 30, 2003 By Drew S. Spears (Springtown, Pa. United States) . See all my reviews Intellectually challenging study of the Khazar Empire, its conversion to Judaism, and its (mostly warlike) interactions and intermarriages with the Rus, Magyar, and Bulgar tribes to the North and West, and with the Muslims and Byzantines to the South. Original Muslim sources are quoted when the empire was at its height, from the 9th.11th Century. After this time, it was defeated by the Rus Empire centered in Kiev and the rest of the book is devoted to possible dispersion theories, suggesting that most of the Khazars dispersed to the newly forming cities of Eastern Europe. Koestler gives detailed evidence for this, part of which is that the Jews were much more populous in Eastern Europe than they ever were in Western Europe. The last part of the book discusses genetic variation which was a consequence of the Jewish concentration in the ghettos of Eastern Europe. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 25 of 33 people found the following review helpful: Amazing book!, October 17, 2005 By Charlie Atan (Sane People's Hospital) . See all my reviews The most convincing part of this book is that you can't find it in any mainstream bookstores! I wonder why not? Why are they keeping it out of the public eye? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 4 of 4 people found the following review helpful: An enlightening account of a forgotten people, despite its poor central thesis, April 25, 2008 By Scott George Mccombe (UK) . See all my reviews Arthur Koestler has been subject to much vilification since the publication of `The Thirteenth Tribe', which sets forward the thesis that the majority of Jews today are not of Semitic origin, but should be traced back to the forgotten Khazar Empire. I think that much of this is justified regarding Koestler's racial conclusions, but not on the bulk of his chronology of the Khzaria. The central argument of `The Thirteenth Tribe' is that the bulk of modern Jewry can be traced back to the seemingly unheard of Khazar Empire, which flourished during the 8th century, before gradually disintegrating in the 10th century. Koestler details the rise of this nomadic nation, and the eventual difficulties produced from being settled between the Christian Byzantine Empire on the West, and the Islamic powers to the East. Refusing to be dominated by either the Roman Emperor or the Caliph of Baghdad, as well as motivations by an onslaught of Jewish refugees, Koestler details the unusual decision taken by the Kazhar nobility to convert to Judaism. The eventual defeat of this power is chronicled, as is the dispersal of the Khazar Jews throughout the world. The rise of the Khazars is certainly well documented, as is the conversion of the upper.classes to Judaism. Less documented by Koestler is the evidence for the lower classes following this example, or the substance supporting the conversion of the nobility having any real significance on the genetics of Ashkenazi Jews. Considering Jewish Koestler was an atheist, and taking note of his stated desire to seperate modern Jewry from both the 'Chosen People' and 'Christ.Killer' label, it seems apparent that he was less than objective in formulating his theory; something that is seen clearly in the chapters attempting to describe the racial attributes of Jews. However, `The Thirteenth Tribe' is certainly a provoking read, which should interest anyone curious in Early Middle Age political manouving. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 19 of 26 people found the following review helpful: Regardless Of All The Arguments..., December 5, 2005 By Caesar M. Warrington (Lansdowne, PA United States) . See all my reviews Koestler researches and documents the history and culture of an obscure but quite fascinating Turkic tribe. Arguing over who are "true" Jews is not only irrelevent but silly and shows an ignorance of the history and religion of the Hebrew peoples. Hebrews and Jews were a heterogeneous lot long before the Khazars arrived on the historical scene and adopted Judaism as their religion. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 12 of 16 people found the following review helpful: Ignorance Survives, January 6, 2007 By B. Tupper (Ramona, CA United States) . See all my reviews I have little problem with the main outlines of Koestler's thesis..however much I might quibble with some of the details. I am comfortable with the idea that the gene pool of modern Ashkenazy Jewry results largely from a melding of Jews from Western Europe (refugees from the Middle East) and Khazars who converted to Judaism, of whatever variety. Modern DNA studies propose that the Ashkenazy genetic material is about 40% of Middle East origin. To the extent that such genetic research is accurate, that leaves about 60% to be filled by Khazar, Germanic and Slavic inheritance. People do intermarry. The Jewish people have always absorbed from the neighboring population. Even Moses had a non.Jewish wife. My purpose in this review is to point out the absurdity of the review posted last September by [Space Intelligences "Space Intelligences"]. Not enough that he apparently beliees in space aliens, but he writes that Iranians are Semites. Any high school student who ever looked into a decent encyclopedia should know better. The Persians, and many of their neighbors, are NOT Semites. They are Indo.Europeans. Such glaring violation of established fact should indicate the value of the whole. As always, the discriminating reader must beware. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 35 of 50 people found the following review helpful: The Khazars and Judaic proselytism!, January 20, 2000 By O. B. Makhubela (South Africa) . See all my reviews Indeed, this is a 5 star book: well researched, unbias, logical and convicing reasons and arguments The boook deals with the conversion of the Khazars (ancient Turks) to Judaism, their (Khazars) history, their power, their reason of conversion to Judaism, and many more! This Khazars, as Koestler argues and is supported by independent historians, formed the bulk of Eastern Europe Jewry and the majority of the world jewry (to this day). Koestler also includes an excellent analysis of the modern Jews: the "hooked" nose, blood resemblance of various Jews, and many more interesting features. It is very clear that at the end the author does adopt a hostile attitude towards the Diaspora Jews . if you follow his/her argument, you can also raise the question: What if the Jesws in Palestine are also to a significant extent a Diaspora? Get the book, even if it does not answer the BIG question: who then is the true genuine Semetic Jew? Also, Koestler calls the Falasha of Ethiopia, "the Falasha of Abyssinia". This is the MOST correct designation as used by Koestler, viz. Abyssinia! Such little things make a difference! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 4 of 5 people found the following review helpful: Koestler to the rescue, July 30, 2008 By David H. Muse "Tigermuse" (Salt Lake City, Utah) . See all my reviews Koestler, and other Khazars, who have the courage to come forward and expose the fraud perpetuated by our corrupt education system, main stream media and bogus religious institutions, deserve a special place in whatever the here after has to offer. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 10 of 14 people found the following review helpful: A thought.provoking essay on the nature of Jewishness, April 21, 1998 By A Customer I am not a good enough historian to know whether the author's main thesis . that the Khazars converted to Judaism . is credible. What I thought more interesting was his comment that there might be no such thing as a Jewish "race" in any usual sense in which the word is used. He notes the awful irony of that in relation to the holocaust. This is definitely not an anti.semitic book, just one that takes an unconventional view . a trademark of Koestler's writing. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment Khazar, August 7, 2006 By Shaneece E. Norris . See all my reviews The book delivered the information I was looking for. There were times that I got lost trying to follow the nomadic patterns of the tribe. Overall, the book is a good read, and I recommend it to others. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 45 of 70 people found the following review helpful: The truth about history's greatest & most enduring deception, July 20, 2002 By Charles "cyconsulting" (Miami, Florida United States) . See all my reviews I had read this important book years ago and now have found it again. It sets right the story of a people who have long used a false identity that has served them well, a fact that should have become obvious because of their lack of Semitic attributes. The blue eyes & red hair often found in so.called modern "Jews" is a dead giveaway of this. Koestler documents and analyzes how the movement of Jews into Europe never reached farther east than the western edge of Germany and how these few (according to "Jewish" census sources) left the area due to the pressures and violence related to the Plague epidemics when many were killed. When masses of "Jews" from Poland, Lithuania, Russia and Prussia moved into Eastern Germany after the twelfth century, the amounts were prodigious . not the few stragglers that might have been found had they remained in Germany and moved East after the Bubonic Plagues. The so.called Jewish Pale actually comprised much of the territory that had been the domain of the Khazars since late in the fifth century AD, basically the same people in the same area. One should remember that the conversion to Judaism was political and not religious, so that most of the converted Khazars remained pagan or atheistic. Centuries later, Irving Kristol in his book Neo.Conservatism stated that "the Jewish people discovered in the XVIII century that there was no god." As B'Nai B'Rith documentaries shown on PBS attest, modern "Judaism" is more than anything else a way of life . except for the minority among the Ashkenazi (Khazars) who had become Orthodox "Jews" . whose religion is the basis for their lives. The Koestler comment that the modern "Jews" are more related to Attila than to Solomon and David is of course true. A team of archaeologists sent by the state of Israel to verify Koestler's claims, found about the same facts that the writer had. It is a pity that the Bolsheviks in Russia, themselves for the most part . the overwhelming part . Khazar "Jews", found it convenient to flood the existing Khazar fortress of Sarkel, perhaps to eradicate any possibility of it being found where their own roots lied. NOTE: In the fifth century AD, Leo III, the Isaurian, emperor of Byzantium had the Jews remaining around the Mediterranean after the Roman destruction of Israel/Judea in AD70 and after the Bar Kohba uprising, c.AD135, picked up and sent to Khazaria, but these numbers were a tiny drop into the one million or more Khazars and their allies . which had been the Pecheneg, the Maggyar, the Alani, the Huns, Turks, and others . all of them scattered over an area larger than the United States. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 26 of 41 people found the following review helpful: Good, but be skeptical, March 21, 2001 By "epeysakh" (New York, NY United States) . See all my reviews Although a good book, take this work with a grain of salt. Koestler comes to many conclusions that are debatable and thinly founded. "The Thirteenth Tribe" is better for proposing ideas and possibilities than for defining truths. If you are interested in the Khazars, I would recommend Kevin Alan Brook's "The Jews of Khazaria" .. which supports some of Koestler's conclusions, but refutes others. I agree with Edgar that Ashkenazi Judaism has nothing in common with Caucasian customs and very much in direct contradiction. However, I do not recall Koestler ever stating that the Khazars ever had caucasian customs. Although Caucasians and Khazars definitely mixed (to what extent, who can know?), Caucasian peoples lived in and around the Caucasus mountains long before the Khazars. Nevertheless, it leads to an important question about the presence of Judaism in the Caucasus and around the Black Sea long before the Khazars. Koestler does a poor job of discussing these peoples, their background, where they came from and their customs .. while he quickly comes to a conclusion that most Jews today are descended from the Khazars, a conclusion which is at best hypothetical. Read "The Thirteenth Tribe", you'll probably enjoy it, then continue to read Kevin Alan Brook's "The Jews of Khazaria," and check as many of the sources of both works as possible. More information and more study on this subject will bring us closer to reality .. which is what I would guess most people reading these works are looking for. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 1 of 2 people found the following review helpful: It continued my journey, November 2, 2008 By Max Heffler (Houston, TX USA) . See all my reviews It continued my journey into learning about the Khazarian royalty that I could be descended from. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 1 of 2 people found the following review helpful: Kind of ruins that whole "anti.Semitism" thing, October 3, 2008 By Cwn_Annwn (Copenhagen, Denmark) . See all my reviews When this book came out it caused a big controversy although I'm not quite sure how anybody could rationally critique what Koestler put forth here. I don't think any sane human being that knows how to read could say that the good bulk of the European/Eastern European Jews are descended from the biblical Israelites. Koestler documents how these European Jews came out the Khazar tribe of southeast Russia/Khazakistan who even back then were a mixed race people mainly of Turko.Armenian type racial stock with some Asian, that later mixed with other various peoples. It really strikes me as odd when Jews like to refer to themselves as a race, which is a card they like to play when its to thier advantage, when there are Jews from literally every race on the planet. I mean you have the stereotypical Ashkenazi type Jew, the middle eastern/Sephardic type of Semitic Jew, but you also have Asian Jews, the African Jews who are an Ethiopian/Somolian racial type, many of the Jews with ancestry that came out of of Germany are indistingguishable from blonde haired blue eyed nothern Europeans (the Jewess actress Alicia Silverstone or the actor Kirk Douglas are good examples), there was even some South American Indian tribe that called themselves Jews that were allowed to immigrate to Israel a few ago. So my point being, to call the Jews a race, or to say that there is any chance that any but a tiny percentage of them have even the slighest chance that they have some lineage with the Jews of the old Testament is ludicrous. If they want to call themselves the chosen of the Yahweh demon thats their own business I suppose but when fables and historical falsehoods are used as justifications for global political maneuverings that more often than not have seriously negative ramifications for the majority of the people on this planet then I begin to have a problem with it. Koestler also documents the whole process of conversion of the Khazars to Judaism, which from my research seems mainly to have been a political/economic move because of the Khazars land being right in the middle of a major trade route between the middle east and Europe. Because there was often crusades and warfare between the Muslims in the middle east and the Christians to the north the Khazars chose a religion that would allow them to play both sides of the card and not have to choose sides when problems arose. You also get a lot of interesting general history of the area that the Khazars came out of using various sources, in particular Ibn Fadlan who is best known for his writings on the Viking Rus that were in that area during the time he was. Overall this is one of the better books you can read if you are studying Ashkenazi Jews. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 16 of 26 people found the following review helpful: Koestler's work should be taken with a grain of salt, March 13, 1998 By forstadt@fas.harvard.edu (Providence, RI) . See all my reviews This review is from: The Thirteenth Tribe (Hardcover) The "Thirteenth Tribe," by Arthur Koestler, is certainly a fascinating read and must be considered an essential source for anyone interested in the history of the Khazars. Unfortunately, Koestler's conclusions about the genesis of East European Jewish communities are not warranted even on the basis of his own evidence. The Khazars' conversion to Judaism is an amazing historical fact, but their contribution to the gene pool of Eastern Europe is uncertain. We still don't know to what degree the bulk of the Khazar population (other than its leaders) adopted the Jewish faith, but we do know that a significant Jewish presence in Eastern Europe predated (and indeed influenced) the Khazar conversion. Extremists on both sides of the Khazar issue have chosen either to adopt Koestler's view wholesale or reject it completely. The answer seems to be somewhere in the middle. The story of Khazars should properly be relegated to the realm of historical, rather than political, interest. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 14 of 23 people found the following review helpful: Most Excellent, September 15, 2005 By Muhammad Ashakur "nicemetal" (Chicago, IL) . See all my reviews I finally overstand the history that has our nation in such a misfortunate scenario. This must be considered required reading reading for all Americans. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 21 of 35 people found the following review helpful: Koestler Is a Man of Truth! , March 6, 2006 By TREE.NATTY "HRU CHA" (NEWARK, NJ) . See all my reviews This book really open my eyes wide! I have been in contact with many people claiming to be "orginal" jews/hebrews. Koestler's work is far beyond any doubt that this Khazar empire existed. Especially to have it written by someone who was studying his own culture and background to begin with! I love some of the reveiws this book has gotten. And his untimly death is proof that what he has shown to the world. Was critical for in understand our past so we can move forward. In my own studying of anicent cultures such as Egyptian in particular. This book answers alot of question that acadamecia has tried to suppress when "validating" the modern jewish hertiage. As I have told many people the word "jewish" is a "johnny.come.lately" name! A good reason why it not even mention in the Torah or bible! But the one country that was mention MORE THAN ANY OTHER IN THE TORAH/BIBLE is Egypt!?! So European Jews are not in ancient history at all under the cloak of Judaism. They're not there! But Koestler book shows where they were! And the main tiff I have with this book is why these descendents of Khazar don't recongize their own ancestory? This action alone should be looked at carefully! For a people to completely or almost completely rid themselves of their own history. And adopted anew history, without any regard to the people, who still exist, of who history and culture they're adopting! This will remain a true blog in so.called jewish history for me. Because the Beta Israel of East Africa can still show lineage from Israel to Ethiopia in accord to the books of Genesis, Exodus, & Kings in the Bible. Where jewish schlors cannot give anyone a clue as to the history of the Kings of Israel after Solomon. There is 2500 yrs of blank history!! The true and revealing fact that is now confirm, once again, is the racial make.up of the Hebrews from the Torah. As we all know the Ancient Egyptians were African in looks and features. As the story goes with Joseph, his brothers didn't know him as their own brother among the Egyptians. So Joseph was just as African, in features and looks, as the Khamites (Egyptians). And now these same people went from African features to Polish, German, and Turkish features???? Ok somebody forgot to tell me about when the aliens came. LOL! I must have skiped that part in the bible. So basically this book burst open that unspoken of taboo's of jewish ancestory wide open. I have no problem with ANYONE adopting a way of life or religion. But PLEASE don't go as far to say "WE ARE THE ORIGINAL FROM so & so". Because thats a LIE! Be proud of who you are before and after! Because when you're not proud or don't show pride in who you are. What difference does it make what you call yourself! Because underneith it all you are still ashamed! Of who you are and where you come from. And thats something you can't erase unless you face the facts. Until than you are running away from yourself! Give thanks to the Lord of Host for the Life of Koestler! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 3 of 6 people found the following review helpful: Interesting read from what I read, January 26, 2008 By " Anti Microchip " "Jesus Christ can ... (Desolation America) . See all my reviews Well first off I have to admit I didn't finish this book. I could only bore myself through the first 100 or so pages until my brain couldn't bare it any longer. Honestly, this book could bore the deceased. Koestler is NOT a good story teller, which is unfortunate since this saga is worth researching. The premise of the book (besides giving those of us who are alive an excuse to read this book as opposed to acquiring prescription sleep medication) is that the modern day Jews are in fact NOT Jews. They are (according to the author) from the khazarian empire (did I spell that right). Through the first 100 or so pages I did glean a little bit of knowledge. First, these Khazar's basicly stood in between the Muslim's of the Middle East and the Christians of Europe. This helped to set up a (for lack of a better term) wall between the christians of Europe and the Muslim's of the middle east (and if you think about it they probably stopped a muslim invasion throughout much of the world for awhile). This book describes how these people adopted Jewish doctrine, and their eventual fall to Genghis Khan. This is really interesting history, and a book I will eventually finish (I'll update this review later if I do). However, as I said before, Koestler in my opinion is a horrible story teller. That being said this history of modern day Judaism may very well lay within these pages. According to Arthur Koestler those that practice modern day Judaism arn't Jews at all. The information is worth your time if you don't fall asleep first. Ok, did I write in a totally non.interesting writing syle that makes you say, "What?" Yes? Well that's why I didn't finish the book. Torture pure torture!!! P.S. If you can finish this book more power to you. If you can pull it off I believe it would be worth it. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (8) 26 of 44 people found the following review helpful: A GREAT PIECE OF WORK . ENLIGHTENING AND SCHOLARLY, January 28, 2000 By Ken (Quantico, VA) . See all my reviews My personal studies of cultural history and research into the peoples of the Bible in the "biblical" lands of Canaan, caused me to question, not Jewish.European's claim to Judaism as a religious/cultural heritage, but rather Jewish.European's claims to be the Biblical descendents of the "Children of Israel". This book was the first scholarly, non.racist, work I came across that put things into perspective. I understand the implications that this work raises about commonly accepted beliefs concerning "racial" and cultural identities. In some ways it is a direct threat to the very identity of a segment of Jewish.Europeans who say they as a people are "Jews", as identified in the writings of the prophets and apostles. I feel "swmirky" gave an absolutely outstanding review of this book. However, in the end it doesn't as much matter if the book, or anyone's' work is oversimplified, overpoularized, or 100% error free. What matters is if that particular body of knowledge contributes to ones understanding of Truth. Truth not necessarily as one believes it to be, but Truth in terms of `what is'. The "possible" truth in the matter Kosetler brings up has to do with the commonly held belief that Western Jewry/Jewish.Europeans (German, Polish, etc.) and their descendants are not the "Jews" of the Bible. Some people cannot and will not even consider those implications. It is worthy of consideration however, for anyone that puts any credence whatsoever in the "Judeo.Christian" belief systems. It is an absolutely necessary consideration, for anyone that puts any credence in God's (YAH's) Truth as it pertains to his relationship to mankind. Koestler's book serves as an outstanding catalyst for considering an alternative perspective on truth. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 0 of 3 people found the following review helpful: fascinating exploration, March 17, 2006 By Jon W. Graham (Miami, Fl USA) . See all my reviews If you ever wondered where the high pink cheeks and blue eyes came from, or the obvious syntactic differences between Yiddish and its ostensible German origin, Koestler's book is a great place to start an exploration...or maybe even satisfy your curiousity. Penned by a writer with scholarship (rather than a scholar who writes), it packs a difficult history of cross migrating tribes, Huns and Mongols and Vikings, of an occult middle kingdom into a readable package, without any of the self conscious and specious scholasticism of more recent tomes. There is some dated, politically incorrect but amusing exploration in a later chapter concerning Semitic features the predates recent DNA tracings, but all in all, it's thoroughly enjoyable and certainly a great subject for the book club, and a jump off into ancient geopolitics that still resonate today. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 11 of 24 people found the following review helpful: Certainly an interesting idea., July 16, 1997 By A Customer I admit to having read this book. I do not admit to being a crackpot. I say that because of the three people that I know who have read this book, two are crackpots and I'm not one of them. (Please read the other two reviews.) They are slightly more interesting than the book. The book has a point to make: Eastern European Jews are not descendants of David. My thought on that? Whew, that let's me off the hook! Now I can't be blamed for the death of Jesus. Is there any way that we can take back the Holocaust, the pogroms, the nasty comments, the insults, the Inquisition and some of the teachings of the Catholic Church? Uh... I didn't think so. I've long ago gotten over any discomfort I might have felt when hearing a Jew joke. As a matter of fact, after visiting the Holocaust memorial in Washington, I sent a friend a postcard with this message: Wishing you were here. There... that feels better. Now what was I saying about crackpots Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 6 of 16 people found the following review helpful: Interesting, but facts may not be completely accurate, November 20, 2006 By Martin C. Shapiro "Marty Epilog" (Connecticut) . See all my reviews I read this book when it came out in the '70's and again, just a short time ago. In the interim, I have read other writers on this subject, from more recent research, and finds. If you are interested in the Khazars, their conversion to Judiasm at the end of the 7th or beginning of the 8th century, this is an excellent first primar. I find the story rudely interupted by footnotes and bibliographical notations. The main story is absolutly true and facinating. Some of the side bars may or may not be completely accurate. I definitely recommend this book as an initial survey of the subject of the Jews of Khazaria from the late 7th century to their decline in the 11th century. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 16 of 36 people found the following review helpful: amezing, September 27, 1999 By A Customer never in history we see such big bulk f jews in the Rihne aera or arround, that will form the quantity of european jews of our time. this make me belive that Koestler theory is correct. her is no evidence that such a big quantity of jews from the part of palestine of to daymoved to the north. My beilive is that the sepharadic jews are the real remain of the jews, since we know so much of ther histoty and emigration to north Africa and Spain from the middle east, if you want more prouve ,raed Dunlop"s theory as well\ Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 21 of 46 people found the following review helpful: Who are the true Jews?, September 19, 2000 By A Customer I read the book The Thirteenth tribe, it is an excellent book by Arthur Koestler. This book is provocative to some, to others vindication. In my opinion this book was well research, The author of this book who happens to be a hungarian Jew, research the archives of Russia, Hungary and other countries in the region pertaining to the History of the Khazars. If the author is right, and these Ashkenazi Jews are converts, they cannot claim any rights to be of Semitic decent. To be Semitic you must be of the linage of the biblical Shem Noah's first son. see Genesis 6 vs 10 (KJV) these Eastern European Jews are not decending from Shem but from Japheth, Noah's third son. See Genesis 6 vs 10 (KJV) how ironically these converted Jews from Eastern Europe call themselves Ashkennazi the name "Ashkenaz" happens to be the name of Japheth's grandson. see Genesis 10 vs 3 (KJV) Japheth happen to be the Patriarch of all those who are descendants of Europe. Now if Mr Koestler is right, then who are the true Jews? could the blacks in Ethiopia be the true Jews? or could the black peoples living in the west, be the descendants of the true Jews? According to the Bible God told the ancient Hebrews or Jews that if they did not obey him they would be put back into slavery, this time with ships. See Deuteronomy 28 vs 68. (KJV) To my knowledge the only people in the history of Humanity to ever been put on ships and sent around the world as slaves are the black peoples of Africa... Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) 40 of 83 people found the following review helpful: Out of date and disproven by new evidence, October 4, 2001 By J. A Magill (Sacramento, CA USA) . See all my reviews The culture of the Khazars, a central asian tribe that adopted Judaism over 1000 years ago and was then destroyed by Gengis Khan, is a facinating subject worthy of study. Sadly, it always gets mixed up with an old 19th century idea that modern European Jews are decended from the Khazars and not the biblical Jews. That theory, highly popular in the middle 19th century served the duel use of, for some, proving that the Jews around Europe were not the same as those of the Hebrew Bible, giving great comfort to anti.semitic Christians. For others, they wanted to prove that Jesus was not Jewish, a strange branch of racist psudo.theory that goes on even today. In the 19th century Jews could simply role their eyes but had no evidence to disprove the theory. The best evidence against the Khazar theory was lingustic, as neither Hebrew nor Yiddish seems to contain any trace of a cetral asian language. Now, with gentic evidence, we can positively identify common ancestry of Jews from areas as far flung as Germany, Spain, Yemen, and Russia. Identical Y chromosome markers can be found among members of every community. While it may be that some Khazars married into the larger Jewish community, the evidence indicates that it never happened in overwhelming number. Indeed, their is considerable historic evidence that the Khazar were largely cut off from the rest of the Jewish world. Many reviwers point to the idea that many European Jews show non.middle eastern features (blue eyes, blond hair, etc.) However, the existance of large scale conversion to Judaism is a clear historical fact. Particularly before Christianity became firmly rooted in Eastern and South Eastern Europe, many locals converted to Judaism. Many of the modern Jewish attitudes against conversion are in fact reasonably recent, tracable to the strong and often violent action Christians took against communities where individuals chose to become Jews. Given the vast amount of genetic evidence against the theory one has to wonder why it still gets so much play. After all, if all Jews contain common genetic markers from locations across the world, what possible evidence could be for this strange theory? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (6) ================== Initial post: Nov 8, 2006 8:51 AM PST Karl Krokar says: Just a comment on the genetic studies: don't be fooled. David Goldstein of Duke University has argued that sample populations in these studies were small and not randomly selected, and that the results may not be statistically significant. Besides, can we really believe in the resulting scenarios of 'few founding fathers' or 'four founding mothers'? The Khazars did not vanish, why should they have? After all their Ashena ruling class provided administrators for the Mongols both as Uyghurs in Central Asia and as Ashkenazis and Kipchaks in Eastern Europe. By all means don't use Koestler's work politically, but keep to its great historical value. Reply to this post Permalink | Report abuse 10 of 11 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Posted on Jan 8, 2007 10:01 AM PST Encompassed Runner says: [Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion.] This should be one of the Amazon Spotlight Reviews for this book so popular among Jew haters. Reply to this post Permalink | Report abuse 1 of 12 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2007 6:53 PM PDT pebe says: You sound like a broken record, E.R. Precisely because the genetic evidence is inconclusive, the above review should not be in the spotlight ...and you should discrad your "Jew hater" mantra. Reply to this post Permalink | Report abuse 3 of 4 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? In reply to an earlier post on Jul 7, 2007 2:34 PM PDT Last edited by the author on Jul 7, 2007 2:38 PM PDT World Music Fan says: Thank you for that clarification. I'm always skeptical when I continue to read statements that claim "it was proven" about anything but with no hard evidence presented. We're just supposed to accept that "it was proven" and not ask questions, basically like the "Protocols" were "proven" to be a forgery, when as I suspected (because I investigated it), that's not true either. But I am finding this book to be fascinating because it shows you that a simple change in thinking can produce a different kind of people and that it has nothing to do with "race" or "ethnicity" or skin color. Reply to this post Permalink | Report abuse 5 of 6 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? In reply to an earlier post on Sep 21, 2007 9:11 AM PDT Last edited by the author on Sep 25, 2007 7:29 PM PDT Caesar M. Warrington says: Mr. Magill: While it is true that the Turkic Khazars were always a minority within their empire, which was destroyed by later Turco.Mongol peoples, the question still lingers as to where they had gone. Considering the tenacity of the Jews to cling to their faith and customs, not too many of these Khazars could have simply adopted Islam and faded into the populations of Central Asia. Furthermore, as you yourself admit... there were many conversions of Eastern European and Central Asian peoples to Judaism. Even before the Khazars rode into history, the Jewish community within the Roman Empire, prior to its adoption of Christianity, was attracting gentiles to its religion. Today, Ashkenazis make up around 80% of world Jewry, whether they predominately derive from Turkic origins or Slavic doesn't contradict the charge (admitedlly, often made for anti.semitic reasons) that the majority of todays Jews are not the descendents of those of Biblical and Greco.Roman times. ================== 15 of 35 people found the following review helpful: Who then are the true Hebrews/Jews?, July 15, 1997 By A Customer Since I have read "The Thirteenth Tribe", much of the confussion I had relating modern Jewry's history to the prophesies of the Old Testement is now cleared up. In the book of Deuteronomy, chapter 28, all of those prophesies was not fullfilled by them. Moses wrote that strangers shall get above the Jews very high and the stranger will lend to Jews and the Jews will always be borrowing, Deut. 28:43.44. According to Arthur Koestler, the converted Kharzars were always the head, controlling economics, etc. outside of Israel. The book of Deut. chapter 28 states that the Jews would be carried by ships into captivity and eventually scattered around the world as slaves. I read another book named "From Babylon to Timbuktu" by Rudolph R.Windsor and he believes the descendants of the ancient Hebrews/Jews are the black people who were captured and scattered around the world as slaves. It seem to me that the Blacks history does agree with Deut 28. I don't agree with all of Windsor's writing but he does make a point. There is also, a lot of African American Hebrew groups on the internet claiming that they are descendants of the original Hebrews. If most of the European Jews are decendant from Ashkenaz the son of Gomer, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah; then, WHO ARE THE TRUE DESCENDANTS OF THE HEBREWS? The next people that fit the bible description of the history of Jews, who were scattered world wide are the descendants of the slaves. This litature make me say, Hmmmmmmm! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 28 of 63 people found the following review helpful: unknown in chicago, January 28, 2002 By A Customer I read the book and I read the bible I went to Deuternomy the 28th chapter, I read the blessing and the curse, and it would appear that Israel is under the curse not the blessing. And if Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Jesus is to be beleived the Nation of Israel should remain in captivity untile Jesus come back to set.up is kingdom on earth. Most of the people who are proclaiming themselves to be Jew are mostly European or biblical known as Gentile (see Genesis 10th chapter). If this too hard to believe just compare their (Europeon Jews) history to what to what happened to the true children of Israel. I always wonder why out of the 12 Tribe of Isreal meaning there is Reuben, Simeon, Levi,Judah and so on they can find only one tribe out of 12? According to history the last known tribe was taken out in 70Ad. God, said the 12 tirbes will not be back until he's coming. So, my questinion is who those people in the Holy Land? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 21 of 50 people found the following review helpful: Interesting but disproven, May 10, 2000 By A Customer Even though this book was well.written and contains a lot of fascinating information about the Khazarian Empire, I have to rate it one star because its thesis .. which is what most people take away from it .. has been completely disproven. Just yesterday (May 10) the New York Times ran an article in its science section about DNA testing on certain markers in the Y chromosome that are present in the majority of Jews in ALL communities .. Sephardic and Ashkenazic. (The markers on Ethiopian Jews are not so clear.cut.) As the article itself stated, these tests finally disprove theories that the majority of Ashkenazic Jews are descended from converts. In fact, the studies show that a surprisingly SMALL number of Jews are descended from converts .. less even than most Orthodox Jews would have assumed. I do not think there is anything "less valid" about being descended from a convert, so Koestler's theory didn't bother me that much even before I read about these tests. But now that the book has been so conclusively proven wrong, it should be reprinted with an appropriate disclaimer. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (2) 28 of 66 people found the following review helpful: Completely Disproven by Genetic Evidence, August 28, 2001 By "mench_2000" . See all my reviews Koestler, a novelist, here writes a piece of psudo academic work. His thesis, that European Jews are descended from the Khazars, a central Asian tribe that may have converted to Judaism in the 11th century is not new. This theory gained great attention in the 19th century as so.called "racial scientists" tried to prove that: One, Jews were a "mongrel race" and, two, that Jesus wasn't really Jewish. The theory was hardly provable, but helped racists deal with a logical contradiction of loving Jesus and hating Jews. Since WWII, the theory gained great admiration among Arabs seeking to deligitimize Israel. The problem is that genetic evidence has proven the theory of Khazar decent completely false. Genes on the Y chromosome have demonstrated that Jews from areas as far a flung as Poland, Yemen, and Africa all share a common ancestor. Moreover, Levities, decedents of the Jewish priestly caste found in among all Jewish communities were also shown to have a common ancestor. All of this evidence demonstrates conclusively that the Khazar theory for European Jewish ancestry is false. Jews, despite their differences, share a common ancestor. Anti.Semites will have to move on and beat another dead horse. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (2) 16 of 44 people found the following review helpful: the real hebrews the blackman in america., September 18, 1999 By A Customer reviewers please read jer.13.19 acts 7.6 gen 15.13 deut.28.68 also there are jews who are notjews but claim to be read rev.2.9& 3.9 this refering to the european so called jews there is no bible proof that will connect you to the hebrews you people are converts in 135.bc and the finale convert.was in 740.ad now hebrews were in slavery for four hundred years if they wre not black when they came they were when they left egypt.africa lets use are brains here people no other people have been scattered around the world except the blackman the proof in the bible and history why dont you check it out the truth is there was not moses mistaken for an egyptian and was not paul mistaken for an egyptian acts 21.38 .39 now we know the egyptians are black and simon was known as the blackman also jesus had hair like lambs wool only the blackman has hair like this wakeup people and smell the truth in the book of hosesa my people perish for lack of knowledge read rev.1.14.15 now show us your proof. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 3 of 17 people found the following review helpful: Historically Interesting, Conclusion Value Poor, July 26, 2006 By Grey Wolffe "Zeb Kantrowitz" (North Waltham, MA United States) . See all my reviews From circa 700 ce to 1100 ce, there was a Khazar Empire that existed north of the Caucasus Mts between the Black and Caspian Seas, that controlled the Volga.Don River portage. They were a bullwark against tribes moving east to the Ukraine and the European plains; against the moslems moving north from Persia; and the Viking.Rus moving south from Muscovy/Kiev. Since it had to be the most dangerous geographic area, next to Constantinople/Byzantine Empire, it makes sense that the nobility decided to convert to judaism. By doing so they put themselves out of the forces of conversion (both Latin and Islamic) but still placed themselves outside from the pagans. The coverage of the history of the Khazars is good but like everything in the book, published in 1976, dated. Worst of all is his discussion of the 'Heritage' of the Khazars, implying that the majority of world jewry (the Ashkenazim) and their decendents and therefore non.semetic. He makes the statement based on the following statistic, that at the time of the book that world jewry was made up of 11 million ashkenazis and 1/2 million sephardim. In actuality, it's more like 50/50, and in Israel the sefardim are now the majority. After WW2 over three million jews emigrated to Israel from North Africa and the Middle East/Asia. Most had lived in these countries for generations, those in Iraq had been there since the destruction of the First Temple. It would be hard to make the point that they weren't semites and therefore part of the original tribes. Poor conclusion. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) 20 of 58 people found the following review helpful: The Truth, June 22, 2003 By Francisca levy (Houston, TX) . See all my reviews I have read this book and find it quiet true! But, people are dwelling on who's a true Jew or not and really you should be more concerned with wether your a true descendant from the 12 tribes of Isreal! Many may claim to be Jew's but there hearitage dosn't allow them to participate in the gifts of the Kingdom of JAHOVAH,JAH,YEHWEH,YAHAWAH. There are many translation of the most highs name, but many do not even mention one translation of his name which is sad, because by calling on is name and praying in the name of savior Christ Jesus,(YAHAWASHY)is the only way to obtain salvation. All the descendants of the 12 tribes of Isreal need to speak hewbrew and learn about their hearitage and stop bickering with other religons as to what they believe. "We shall come to know the truth and the truth shall set us free". Remember those hating other religion and people are of satan, because Jesus spoke of peace and loving kindness. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (2) 9 of 36 people found the following review helpful: Interesting but inaccurate, March 20, 1999 By A Customer This review is from: Thirteenth Tribe (Picador Books) (Paperback) While Koestler presents an intriguing theory and a well written book, there is absolutely no credibility to his ideas. No serious historian will use his book when researching the history of Eastern European Jews. For example the vast majority of the Jews in that area were not converts from Khazaria but rather moved into Eastern Europe from Germany and other Central European countries. That this book is even considered serious to some is a disgace of history. Not that Koestler is entirely incorrect. There was a country called Khazaria and its leaders did convert to Judaism, and there are most likely Jews today who came from Khazarian ancestry, but frankly there the known facts end. This may have well been historical fiction. Hopefully one day someone with a famous name will write a book that tells the truth about Jews in the area. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) 5 of 26 people found the following review helpful: outdated book, October 22, 2007 By Steven W. Rothenberg "retired PD" (Westchester, NY) . See all my reviews The book is interesting, and at the time of its publishing was probably very controversial but his theory that most Ashkenazi Jews are descendents from the Khazar empire and not from the middle east has been proven false by genetic testing in the last 2 decades. (see the excellent work "Jews of Khazaria" Kevin Alan Brook, "DNA, & Tradition the genetic link to the ancient Hebrews", and hundreds of other scientific papers. This book belongs in the flat earth society library. Don't waste your money if you are interested in scholarly learning about the Khazars. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 9 of 37 people found the following review helpful: Debunked, psuedo history, March 22, 2006 A Kid's Review Koestler would not have survived any peer review in the first page and it gets worse throughout the text. OK we know all the genetic work of the past ten years as completly exposed the Khazar.Ashkenazi (or Turkic .Ashkenazi) link as tiny and meaningless compared to more prevelent Asheknazi Kurdish, Armenian and Greek genetic links. Does this mean we shuld no argue that the Greeks are the lost tribe of Israel? Or that the Ashkenazi are closest to the Greeks? Where Koestler falls down here is in failing to recognize that the haplotype links are 1) extremely marginal; b) easily explained through common ancestros going back 20,000 to 30,000 years, which is to say going back to relationships that drive common haplotype between East Africans and Japanese! This is hardly a good starting point, but Koestler uses it to rewrite all the serious scholarship in the fields of known archeology, linguistics, and primary material concerning the Khazars. What next for Koestler? Explaining the Sephardim are really the Atlantians? Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) 4 of 29 people found the following review helpful: A 'second the motion'review , February 1, 2005 By Shalom Freedman "Shalom Freedman" (Jerusalem,Israel) . See all my reviews I 'second the motion' of the review written by Mr. Mirsky. I think he analyzes in a very good way the whole thrust of Koestler's argument in trying to prove that Ashkenazi Jews are fundamentally not a Semitic people. He also brings to bear what I understand to be , the genetic testing on that matter which do show that Jews of all type have some kind of 'genetic connection between them.' I do not however understand one major thing i.e. why for Koestler it is important to show that the Jews are not Semitic. Is this to show that they are allegedly strangers in the Middle East, and so have no ' genetic right' (if there is such a thing) to the land of Israel. I join Mr. Mirsky in thinking that in some way the whole controversy aroused by this book, as to where the Jews have their origin is irrelevant. Judaism is a question of sharing a common tradition, faith, culture and therefore its 'racial component or preferably biological component' is secondary. What's important in regard to geography and every Jew, including Jewish converts is not what region of the world their ancestors may have come from but whether the eyes, minds and hearts are devoted to realizing the Biblical promise of return to the land of Israel. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (3) 1 of 21 people found the following review helpful: And the gaping hole in this theory is..., June 30, 2006 By Too Much Coffee Woman (Nottingham) . See all my reviews only the Khazar elite converted to the Jewish faith there are plenty of archeological expeditions that have uncovered burials from the same period that are monotheistic in origin. the experts of Molecular Population Genetics would also have something to say on the matter. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment 11 of 58 people found the following review helpful: The Next Hate War, April 5, 2003 By A Customer This book has become a sort of Bible of Anti.semitism and the so called "Chrisitan Identity" movement. The premise is that pagans and barbarians are the true ancesters of the so.called Ashkenazi Jew (European/ American Jew). This means that the true Jews of Jesus Christ day, the Israelites and Hebrews of the Bible are in no way related to the Jews we see today in America and Israel, who are in fact, Huns,Turks, Magyars and other "mud race" derivatives that populated Eastern Europe. Where are the Jews of Jesus' day? They migrated to Europe and the sons of Yacob (Sax.sons) became the Anglo.Saxons and Scandinavians and other proper Aryan derivatives. Thus, hating the Jews is really akin to hating the brutal Khazars who co.opted the Jewish religion during the Dark Ages. Thus, the Aryan Nations do not hate Jews but using this book and others like it, can show that they are the true descendents of the Hebrews. Read this book if you like historical revisionism, but beware of the hatred that this book causes as it becomes the basis for a worldwide attack on Khazars, "false jews", "Orthodox jews, etc. STOP HATRED! Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comments (3) 6 of 72 people found the following review helpful: a defamation text, February 25, 2004 By Seth J. Frantzman (Jerusalem, Israel) . See all my reviews This is actually an anti.simitic text that claims that Judaism is descended from the Khazars. One problem with this argument is that many Jews actually do resemble their arab and Simitic cousins in the middle east. Many Palistinians have fair, blond, features, but that doesn't mean they are not Arabs, it just means they intermingled with europeans crusaders. The reality is that the Khazars NEVER immigrated to Khazaria, they were whiped out by the mongols. Most of the tribes of the Caucuses were not emigratory tribes, like the armenians and Georgians and Chechens, they were sedintary and like the Khazars they weathered the storm of invasion. Unfortunatly the Khazars did not weather the storm very well and they disappeared, but they NEVER moved to europe and this book is full of hateful remarks and polemics against the Judiasm, very offensive. Help other customers find the most helpful reviews Was this review helpful to you? Report this | Permalink Comment (1) NB: tape recordings made in the British Libray; pre-Internet and hugely inefficient!] - Koestler's book: I have some notes on tape. 3 parts; map at front; part 1 rise and fall of the Khazars; part 2 the heritage; 4 appendices: spelling sources, the correspondence, some implications. References, bibliography, index. Map shows Khazaria as a space so to speak balanced above the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, stretching almost to the Sea of Aral. Above it are the Ural mountains with the Bulgars, and below it Georgia with the Caucasus mountains, and the Carpathians seem to hem it in over to the west. Unfortunately Koestler doesn't have any sort of summary so you have to plough through and make inferences as you go. He also has no chronology; this is confusing. (And could very easily have been included!) These are my notes on the book; I dictated in the British Library from many of the sections:- NB May 97: how very inefficient compared with computer transmission! And see how I tired towards the end, increasingly impatient of dictating spellings..) RISE About the time when Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West, the eastern confines of Europe between the Caucasus and the Volga were ruled by a Jewish state, known as the Khazar Empire. At the peak of its power, from the 7th to the 10th C AD, it played a significant part in shaping the destinies of medieval and consequently modern Europe. The Byzantine Emperor and historian, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, 913-959, must have been well aware of this when he recorded in his treatise on court protocol that letters addressed to the Pope in Rome and similarly those to the Emperor in the west had a gold seal worth 2 solidi attached to them, whereas messages to the King of the Khazars displayed a seal worth three solidi. This was not flattery, but realpolitik. In the period with which we are concerned wrote J B Bury 1912 it is probable the Khan of the Khazars was of little less importance in view of the imperial foreign policy than Charles the Great and his successors. The country of the Khazars a people of Turkish stock, occupied a strategic position at a key gateway between the Black Sea and the Caspian, where the great eastern powers of the period confronted each other. It acted as a buffer protecting Byzantium against invasion by the lusty barbarian tribesmen of the northern steppes, Bulgars, Magyars, Peshaneks etc, and later the Vikings and the Russians. But equally or even more important, both from the point of view of Byzantine diplomacy and of European history, it is a fact that the Khazar armies effectively blocked the Arab avalanche's most devastating early stages, and thus prevented the Muslim conquest of eastern Europe. Professor Dunlop of Columbia University, a leading authority on the history of the Khazars, has given a concise summary of this decisive yet virtually unknown episode. The Khazar country lay across the natural line of advance of the Arabs within a few years of the death of Mohammed AD 632. The armies of the Caliphate sweeping northward through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before them, reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus. This barrier once passed the road lay open to the lands of eastern Europe. As it was, on the line of the Caucasus, the Arabs met the forces of an organised military power which effectively prevented them from extending their conquests in that direction. The wars of the Arabs and the Khazars which lasted more than a hundred years though little known are thus of considerable historical importance. The Franks of Charles Martel on the field of Tours turned the tide of Arab invasion at about the same time the threat to Europe in the east was hardly less acute the victorious Muslims were met and held by the forces of the Khazar kingdom. We can scarcely doubt that, but for the existence of the Khazars in the region north of the Caucasus, Byzantium, the bulwark of European civilization in the east, would have found itself outflanked by the Arabs and the history of Christendom and Islam might well have been different from what we know. It is perhaps not surprising, given these circumstances, that in 732 after a resounding Khazar victory over the Arabs, the future Emperor Constantine V married a Khazar princess. In due time their son became Emperor Leo IV, known as Leo the Khazar. Ironically, the last battle in the war, AD 737, ended in a Khazar defeat but by that time the impetus of the Muslim holy war was spent, the Caliphate was rocked by internal dissensions, and the Arab invaders retraced their steps across the Caucasus without having gained a permanent foothold in the north, whereas the Khazars became more powerful than they had previously been. A few years later, probably AD 740, the king, his court and the military ruling class embraced the Jewish faith, and Judaism became the state religion of the Khazars. No doubt their contemporaries were as astonished by this decision as modern scholars were when they came across the evidence in the Arab, Byzantine, Russian, and Hebrew sources. One of the most recent comments is to be found in a work by the Hungarian Marxist historian Dr ?Antel ?Bartar. His book on the Magyar society in the 8th and 9th C (1968, p 35) has several chapters on the Khazars, as during most of that period the Hungarians were ruled by them. Yet their conversion to Judaism is discussed in a single paragraph with obvious embarrassment. It reads: our investigations cannot go into problems pertaining to the history of ideas. We must call the reader's attention to the matter of the Khazar Kingdom's state religion. It was the Jewish faith which became the official religion of the ruling strata of society. Needless to say the acceptance of the Jewish faith as the state religion of an ethnically non-Jewish people could be the subject of interesting speculations. We shall however confine ourselves to the remark that this official conversion in defiance of Christian proselytising by Byzantium, the Muslim influence from the east, and in spite of the political pressure of these two powers, to a religion which had no support from any political power, but which was persecuted by nearly all, has come as a surprise to all historians concerned with the Khazars. It cannot be considered as accidental, but must be regarded as a sign of the independent policy pursued by that kingdom. [Actual reference something like: R ix-x Cazardeem Magyar Tarsadolom, Hungarian Society in the 9th and 10th Centuries, published in Budapest.] That extract leaves us only slightly more bewildered than before. Yet whereas the sources differ in minor detail, the major facts are beyond dispute. What is in dispute is the fate of the Jewish Khazars after the destruction of the empire in the 11th, the ?end of the 12th, or 13th C. On this problem the sources are scant, but various late medieval Khazar settlements are mentioned in the Crimea, the Ukraine, in Hungary, Poland, and Lithuania. The general picture that emerges from these fragmentary pieces of information is that of a migration of Khazar tribes and communities into those regions of eastern Europe, mainly Russia and Poland, where at the dawn of the modern age the greatest concentration of Jews were found. This has led several historians to conjecture that a substantial part and perhaps a majority of eastern Jews, hence of world Jewry, might be of Khazar, not of Semitic, origin. The far-reaching implications of this hypothesis may explain the great caution exercised by historians in approaching this subject if they do not avoid it altogether. Thus the 1973 edition of the Encyclopedia Judaica, the article Khazars is signed by Dunlop. There is a separate section dealing with Khazar Jews after the fall of the kingdom signed by the editors, and written with the obvious intent to avoid upsetting believers in the dogma of the chosen race. [Quotes:] The Turkish speaking Karaites, a fundamentalist Jewish sect, of the Crimea, Poland and elsewhere, have affirmed a connection with the Khazars which is perhaps confirmed by evidence from folklore and anthropology as well as language. There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence attesting to a continued presence in Europe of descendants of the Khazars. How important in quantitative terms is that presence of the Caucasian sons of Japheth in the tents of Shem? One of the most radical propounders of the hypothesis concerning the Khazar origins of Jews is the professor of medieval Jewish history at Tel Aviv University, A N ?Poliak. His book, Khazaria the History of a Jewish Kingdom in Europe, in Hebrew, was published [by ?Mossad ?Byalik Tel Aviv] in 1944 in Tel Aviv, with a second edition in 1951. In his introduction [presumably translated by Koestler] he writes that the facts demand a new approach both to the problem of the relations between the Khazar Jewry and other Jewish communities, and to the question of how far we can go in regarding this Khazar Jewry as the nucleus of the large Jewish settlement in eastern Europe. The descendants of this settlement, those who stayed where they were, those who emigrated to the US or to other countries, and those who went to Israel, constitute now the large majority of world Jewry. This was written before the full extent of the holocaust was known, but that does not alter the fact that the large majority of surviving Jews in the world is of eastern European, and thus perhaps mainly of Khazar origin. If so this would mean that their ancestors came not from Jordan but from the Volga, not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once believed to be the cradle of the Aryan race, and that genetically they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur, and of Magyar tribes than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Should this turn out to be he case, then the term 'anti-Semitism' would become void of meaning, based on a misapprehension shared by both the killers and their victim. The story of the Khazar empire as it slowly emerges from the past begins to look like the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated. Attila, was, after all, merely the king of the Kingdom of Tents, his state passed away, whereas the despised city of Constantinople remained a power. The tents vanished, the towns remained. The Huns' state was a whirlwind. This is a quotation from ?Kassel. [Paulus Kassel wrote: Magyarische Alterts Humer, published 1847, Berlin; Der Chasarische Konigsbrief Aus Dem 10 Jahr Hundert, 1876] Plainly the Khazars shared for similar reasons a similar fate [i.e. as Attila the Hun] yet the Hun presence on the European scene lasted a mere 80 years, from about 382 to 453, when Attila died, whereas the King of the Khazars held his own for the best part of 4 centuries. They too lived in tents but the also had large urban settlements are were in the process of transformation from a tribe of nomadic warriors into a nation of farmers, cattle breeders, fishermen, vine growers, traders, and skilled craftsmen. Soviet archaeologists have unearthed evidence for a relatively advanced civilisation which is altogether different from the Hun whirlwind. They found the traces of villages extending over several miles with houses connecting by galleries to huge cattle sheds, sheep pens, and stables, measuring 3 to 3 1/2 by 10 to 14 metres and supported by columns. Some remaining ox-ploughs showed remarkable craftsmanship. So did the preserved artifacts, buckles, clasps, ornamental saddle-plates. Of particular interest were the foundations sunk into the ground of houses built in a circular shape. According to the Soviet archaeologist these were found all over the territories inhabited by the Khazars or an earlier date than their normal rectangular buildings. Obviously [says Koestler] the round houses symbolise the transition from the portable dome-shaped tents to permanent dwellings, from the nomadic to the settled, or rather the semi-settled, existence. The contemporary Arab sources tell us that the Khazars only stayed in the towns, including even their capital, ?Itil, during the winter. Come spring, they packed their tents, left their houses and sallied forth with their sheep or cattle into the steppes, or camped in the cornfields or vineyards. The excavations show that the Kingdom was, during its later period, surrounded by an elaborate chain of fortifications, dating from the 8th and 9th Cs, which protected its northern frontiers, facing the open steppes. These fortresses formed a rough semicircular arc from the Crimea, which the Khazars ruled for a time, across the lower reaches of the Donetz and the Don to the Volga, while towards the south they were protected by the Caucasus, to the west by the Black Sea, and to the east by the Khazar Sea, the Caspian. [Footnote: To this day the Muslims recalling the Arab terror of the Khazar raids, still call the Caspian, a sea as shifting as the nomads, and washing their steppeland ?parts, Bahr-ul-Khazar, the Khazar Sea.] [NB: I looked up these fortifications on his map, but it's a bit vague as to where they actually are] However, the northern chain of fortifications merely marked an inner ring protecting the stable core of the Khazar country. The actual boundaries of their rule over other tribes fluctuated according to the fortunes of war. At the peak of their power, they controlled or exacted tribute from some thirty different nations and tribes inhabiting the vast territories between the Caucasus, the Ural Sea, the Ural Mountains, the town of Kiev and the Ukrainian steppes. People under Khazar suzerainty included the Bulgars, ?Bertars, Khuz, Magyars, Gothic and Greek colonies of the Crimea, and the Slavonic tribes in the north western woodlands. Beyond these extended dominions, Khazar armies also raided Georgia and Armenia, penetrated the Arab Caliphate as far as Mosul. In the words of the Soviet archaeologist M I Artarmonov, 'until the 9th century the Khazars had no rivals to their supremacy in the regions north of the Black Sea, and the adjoining steppe and forest regions of the Dnieper. The Khazars were the supreme masters of the southern half of eastern Europe for a century and a half, and presented a mighty bulwark, blocking the Ural-Caspian gateway from Asia into Europe. During this whole period they held back the onslaught of the nomadic tribes from the east.' [Artarmanov, M I, [difft spelling sic] 'Studies in Ancient Khazar History', written in Russian, Leningrad 1936. Also wrote 'Khazar History', 1962, Leningrad] Taking a bird's eye view of the history of the great nomadic empires of the east, the Khazar kingdom occupies an intermediary position in time, size, and degree of civilization between the Hun and the Avar empires which preceded it, and the Mongol empire that succeeded it. Section 3: But who were these remarkable people, remarkable as much by their power and achievements as by their conversion to a religion of outcasts? The descriptions that have come down to us originate in hostile sources and cannot be taken at face value. 'As to the Khazars,' an Arab chronicler writes, 'they are to the north of the inhabited earth towards the seventh clime, having over their heads the constellation of the plough. Their land is cold and wet. Their complexions are white, their eyes blue, their hairs flowing and predominantly reddish, their bodies are large, and their natures cold. Their general aspect is wild.' After a century of warfare, the Arab writer obviously had no great sympathy for the Khazars. Nor had the Georgian or Armenian scribes, whose countries of a much older culture had been repeatedly devastated by the Khazar horsemen. The Georgian Chronicle, echoing an ancient tradition, identifies them with the hosts of Gog and Magog, wild men with hideous faces and the manner of wild beasts, eaters of blood. An Armenian writer refers to the horrible multitude of the Khazars with insolent, broad, lashless faces and long falling hair like women. Lastly, the Arab geographer Istakhri [edited by de Goeje, Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum] one of the main Arab sources, has this to say: 'The Khazars do not resemble the Turks. They are black-haired and are of two kinds. One called the ?Khora-Khazars, black Khazars, who are swarthy verging on deep black as if they were a kind of Indian, and the white kind, ?Al-Khazars, who are strikingly handsome.' This is more flattering, but only out of the confusion of ?. It is customary among Turkish peoples to refer to their ruling classes or clans as white, to the lower strata as black. Istakhri's black-skinned Khazars, as in much else in his writings and his colleagues', was based on hearsay and legends, so we are none the wiser. The ethnic origins can only be answered in a vague and general way. .. It's equally frustrating to enquire into the origin of the Huns, Alans, Avars, Bulgars, Magyars, Bashkirs, ?Burtars, ?Sabhirs, ?Urgirs, ?Saragers, ?Oregers, ?Utigers, ?Kutrigers, Tanyaks, Cootrigars, Khabaz, Zabinders, Peshaneks, Khuz, and Khumans, and ?Khipchaks, and dozens of other tribes or people who at one time or another passed through the turnstiles of those migratory playgrounds. Even the Huns, who we know much more of, are of uncertain origin, named apparently from the Chinese ?Hieng-Nu, meaning warlike nomads. In the 1st C AD, the Chinese drove them westward, and started one of those periodic avalanches which swept for centuries from Asia to the West. From the 5th C on, many of these westbound tribes were called by the generic name of Turks, .. supposed to be a Chinese name derived from the name of a hill, and was used to refer to all tribes who spoke languages with certain common characteristics, the Turkic language group. The term Turk in the sense it was used by medieval writers and modern ethnologists refers to the language, not to race. The Huns and Khazars were Turkic in this sense, not the Magyars, whose language belongs to the Finno-Ugrian language group. .. The Khazar language was supposedly a Chuvash dialect of Turkish, which still survives in the autonomous Chuvash Soviet republic, between the Volga and the ?Sura. The Chuvash people are actually believed to be the descendants of the Bulgars, who spoke a dialect similar to the Khazars. But all these connections are rather tenuous. All we can say with safety is that the Khazars were a Turkic tribe who irrupted from the Asian steppes in about the 5th C in our era. The origin of the name Khazar and the modern derivations to which it gives rise has been the subject of much speculation. Most likely it is derived from a Turkish root, ?gaz to wander, which simply means nomad. Of greater interest to non-specialists are some alleged modern derivations, one of them the Russian Cossack, and the Hungarian Huszar [sic], both signifying martial horsemen. And also the German ketzer, heretic, i.e. Jew. Huszar is probably derived via the Serbo-Croat, from Greek references to Khazars. If these derivations are correct they would show that the Khazars had considerable impact on the imagination of a variety of peoples in the Middle Ages. Some Persian and Arab chronicles provide an attractive combination of legend and gossip column. They may start with the creation and end with stop press tit-bits. Thus Yacoubi, a 9th C Arab historian, traces the origin of the Khazars back to Japheth, third son of Noah. The Japheth motive recurs frequently in the literature, while other legends connect them with Abraham or Alexander the Great. Some of the earliest factual references to the Khazars occur in a Syriac chronicle, by 'Zacharia Rhetor', dating from the middle of the 6th C. It mentions the Khazars in a list of people who inhabit the region of the Caucasus. Other sources indicated they were much in evidence a century earlier. In AD 448, the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II sent an embassy to Attila, which included a rhetorician by the name of Priscus. He kept a minute account, not only of the diplomatic negotiations, but also of the court goings-on and intrigues in Attila's sumptuous banqueting hall. He was in fact the perfect gossip columnist, and is still one of the main sources of information about Hun customs and habits. But Priscus also has anecdotes to tell about the peoples subject to the Huns, whom he calls ?Acatzirs. That is very likely the ?Ac-Khazars or white Khazars, as distinct from the black ?kara-Khazars. The Byzantine Emperor, Priscus tells us, was trying to win this warrior race over to his side, but the greedy Khazar chieftain named ?Karadakh considered the bribe offered to him inadequate, and sided with the Huns. Attila defeated ?Karadakh's rival chieftains and installed him as sole ruler of the ?Acatzirs, and invited him to his court. ?Karadakh thanked him profusely for the invitation, and went on to say that it would be to hard on a mortal man to look into the face of a God, for as one cannot stare into the sun's disc, even less could one look into the face of the greatest god without suffering injury. Attila must have been pleased, for he confirmed ?Karadakh in his rule. .. Priscus's chronicle confirms the Khazars appeared about the middle of the 5th C. The collapse of the Hun Empire after Attila's death left a power vacuum in eastern europe, through which once more wave after wave of nomadic hordes swept from east to west, the ?Uigars and ?Avars prominent among them. the khazars during most of this period seem to be happily occupied with raiding the rich transcaucasian regions of Georgia and Armenia, and collecting plunder. During the second half of the 6th C they became the dominant force among the tribes north of the caucasus. A number of these tribes - Sabirs, Surragirs, Samanders, Bellangars, and so on are from this date no longer mentioned by name in the sources. They had been subdued or absorbed by the Khazars. The toughest resistance apparently was offered by the powerful Bulgars, but they too were defeated in 641 approximately, and as a result the nation was split in two. Some of them migrated west to the Danube, into the region of modern Bulgaria, others north eastwards to the middle Volga, the latter remaining under Khazar suzerainty. Before becoming a sovereign state, the Khazars still had to serve their apprenticeship under another short-lived power, the so-called West Turkish empire or Turkut Kingdom. It was a confederation of tribes held together by a ruler, the Kagan or ?Khogan, a title which Khazar rulers too were subsequently to adopt. This first Turkish state, if one may call it that, lasted for a century, 550 - 650, and then fell apart leaving hardly any trace. However, it was only after the establishment of this kingdom that the name 'Turk' was used to apply to a specific nation, as distinct from other Turkic speaking peoples, like the Khazars and Bulgars. Thus during the first few decades of the 7th C, just before the Muslim hurricane was unleashed from Arabia, the Middle East was dominated by a triangle of powers, Byzantium, Persia, and the West Turkish Empire. The first two of these had been waging intermittent war against each other for a century, and both seemed on the verge of collapse. In the sequel, Byzantium recovered but the Persian kingdom was soon to meet its doom, and the Khazars were actually in on the kill. They were still nominally under the suzerainty of he West Turkish kingdom within which they represented the strongest effective force and to which they would soon succeed. ? in 627 the Roman Emperor Heraclius concluded a military alliance with the Khazars, the first of several to follow, in preparing his decisive campaign against Persia. There are several versions of the role played by the Khazars in that campaign, which seems to have been somewhat inglorious, but the principal facts are well-established. The Khazars provided Heraclius with 40,000 horsemen under a chieftain named Zebel, who participated in the advance into Persia but then presumably fed up with the cautious strategy of the Greeks turned back to lay siege on Tiflis. This was unsuccessful, but the next year they again joined forces with Heraclius, took the Georgian capital, and returned to the rich plunder. Gibbon has given a colourful description based on Theophanes of the first meeting between the Roman Emperor and the Khazar chieftain. 'To the hostile league of Chosroes were the Avars. The Roman Emperor opposed the useful and honourable alliance of the Turks. At his liberal invitation, the hoard of ?Chosars transported their tents from the plains of the Volga to the mountains of Georgia. Heraclius received them in the neighbourhood of Tiflis and the Khan with his nobles dismounted from their horses ? the Greeks and fell prostrate on the ground to adore the purple of the Caesar. Such voluntary homage and important aid were entitled to the warmest acknowledgements, and the Emperor, taking off his own diadem, placed it on the head of the Turkish prince whom he saluted with a tender embrace and the appellation of a son. After a sumptuous banquet, he presented ?Zebel with the plate and ornaments, the gold, the gems and the silver, which had been used at the imperial table, and with his own hand distributed rich jewels and earrings to his new allies. In a secret interview, he produced the portrait of his daughter Eudosia condescended to flatter the barbarian with a promise of a fair and ?cust bride, and obtained the immediate succour of 40,000 horse. Eudosia, or Epiphenia, was the only daughter of Heraclius by his first wife, who promised to give her in marriage to the Turk, indicates once more the high value set by the Byzantine court on the Khazar alliance. However, the marriage came to nought because Zebel died while Eudosia and her suite were on their way to him. There is also an ambivalent reference in Theophanes to the effect that Zebel presented his son a beardless boy to the emperor as quid pro quo? There is another picturesque passage in an Armenian chronicle quoting the text of what might be called an order of mobilization issued by the Khazar ruler for the second campaign against Persia addressed to all tribes and peoples under Khazar authority. Inhabitants of the mountains and the plains living under roofs or the open sky having their heads shaved or wearing their hair long this gives us a first intimation of the heterogeneous ethnic mosaic who were to compose the Khazar empire. The real Khazars who ruled probably was a minority as the Austrians were in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. In the first 20 years of the Hegira, Mohammed's flight to Medina in 622, with which the Arab calendar starts, the Muslims had conquered Persia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and surrounded the Byzantine heartland, present-day Turkey, in a deadly semi-circle which extended from the Mediterranean to the Caucasus and the southern shores of the Caspian. The Caucasus was a formidable natural obstacle but no more forbidding than the Pyrenees. It could be negotiated by the Pass of ?Dariel, which is now called the Kasbek Pass or bypass to the defile of Darband along the Caspian shore. This fortified defile, called by the Arabs, Bab al Abwab, the Gate of Gates, is a kind of historic turnstile through which the Khazars and other marauding tribes had from time immemorial attacked the countries of the south and retreated again. Now it was the turn of the Arabs. Between 642 and 652 they repeatedly broke through the Darband Gate and advanced deep into Khazaria, attempting to capture ?Balanjar the nearest town, and thus secure a foothold on the European side of the Caucasus. They were beaten back on every occasion in this first phase of the Arab-Khazar war. The last time, in 652, a great battle in which both sides used artillery, catapults and ballistae, 4000 Arabs were killed including their commander, ?Abd al Rahman bin Rabia. The rest fled in disorder across the mountains. For the next 30 or 40 years, the Arabs did not attempt any further incursions into the Khazar stronghold. Their main attacks were now aimed at Byzantium. On several occasions, between 669 and 718, they laid siege to Constantinople, by land and by sea. Had they been able to outflank the capital across the Caucasus around the Black Sea the fate of the Roman Empire would probably have been sealed. The Khazars in the meantime having subjugated the Bulgars and Magyars completed their western expansion to the Ukraine and the Crimea. But these were no longer haphazard raids to amass booty and prisoners. They were wars of conquest, incorporating the conquered people into an empire with stable administration ruled by the mighty Kagan who appointed his provincial governors to administer and levy taxes in the conquered territories. At the beginning of the 8th C, their state was sufficiently consolidated for the Khazars to take the offensive against the Arabs. From a distance of more than a thousand years, the period of intermittent warfare that followed, the so-called Second Arab War, 722-737, looks like a series of tedious episodes on a local scale following the same repetitive pattern: the Khazar cavalry in their heavy armour breaking through the Pass of Dariel or the Gate of Darband into the Caliph's domain to the south, followed by Arabs' counterthrusts to the same pass or defile towards the Volga and back again. Looking thus through the wrong end of the telescope one is reminded of the old jingle about The Grand Old Duke of York Who Had Ten Thousand Men. In fact the Arab sources, although they often exaggerate, speak of armies of 100,000, even of 300,000 men engaged on either side, probably outnumbering the armies which decided the fate of the western world at the battle of Tours at about the same time. The death-defying fanaticism which characterized these wars is illustrated by episodes such as the suicide by fire of whole Khazar towns as an alternative to surrender, the poisoning of the water-supply of Bab-el-Abwab by an Arab general, or by the traditional extortion which would halt the route of the defeated Arab army and make it fight elsewhere. To the garden, Muslims, not the fire. The joys of Paradise being assured, every Muslim soldier killed in the Holy War. At one stage during these fifteen years of fighting the Khazars between Georgia and Armenia the Khazars overran Georgia and Armenia inflicting a total defeat on the Arab army at he battle of ?Ardabil, AD 730, advanced as far as Mosul and Duiar-al-Bakir, more than half-way to Damascus, capital of the Caliphate. But a freshly-raised Muslim army stemmed the tide and the Khazars retreated homewards across the mountains. The next year ?Mas-lar-ibn-un-al-malik, the most famed Arab general of his time, who had formerly commanded the seige of Constantinople, took ?Ballingar and even got as far as ?Salmandar, a large Khazar town further north. Once more the invaders were unable to establish a permanent garrison, and once more they were forced to retreat across the Caucasus. The sigh of relief experienced in the Roman Empire assumed a tangible form through another dynastic alliance when the heir to the throne was married to the Khazar ? Princess, whose son was to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. The last Arab campaign was led by the future Caliph Marwan II and ended in a Pyrrhic victory. Marwan made an offer of alliance to the Khazar Kagan, then attacked by surprise through both passes. The Khazar army, unable to recover from the initial shock, retreated as far as the Volga. The Kagan was forced to ask for terms. Marwan in accordance with the routine followed in other conquered countries requested the Kagan's conversion to the true faith. The Kagan complied, but his conversion to Islam must have been an act of lip-service, for no more is heard of the episode in Arab or Byzantine sources, in contrast to the lasting effects of the [tape ran out here; later conversion to Judaism?] During the long lull between the First and Second Arab wars the Khazars became involved in one of the more lurid episodes in Byzantine history, characteristic of the times and of the role the Khazars played in it. In AD 685, Justinian II became east Roman emperor at the age of 16. Gibbon says he was foolish and feeble.. after ten years he provoked a rebellion and had his nose chopped off. ... Justinian.. 704-711.. proved worse than the first. He considered the axe, the cord and the rack the only instruments of royalty. He became mentally unbalanced and obsessed with hatred against the inhabitants of a place called Cherson. .. citizens were ?burned/burnt and drowned.. He sent a second expedition in order to raze the city to the ground. However, this time, his troops were halted by a mighty Khazar army. Justinian ? in the Crimea a certain ?Bardanes changed sides and joined the Khazars. A demoralized expeditionary force abjured its allegiance to Justinian, and elected ?Bardanes as emperor under the name of Philippicus. But since Philippicus was in Khazar hands, the insurgents had to pay a heavy ransom to the Kagan to get their new emperor back. When the expeditionary force returned to Constantinople, Justinian and his son were assassinated and Philippicus greeted as a liberator ? installed on the throne, only to be deposed and blinded a couple of years later. The point of this gory tale is to show the influence which the Khazars at this stage exercised over the role and the destinies of the east Roman empire. ... It does not seem an exaggeration to say that at this juncture the Kagan was able practically to give a new ruler to the Greek Empire. The next event should be the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism round AD 740, but to see that remarkable event in its proper perspective one should have at least some sketchy idea of the habits, customs and everyday life of the Khazars prior to the conversion. Alas, we have no lively eye-witness reports such as Priscus' description of Attila's court. What we do have are mainly second-hand accounts and compilations by Byzantine and Arab chroniclers, which are schematic and fragmentary [sic; can they really be both?], with two exceptions: one is a letter, reportedly from a Khazar king, to be discussed in chapter 2. The other is a travelogue by an observant Arab traveller, ibn-?fadl-al who like Priscus was a member of a diplomatic mission from a civilised court to the barbarians of the north. The court was that of the Caliph ?Al-Mukh-Tardir, and the diplomatic mission travelled from Baghdad through Persia and ?Bukhara to the land of the Volga Bulgars. The official pretext for this grandiose expedition was the letter of invitation from a Bulgar king, who asked the Caliph (a) for religious instructors to convert his people to Islam, and (b) to build him a fortress, which would enable him to defy his overlord, the King of the Khazars. The invitation, which was no doubt pre-arranged by earlier diplomatic contacts, also provided an opportunity to create goodwill among the various Turkish tribes inhabiting territories through which the mission had to pass, by preaching the message of the Koran and distributing huge amounts of gold ?bakh sheesh. The opening paragraphs [sic] of our traveller's account [Footnote: based on ?Zecki ?Balidi ?Turgan's German translation of the Arabic text, and an English translation of extracts, by Blake and Fry] read: 'This is the book of ?Ahmed ibn Fadlahn ibn al Abbas ibn Rassid ibn Hammad, an official in the service of (General) Mohammed ibn Suleiman, the ambassador of (Caliph) al ?Mukhtadir to the King of the Bulgars, in which he relates what he saw in the land of the Turks, the Khazars, the Rus, the Bulgars, the Bashkirs, and others, their varied kinds of religion, the history of their kings and their conduct in many walks of life. The letter of the King of the Bulgars reached the Commander of the Faithful, al ?Mukhtadir. He asked him therein to send him someone to give him religious instruction, and acquaint him with the laws of Islam, to build him a mosque and a pulpit, so that he may carry out his mission of converting the people all over his country. He also entreated the Caliph to bring him a fortress to defend himself against hostile kings, i.e. the King of the Khazars. ... Everything that the King asked for was granted by the Caliph. I was chosen to read the Caliph's message to the King, to hand over the gifts the Caliph sent him and to supervise the work of the teachers and interpreters of the law. ? financing.. names of the participants.. and so we started on Thursday 11th of ?Saphar, of the year 309, [which Koestler says is June 21 AD 921] from the City of Peace [that is, Baghdad, capital of the Caliphate]. The date of the expedition is much later than the events described in the previous section, as will be noted, but as far as the customs and institutions of the Khazars' pagan neighbours are concerned, this probably makes not much difference, and the glimpses we get of the life of these nomadic tribes gives at least some idea of what life ? the Khazars may have been during that earlier period before the conversion, when they adhered to a form of Shamanism somewhat similar to that still practised by their neighbours in ibn-?Fadalan's time. The progress of the mission was slow and apparently uneventful until it reached ?Qarizim, a border province of the Caliphate south of the Sea of Aral. Here the governor in charge tried to prevent them from proceeding further by arguing that between his country and the King of the Bulgars there were a thousand tribes of disbelievers who were sure to kill them. The fact that his attempts to disregard the Caliph's instructions to let them pass might be due to other motives. He realised the mission was indirectly aimed against the Khazars with whom he maintained a flourishing trade and friendly relations. In the end though he had to give in and the mission was allowed to proceed to ?Girganzh on the estuary of the ?Amodaria. Here they hibernated for three months because of the intense cold a fact which looms large in many Arab travellers' tales. The river was frozen for three months. We looked at the landscape and thought that the gates of the cold hell had been opened for us. Verily I saw that the market place and the streets were totally empty because of the cold. ? when I came out of the bath and got home I saw that my beard had frozen to a lump of ice, and I had to thaw it in front of the fire. I stayed for some days in a house which was inside another house [a compound] in which there stood a Turkish felt tent. I lay inside the tent wrapped in clothes and furs, but nevertheless my cheeks often froze to the cushion. ... [thaw set in] Each of us put on a ?kurtak, a camisole, over that a woollen kaftan, over that a buslin, a fur-lined coat, over that a ?burka, a fur coat, and a fur cap, under which only the eyes could be seen, a simple pair of underpants and a lined pair and trousers .. when one of us mounted a camel, he was unable to move because of his clothes... They are the most repulsive of men, says ibn ?Fadwal. Their language is like the chatter of starlings. ... Another village.. their language is like the croaking of frogs. Next morning one of the Turks met us. He was ugly in built, dirty in appearance, contemptible in manners, base in nature. We were moving through heavy rain and he said halt and the whole caravan of 3000 animals and 5000 men halted. Then he said not a single one of you is allowed to go on. So we halted, obeying his orders. We said we are friends of the ?Khudakhin, the Viceroy. He began to laugh and said Who is the ?Khudakhin? I shit on his beard. Then he said bread. I gave him a few loaves of bread. He took them and said continue your journey, I have taken pity on you. The democratic methods ? influence practiced ? were even more bewildering to the representatives of an authoritarian theocracy. The nomads have houses of felt. They stay for a while in one place then move on. ? I can see their tents dispersed here and there. Moreover the ? according to nomadic custom. .. Oh Lord, what shall I do in this manner? and consults the chieftain. The sexual mores of the Khazars and other tribes were a remarkable mixture of liberalism and savagery. The women wear no veils in the presence of their en or strangers. Nor do the women cover any parts of their bodies in the presence of people. One day we strayed at the pass of the ?Khuz was sitting around. His wife was also present. As we conversed, the woman uncovered her private parts and scratched them and we all saw it. Thereupon we covered our faces and said may God forgive me. The husband laughed and said to the interpreter: tell them we uncover it in your presence so that you may see and restrain yourselves, but it cannot be attained. That is better than when it is covered up yet attainable. Adultery is alien to them. Yet, when they discover that someone is an adulterer, they spilt him in two halves. They do this by bringing together the branches of two trees, tie him to the branches, and let both trees go, so that the man tied to them is torn in two. It doesn't say whether the same punishment was meted out to the guilty woman. Yet Bulgars of both sexes swim naked in rivers. Homosexuality in Arab countries was taken as a matter of course, but was regarded by the Turks as a terrible sin. .. [Lot of stuff about how the traveller can't get used to the dirtiness of the Turks:] they don't wash after defecating or urinating, they don't bath after seminal pollution [sic] or other occasions. They won't have anything to do with water in winter. Their underclothes fall apart from dirt. However, their savagery leaves them indifferent. He describes the Bulgar's punishment for manslaughter: they put the delinquent in a box of birchwood, put him inside, nail the lid on it, put three loaves of bread and a can of water beside it, suspend the box between two tall poles, saying they've put him between heaven and earth that he may be exposed to the sun and the rain, and that the deity may perhaps forgive him. So he remains suspended until time lets him decay and the winds blow him away. .. Also funeral sacrifices of horses and herds of animals and the gruesome ritual killing of a Rus slave girl. .. Bashkir's phallus cult: I came from something similar, and know of no other creators who made me. Some Bashkirs believed in 12 deities, gods for winter, summer, rain, wind, trees, men, horse, water, night, day, death, earth. And the god that dwells in the sky is the greatest amongst them and takes counsel from the others and thus they are all content with each others' doings. Some of them worship snakes, fish, cranes. When they observe a man who excels through quick wittedness and knowledge, the Volga Bulgars say for this one it is more befitting to serve our Lord. They seize him, put a rope round his neck and hang him on a tree and leave him until he rots away. ... Ibn-?Fadlan describes also one of their pagan customs, human sacrifice, by which the most excellent among men were offered as a sacrifice to god. This was probably ? ? ?tabibs or medicine-men, their shamans, whose equivalent among the Bulgars also wielded the power of life and death over people. .. It took the ? expedition nearly a year from June 21 921 to May 12 922 to reach its destination, the land of the Volga Bulgars. ... The narrative switches to a description of the Rus courts known to the Khazar courts.. The King of the Khazars whose name is Kagan. He appears in public only once every four months. They call him the Great Kagan. His deputy is called Kagan ?Bec. He is the one who commands and supplies the armies, manages the affairs of state, appears in public and leads in war. The neighbouring kings obey his orders. He enters every day in the presence of the Great Kagan with deference and modesty, carrying a stick of wood. He makes obeisance, lights the stick, and when it is burnt down he sits down on the throne at the king's right. ... The power to bind or release or mete out punishments or to govern the country belongs to his deputy, the Kagan ?Bek. Further custom .. great King.. when he dies a great building is built for him containing 20 chambers. In each chamber a grave is dug, stones are broken and ?hammered to powder, spread over the floor covered with pitch. beneath this building flows a river. This river is large and rapid. They divert the river water over the grave and they say this is done so that no devil, no man, no ?woman, no creeping creatures will get at him. After he has been buried those who buried him are decapitated so that nobody may know which of the chambers is his grave. .. ? paradise and they have the same scent as paradise. All the chambers are spread with silk brocade interwoven with threads of gold. It is the custom of the king of the Khazars to have 25 wives. Each of the wives is the daughter of a king who owes him allegiance. He takes them by consent or by force. He has 60 girls ? each of them of exquisite beauty. ... [Rather fanciful description of the harem:] each of the wives or concubines has a palace of her own and an attendant or eunuch who at the king's command brings her to his alcove faster than the blinking of an eye. At last we find some factual information. The King has a great city on the River Itil [that's Volga] on both banks. One bank of the Muslims, on the other bank the King and his court. The Muslims are governed by one of the King's officials, himself a Muslim. The law ?suits the Muslims. Living in the Khazar capital the Christian merchants were ? looked after by the official. Nobody else meddles in their affairs or sits in judgement over them. The Khazars had a castle built of burnt brick, houses with roofs of teak, and several mosques with minarets, one with a minaret rising above the royal castle. Their farms stretch 60 or 70 miles. Mainly of these places produce grapes; Caucasian wine is still a delight. The Royal Treasury's main source of income was foreign trade. The sheer volume of the trading caravans between Central Asia and the Volga-Ural region is indicated by ibn-?Fadlan. ... remember that the caravan had 5000 men and 3000 pack animals. It must have been a mighty caravan. We don't know how many of these there were at any time on the move, or what goods they transported. Textiles, fruit, honey, wax and spices seem to have played an important part. Apart from the fertile regions of the south, with vineyards and orchards, the country was poor in natural resources. The only native product they exported was isinglass. The fact remains that their main commercial activity seems to have consisted in reexporting goods brought in from abroad. Honey and candle-wax particularly caught the Arab chronicler's imagination. Thus ?Macoudasi said in Khazaria, sheep, honey and Jews exist in large quantities. One source mentions gold or silver mines on Khazar territory, but their location has not been ascertained. So Khazaria was by no means isolated from the civilized world compared with its tribal neighbours in the north. It was a cosmopolitan country, open to all sorts of cultural and religious influences, yet jealously defending its independence against the two ecclesiastical world powers. [All this introductory matter is justified by Koestler on the grounds that it gives the background as to what the Khazars were doing when they converted] Bury wrote: 'The religion of the Hebrews has exercised a profound influence on the creed of Islam, and it had been a basis of Christianity. It had won scattered proselytes, but the conversion of the Khazars to the undiluted religion of Jehovah is unique in history.' What was the motivation of this unique event? It is not easy to get under the skin of the Khazar prince, covered as it was by a coat of mail. But every reason in terms of power politics which obeys essentially the same rules throughout the ages. A fairly plausible analogy offers itself. At the beginning of the 8 C, the world was polarised between the two superpowers representing Christianity and Islam. [Note:] Their ideological doctrines were welded to power politics pursued by the classical methods of propaganda, subversion, and military conquest. The Khazar empire represented a third force, which had proved equal to either of them, both as adversary and as an ally, but it could only maintain its independence by accepting neither Christianity nor Islam. For either choice would have automatically subordinated it to the authority of the Roman emperor or the ?Caliph of Baghdad. There had been no lack of efforts by either court to convert the Khazars to Christianity or Islam, and all they resulted in was the exchange of diplomatic courtesies, dynastic intermarriages, and shifting military alliances based on mutual self-interest. Relying on its military strength, the Khazar kingdom, with its hinterland of vassal tribes, was determined to preserve its position as the third force, leader of the uncommitted nations of the steppes. At the same time, their intimate contacts with Byzantium and the Caliphate had taught the Khazars that their primitive shamanism was not only barbaric and outdated compared to the great monotheistic creeds, but also unable to confer on the leaders the spiritual and legal authority which the rulers of the two theocratic world powers, the Caliph and the Emperor, enjoyed. Yet the conversion to either creed would have meant submission, the end of independence, and thus would have defeated its purpose. What could have been more logical than to embrace a third creed which was uncommitted towards either of the two yet represented the venerable foundation of both? The apparent logic is of course due to the deceptive clarity of hindsight. In reality the conversion required an act of genius. Yet both the Arab and Hebrew sources on the history of the conversion point to a line of reasoning adhered to above. To quote Bury once more: 'There can be no question that the ruler was actuated by political motives in adopting Judaism. To embrace Mohammedanism would have made him the spiritual dependent of the Caliphs who attempted to press their faith on the Khazars, and in Christianity lay the danger of becoming an ecclesiastical ?vessel of the Roman empire. Judaism was a reputable religion with sacred books which both Christian and Mohammedan respected. It elevated him among the heathen barbarians and secured him against the interference of Caliph or Emperor. But he did not adopt, along with circumcision, the intolerance of the Jewish cult. He allowed the mass of his people to abide in their heathendom and worship their idols.' Though the Khazars' conversion was no doubt politically motivated it would be absurd to imagine they embraced overnight blindly a religion whose tenets were unknown to them. In fact, however, they had been well acquainted with the Jews and their religious observations for at least a century before the conversion, through the continued influx of refugees from religious persecution in Byzantium and to a lesser extent from countries in Asia Minor conquered by the Arabs. Now that Khazaria was a relatively civilized among the barbarians of the north yet not committed to either of the militant creeds, and so it became a natural haven for periodic exodus of Jews under Byzantine rule, threatened by forced conversion and other pressures. Persecution of various forms started with Justinian I, 527-565, and assumed particularly vicious forms under Heraclius in the 7 C, Leo III in the 8th, ?Asilov, Leo IV in the 9th, ?Romanus in the 10th. Thus Leo III who ruled during the two decades immediately preceding the Khazar conversion to Judaism attempted to end the anomaly of the tolerated status of Jews in one blow, by ordering them all to be baptized. That order led to the flight of a considerable number of Jews from Byzantium. ?Mazoudi relates: In this city [Khazaran, Itil] are Moslems, Christians, Jews, and Pagans. The Jews are the King and his attendants and the Khazars of his kind [presumably the 'white' Khazars]. The king of the Khazars had already become a Jew in the Caliphate of Haroun-al-Raschid, i.e. between 786 and 809. It is generally assumed that Mazoudi used a convenient historical landmark, and that the conversion was actually 740. He was joined by Jews from all the lands of Islam, and from the country of the Greeks [Byzantium]. Indeed, the king of the Greeks at the present time, the year of the Hegira, 332, [AD 943-4] has converted the Jews in his kingdom to Christianity by coercion. Thus many Jews took flight from the country of the Greeks to Khazaria.' The last two sentences referring to events 200 years after the Khazar conversion show how persistently the waves of persecution have followed each other over the centuries. But the Jews were equally persistent. Many endured torture and those who did not have the strength to resist returned later on to their faith, 'like dogs to their vomit' as one Christian chronicler put it. ... This was an age when converting unbelievers by force or persuasion was the foremost concern. The Jews also indulged in it. ? ? Justinian Byzantine law threatened severe punishments for the attempt to convert Christians to Judaism. ? Jews molesting converts to Christianity the penalty was death by fire. How did they force them? [This is the Emperor Basil against the Jewish community] of ?Orian, southern Italy. Anyone refusing was placed in an olive mill under a wooden press and squeezed the way olives are squeezed. From Khazaria, the Hebrew script seemed to have spread to neighbouring countries. Thus ?Kwalson reports that inscriptions in a non-Semitic language using Hebrew characters were found on two gravestones from ?Thanagoria, ? in the Crimea. They have not been deciphered yet. Crimea was, as we have seen, intermittently under Khazar rule, but also had an old-established Jewish community. The inscriptions may even pre-date the conversion. Some Hebrew letters, shin and ?sardi, also found their way into the Cyrillic alphabet, and furthermore many Polish silver coins have been found, dating from the 12 or 13 C, which have Polish inscriptions in Hebrew lettering, e.g. ?les sec krol polski, Les sec King of Poland, side by side with coins inscribed in the Latin alphabet. These coins are the final evidence for the spreading of the Hebrew script from Khazaria to the neighbouring Slavonic countries. The use of these coins was not related to any question of religion. They were minted because many of the Polish people were more used to this type of script than to the Roman script, not considering it specifically Jewish. ... This account by Al-Bakri, The Book of Kingdoms and Roads, 11 C: 'the reason for the conversion to Judaism of the King of the Khazars that had previously been a pagan is as follows: He adopted Christianity. [No other source, Koestler says, mentions this; it may be a substitution more palatable to Moslem readers for the Kagan's short-lived adoption of Islam prior to Judaism]. Then he recognized its falsehood and discussed this matter which greatly worried him with one of his high officials ? said to him, 'O king, those in possession of sacred scriptures fall into three groups. Summon them and ask them to state their case, and follow the one who is in possession of the truth.' So he sent to the Christians for a bishop. Now there was with the king a Jew skilled in argument who engaged him in disputation. He asked the Bishop: what do you say of Moses, the son of Amran, and the Torah, which was revealed to him? The Bishop replied Moses is a prophet, and the Torah speaks the truth. Then the Jew said to the King: He has already admitted the truth of my creed. Ask him now what he believes in. So the king asked him what he believed, and he replied I say that Jesus the Messiah is the son of Mary. He is the word, and he has revealed the mysteries and the name of god. Then said the Jew to the King of the Khazars: he preaches a doctrine which I know not, while he accepts my propositions. The Bishop was not strong in producing evidence. Then the King asked for a Moslem, and they sent him a scholarly clever man who was good at arguments, but the Jew hired someone who poisoned him on the journey and he died. So the Jew succeeded in winning the King for his faith, so that he embraced Judaism.' The Arab historian certainly had a gift for sugaring the pill. Had the Moslem scholar been able to participate in the debate, he would have fallen into the same trap as the Bishop, for both accepted the truth of the Old Testament, whereas the upholders of the New Testament and of the Koran were each outvoted two to one. The King's approval of this reasoning is symbolic: he is only willing to accept doctrines which are shared by all three, their common denominator, and refuses to accept for himself any of the rival claims which go beyond that. It is once more the principle of the uncommitted world applied in theology. The story also implies, as Bury has pointed out, that the Jewish influence at the Khazar court must already have been strong before the formal conversion, for the Bishop and the Moslem scholar had to be sent for, whereas the Jew was already with him, the King. .. We turn from the principal Arab source on the conversion to the principle Jewish source. This is the so-called Khazar correspondence, an exchange of letters in Hebrew between Hasdai-ibn-Shaprut, the Jewish chief minister of the Caliph of Cordoba, and Joseph, king of the Khazars, or rather between their respective scribes. The authenticity of the correspondence has been the subject of controversy, but it is now generally accepted with due allowance made for the vagaries of later copyists. [Appendices: The Khazar Correspondence is described here.. passage dated 1161.. 'you will find congregations of Israel spread abroad from the town of ?Salah, at the extremity of the ?Maghreeb, as far as ?Tahat at its commencement. The extremity of Africa, ?Frequia [? = Tunis], in all Africa, Egypt, the country of the ?Sabeans, Arabia, Babylonia, Elam, Persia, ?Didam, the country of the ?Girgashites which is called ?Zherzhan, ?Tabaristan as far as ?Dalam and the river ?Itur, where live the Khazar peoples who became proselytes. Their king Joseph sent a letter to our Hasdai, the Prince Bar Isaac ben Shaprut, and informed him that he and all his people followed the Rabbinite faith. ?We see near Toledo some of their descendants pupils of the wise and they told us that the remnant of them followed the rabbinite faith.' ... [Several biographies here: Abraham N Poliak, whose name is not mentioned in the Encyclopedia Judaica 1971. Born in 1910 in Kiev, went to Palestine in 1923, occupied the chair of Medieval Jewish History at Tel Aviv University. He was the author of a lot of books in Hebrew: The History of the Arabs, Feudalism in Egypt, Geopolitics of Israel and the Middle East, and so on. He wrote an essay on the Khazar conversion to Judaism in 1941, in the Hebrew periodical Zion. His book 'Khazaria' was published in 1944 and received with hostility as an attempt to undermine the sacred tradition concerning the descent of modern Jewry from the Biblical tribe. ... Matthias Mieses: whose views on the origin of eastern Jewry and the Yiddish language I have quoted. He was held in high academic esteem. Born 1880.. Galicia.. studied linguistics.. became a pioneer of Yiddish philology, though he wrote mainly in German, Persian, and Hebrew. He is an outstanding figure at the first conference on the Yiddish language at Chernowitz in 1908. Two books: 'Die ?Entschdewung ?su ?zacker de Judischen Dialecte', 1915, and 'Die Yiddische Sprache' 1924. He spent his last years in Krakow. Was deported in 1945 to Auschwitz and died on the journey. ... Hugo Freiherr von ?Kutscherer, 1847-1910, one of the early propounders of the theory of the Khazar origin of eastern Jewry. Son of a high-ranking Austrian civil servant, he was destined to a diplomatic career and studied at the oriental academy in Vienna, where he became an expert linguist, mastering Turkish, Arabic, Persian, and other eastern languages. He served as an attache at the Austro-Hungarian embassy at Constantinople, and became in 1882 a director of administration in Sarajevo, ?over the provinces of Bosnia, Herzegovina, recently occupied by Austro-Hungary. His familiarity with oriental ways of life made him a popular figure amongst the Muslims at Bosnia, and contributed to the relative pacification of the province. He was awarded the title of Freiherr Baron ? ?. When he retired in 1909 he devoted his days to his lifelong hobby, the connection between European Jews and the Khazars. He had been struck by the contrast between Sephardi and Ashkenazi Jews in Turkey and the Balkans. The study of ancient sources on the history of the Khazars led to a growing conviction they provided at least a partial answer to this problem. He was an amateur historian though a quasi-professional linguist. His Arab erudition was remarkable. There is hardly an Arabic source known before 1910 missing. Unfortunately he died before he had time to provide the bibliography and references to 'Die Chasaren Historische Studie', which was published posthumously in 1910. Though it went into a second edition it is rarely mentioned by historians.] ... [Start of section on DECLINE:] [Philology:] Cyril is credited by tradition with having devised the Cyrillic and also the ?Glacolytic alphabet. The latter was used in Croatia till the 17 C. It is indebted to the Hebrew alphabet in at least eleven characters, representing in part the Slavonic sounds. It has long been recognised ? characters a, b, v, g, e, k, p, r, s, sh, sch, and t [says Koestler] which seems to confirm what has been said earlier about the influence of the Khazars. [DECLINE:] It was, wrote ?D ?Sinor, in the second half of the 8 C that the Khazar empire reached the acme of its glory, between the conversion of ?Boulin and the religious reforms under Obadiah. This is not meant to imply the Khazars owed their good fortune to the Jewish religion. It is rather the other way around: they could afford to be Jews because they were economically and militarily strong. Emperor Leo the Khazar who ruled Byzantium in 775-780, named after his mother the Khazar princess flower .. the one who created a new fashion at court.. with the cloak and dagger intrigues, dynastic marriages, could be dangerous. They gave cause, or provided pretexts, for a war. The pattern was set by Attila in 450.. He is said to have received a message, accompanied by an engagement ring, from Honoria, sister of the West Roman emperor, Valentinian III. This romantic lady begged the Hun chief to rescue her from a fate worse than death, a forced marriage to an old senator. .. She sent him a ring. He claimed his bride, together with half the empire as her dowry. When Valentinian refused, Attila invaded Gaul. Several variations on this quasi-archetypal theme crop up throughout Khazar history. The fury of the Bulgar king about the abduction of his daughter, and ... No more is heard about Khazar-Arab fighting after the end of the 8 C. .. Ominous episodes in 833.. [End of tape]