The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

To a problem of "The Russian khaganate": Ancient Russia and its steppe neighbors

maksy ZhIH


E.S. Galkina's researches on the ethnocultural history of Southeast Europe of an era early srednevekovya1 belong to number of the innovative works bringing a stream of the fresh ideas but which are at the same time generating and new serious questions in science.

The subject of the beginning of Russia and closely related problem of formation of Old Russian statehood was always one of central in a historiography. It is natural that for almost three-century history of studying this question of decisions it it was offered nemalo2. And among a set of questions to which this grandiose subject breaks up always a specific place was held by a question of the so-called "Russian khaganate".

By its consideration it is necessary to resolve a set of private issues of early history of Russia and its relationship with Khazaria, each of which in itself is a subject for discussions. In the Russian khaganate saw also the first East Slavic state - a germ of future Kievan Rus', and some area subordinated to Khazaria and the state created by Normans in the north of Eastern Europe, etc. 3

Here it is necessary to designate one important point at once. A number of the professional historians and archeologists who are not dealing directly with problems of initial Russian history very often has a question of the term "Russian Khaganate". About as far as it corresponds to era realities and whether it is thought up ponya-

tiye by the incorrect address with istochnikami4. In sources there are only mentions of Kagan of rus, but there is no khaganate. Then, however, permissibly to raise a similar question and of Khazar Khanate because in early medieval sources such concept also does not meet. Considering the nature of mentions of Kagan of ru-owls and the fact that these mentions belong to traditions independent from each other (we will tell, east and Western European), we have to tell full authority about a khaganate - i.e. multilevel political association. Its multilevel character Kagan also led it to acceptance by governors of a title (i.e. the governor over governors).

In a modern historiography when studying questions of the beginning of ethnocultural history of Russia the concept which essence E.S. Galkina defines so returned itself prevalence repeatedly disproved earlier Norman (or, or rather, normansko-Hazaria): "Eastern Europe US - the 10th centuries, according to representations of present holes-manistov, was divided into two approximately equal spheres of influence: Norman Varangians (they are rusa), with southern - Judaic Khazaria raise a tribute from northern areas" (The Russian khaganate. Page 5-6). In the greatest measure such approach is characteristic Petrukhina5 of V.Ya. works, but at any given form is present also at works of a number of others is-sledovateley6.

But there is a question of validity of this theory, of what it has in an asset on what sources it leans and what its methodological base. And here it turns out that the problem is not so simple at all as the newest scientists of this direction want to present it.

The main opponent of modern normanist many years was A.G. Kuzmin. If shortly to summarize his views of a problem of origin of Rusi7, then their essence is that in the ancient time there was no uniform "initial Russia". Different sources call by Rusami (or the similar names) sometimes raznoetnichny formations. For this reason their data are so contradictory for this reason spear historians so long break, vainly trying to agree on these contradictory certificates somehow. And the speech actually, according to the scientist, goes about the different people - in it and there is a key to a solution. And rusa of the Iranian origin were one of these rus.

We will not press in detailed assessment of results of scientific search of A.G. Kuzmin - it is a separate big subject. Now it is much more important for us that the thought of the Iranian sources of Russia has strong historiographic tradition. The thought of the Iranian origin of the ethnonym Russia 8 is proved by linguists for a long time that

is not surprising at all: a number of early Slavic ethnonyms has the Iranian origin (Anta, Serbians, Croats, etc.) 9. It, apparently, is explained by the long slavyano-Iranian ethnic symbiosis taking place in the first centuries AD in an area Chernyakhovsk archaeological kultury10.

It should be noted that polemic of "normanist" and "antinormanists" too often reminds "a dispute of deafs" at which the parties refuse to hear each other and to look for new ways in the solution of old problems. Attempt to find such essentially new way was also the monograph by the schoolgirl of A.G. Kuzmin E.S. Galkina.

At the time M.I. Artamonov, developing the concept of the Iranian origin of Russia, introduced very careful idea of the iranoyazychny people of rus connected with alana - carriers of later saltovsky culture of upper courses of the Seversky Donets, Oskol and Dona11. At the same time the scientist laid also the foundation of the concept according to which Khazaria dominated over all South of Eastern Europe. Material expression of this domination was, according to M.I. Artamonov, existence of uniform archaeological culture of Khazaria in which as local option he included and saltovo-ma-yatskuyu kulturu12. Later I.I. Lyapushkin showed that bases for such assumption nedostatochno13. However he accurately did not explain what of the ancient people possessed so developed culture.

This innuendo allowed the subsequent researchers to ignore a conclusion about independence of saltovsky culture in relation to the culture of Khazaria. "As for Alania option of SMK (saltovo-mayatsky culture - M.Zh.) Podonya, - wrote, for example, S.A. Pletnyov, - that about it is mute no data in literature of that time remained. The rich, developed and aggressive people as though did not participate in the all-European life at all. It suggests an idea that the name of alan is concealed in sources under some other... name" 14. Having tried to resolve this contradiction, the researcher concluded that "alana of the Upper Don merged with the main population of Khazar Khanate - Khazars - and were a part of this state" 15.

How often happens to insufficiently reasonable, but "convenient" concepts, constructions by S.A. Pletnyova quickly became dominating though neither arkheologicheskimi16, nor pismennymi17 it is impossible to prove by sources them. We have no bases to include saltovsky culture in structure of Khazaria (The Russian khaganate. Page 139-191; Nomads. Page 327-369, 385-391). Though many modern writers look at a problem of its attribution in the spirit of Artamonov's concept -

Pletnyova also do not notice obvious contradictions between her and own materialami18.

The possibility essentially of a different approach to the analysis of an ethnopolitical situation in the south of Eastern Europe in 1970 was planned by the Ukrainian archeologist D.T. Berezovets who, developing the concept of the Iranian origin of Russia, mainly in its interpretation by M.I. Artamonov, stated in article "About a Name of Carriers of Saltov-sky Culture" a thought, according to which a rusa of east sources

>- it is iranoyazychny carriers of forest-steppe option saltovsky kultury19. Such unexpected conclusion did not find support in the subsequent istoriografii20 as contradicted all main concepts of both the ancient history of Russia and Khazaria, and history of the Russian-Hazaria relations. Though itself D.T. Berezovets nevertheless did not risk to claim that these rusa created a little considerable political association, believing that they submitted to Khazaria, its conclusions were unacceptable for most of archeologists - hazarovedov: at the expense of an area of saltovsky culture they as it was already told above, proved a thesis about the considerable territory of Khazar Khanate including Podonye and Podontso-vye21. Unacceptable this thesis appeared also for those researchers who defended the idea about the Central Dnieper Bank as about the most ancient territory Rusi22. The similar thought, certainly, and is unacceptable for the latest supporters Norman teorii23. Meanwhile, D.T. Berezovts's idea is represented very perspective and is absolutely undeserved otvergnutoy24 that was well shown by the works as E.S. Galkina considered by us.

In summary form the concept of history of the Russian khaganate was stated to E.S. Galkina in article written together with A.G. Kuzmin where authors, having assumed as a basis the constructions D.T. Bie-rezovtsa conclusions, went significantly further, having put forward a thesis about existence of the Russian khaganate - the considerable political association created at a boundary of the VIII-IX centuries by the iranoyazychny people living in Don upper courses, the Seversky Donets and Oskola25. Archaeological Russian khaganate is a territory of saltovsky culture with its white stone zamkami26, developed by craft and trade, and, perhaps, and with own monetary business. Russian khaganate of the first third of the 9th century

>- the great power which was in cruel confrontation with Haza-riyey27 and eventually broken posledney28. A part of rus at the same time went to the Baltics where they are known to a number of the latest authors (Adam Bremensky, the Geographer Ravensky, Otton Bambergsky, Gerbord, Ebbon, etc.). In this regard researchers identified the mysterious "island of rus" mentioned repeatedly in the Arab-Persian medieval geographical literature with the island of Saaremaa at coast with -

temporary Estonia. This plot united information on the Russian khaganate and the latest habitat of saltovsky rus.

Further E.S. Galkina published a number of the works devoted to separate plots within a problem of "The Russian khaganate" where continued justification of this original kontseptsii29 which basis of justification are results of comparison of data of east geographical compositions (first of all, the anonymous "Borders of the world" containing mutual coordinates of various people and geographical objects) with ethnocultural and archaeological maps of Southeast Europe where during this period of time there was saltovsky archaeological culture (The Russian khaganate. Page 63-191, Nomads. Page 179-270, 385-413) in the territory of which east authors also place rus.

This conclusion contradicts concepts as the "normanist" seeking to find rus in the north of Eastern Europe and their opponents who look for them on average the Dnieper Bank. In general in studying problems of ethnocultural history of Southeast Europe there was a peculiar vicious circle: archeologists at inclusion of lands of upper courses of the Seversky Donets, Oskol and Don in structure of Khazar Khanate, as a rule, refer to general historical and source study works, and then these conclusions of archeologists are made by authors of general historical and source study works as the "independent" proof of a starting position. Certainly if further to follow logic of this vicious circle, then the movement of science will be absolutely impossible forward.

As a result of the integrated approach realized by E.S. Galkina to the studied perspective the new picture of history of a number of the people of Southeast Europe in which special attention is paid to history of iranoyazychny alan from an era of Great resettlement of the people until the end of the I millennium AD appears at us bright and considerably. By alana, on belief of the researcher, it was also created at US boundary - the 9th centuries political association which governors, applying for hegemony in the specified region, accept the highest of titles known to them - Kagan's title. Material expression of the birth of this political association was bright saltovs-ky culture which carriers mastered both own monetary production, and runic writing, is frequent without the sufficient bases attributed to Khazar Turkic peoples (The Russian khaganate. Page 139-235, Nomads. Page 407-446). The last received rich cultural heritage including the name "Russia", and a title (or honourable definition) Kagan by whom they sometimes designated Old Russian princes (The Russian khaganate from the Russian khaganate which neighbors were east Slavs. Page 353-359).

All above-mentioned (namely the developed craft and trade, military organizatsiya30, emergence of monumental architecture, own monetary business and writing) allowed E.S. Galkina to draw a conclusion on existence at saltovtsev-alan own early state organization (The Russian khaganate. Page 190-191, Nomads. Page 391-399) what it is probably necessary to agree with.

One of the major questions raised by the researcher - a question of a ratio of social elite of the Russian khaganate and Kievan Rus' more widely - ratios of these political formations in general. If earlier Russian khaganate (irrespective of its southern or northern localization) was considered as the direct predecessor of Kievan Rus', then works as E.S. Galkina establish their discretization. And identification of carriers of saltovsky culture with the population of the Russian khaganate allows to raise in a new way a question of origin of socio-political elite of Ancient Russia the IX-X centuries which, according to Konstantin Bagryanorodny, was called as "rusa" and was opposed to "Slavs" 31. These data direct at the assumption that in Russia the model of a politogenez close to Bulgarian was realized (on Danube) when the indigenous Slavic people underwent gain as a result of which the inoetnichny ruling elite was formed. It turns out that Old Russian politogenez it was carried out in the conditions of ethnocultural synthesis in which saltovsky alany-rusa and east Slavs participated. And it, in turn, leads to revision of all picture of early history of Russia.

Problems of an etnopolitogenez, its possible ways and options occupy the central place in works as E.S. Galkina. The address to them led the researcher to creation of the new generalizing work on the history of nomadic societies of Southeast Europe - "Nomads of Eastern Europe: ethnic groups, society, power".

At once it should be noted that this research - the first in a domestic historiography work in which the ethnocultural and socio-political history of nomadic societies of Southeast Europe throughout all the I millennium AD is systemically studied. Earlier researchers addressed only history of the separate people or their political associations which were replaced sometimes with kaleidoscopical speed, but ever before nobody considered through process of ethnic, political, social and cultural development of nomads of the East European region on so considerable interval of time.

Developing the scientific ideas of a politogeneza of nomadic societies existing today in which development made a considerable contribution as domestic (B.Ya. Vladimirtsov, G.E. Markov,

A.M. Hazanov, N.N. Kradin, E.I. Kychanov, S.A. Pletnyova, etc.), and foreign researchers (P.B. Golden, R. Coen, V. Ayrons, L. Kre-

of the village, D.M. Danlop, O. Pritsak, etc.), E.S. Galkina considers socio-political development of nomadic societies of Southeast Europe as the uniform in fact process subordinated to the general regularities of development. It especially is justified if to consider that in an interval between invasion of Huns (IV - At centuries) and invasion of Hungarians and Pechenegs (IX-X centuries) the population of a steppe strip of Eastern Europe developed of two main ethnic components: the iranoyazychny people dominating till an era of Great resettlement of the people, and "pozdnegunnsky" tribes which ethnic origin can not always be defined with confidence (savira, Khazars, Bulgars, etc.).

Respectively, according to E.S. Galkina, it is possible to allocate also two types of an etnopolitogenez of nomads of Southeast Europe (Nomads. Page 447-452): North Iranian (Alana and a rusa) and that which it is possible to call conditionally Hazaria and which was characteristic of all "pozdnegunnsky" ethnic groups (Nomads. Page 450-452). The first of these ways came to the end with creation of the Russian khaganate, the second - formation of Khazaria. It were two absolutely different political merging with various economic structure and the political organization.

The semi-settled type of managing with equal approximately value zemledeliya32 and cattle breedings what the North Iranian ideological tradition equating farmers and handicraftsmen to ordinary nomads was the cornerstone of is characteristic of the North Iranian way. These factors naturally led also to integration from an inoetnichny-ma and foreign culture associations (in particular, East Slavic). Over time all this led to political integration of a number of the tribes which united in one vertically integrated potes-tare association - the Russian khaganate. In the economic sphere this semi-settled model of housekeeping led gradually to the making economy with the economy based on advanced handicraft trade and trade including external.

The economic basis of a Hazaria way was formed by nomadic cattle breeding and an ekzoexpluatation of the settled agricultural population (extortionate attacks and a tribute). Violently carried out vertical integration (submission of some ethnic groups by others) is characteristic of political development of the societies going on this way. As a result there is a so-called "nomadic empire" - the friable and unstable political education based only on gain, and included, in mainly violent way, in its structure the ethnic groups can be at different steps of social and economic, political and cultural development. The Turkic khaganate and Khazaria were those. The last managed to unite practically all "pozdnegunnsky" ethnic groups of Southeast Ev-

ropa. Violent nature of vertical association of various ethnic groups explains internal weakness of Khazar Khanate and its internal disproportions.

In general the problem of a Hazaria politogenez is still low-investigated. Khazaria is usually quite surely called the state (we will remember at least the name of the known work of A.P. Novoseltsev), but in effect this situation never and nobody seriously was proved as the problem of gosudarstvoobrazovatelny processes which took place in Khazaria was not considered and in principle. E.S. Galkina tries to fill also this important historiographic gap.

The first stage of history of medieval Khazars is connected with an era of arabokhazarsky wars. In a hearth of fight against Arabs there was a formation of the most Hazaria ethnos and the birth of the potestarny association headed by Khazars where savira, a number of the "pozdnegunnsky" tribes of Ciscaucasia and Great Bulgaria entered (Nomads. Page 271327). External danger acting through Arabs was a push thanks to which there was an association of several ethnic groups under domination of Khazars which center was located in the territory of modern Dagestan.

Later under blows of Arabs there is a mass movement of the population from Ciscaucasia on the North, in the steppe between lower reaches of Volga and Don where processes of a politogenez lead to multilevel integration of the population united as a part of Khazaria: 1) the iudeo-Hazaria ethnos stratum protected by Muslim mercenaries and connected with transit trade; 2) breeding nomadic aristocracy; 3) ordinary Khazar nomads. Division of the ethnic groups subordinated to Khazars was rather simpler and developed on the line elite - the ordinary nomadic population. Gradually inoetnichny ordinary nomadic population merged with Hazaria, the same happened also to elite. All this led to gradual registration of a set of "pozdnegunnsky" tribes of Southeast Europe in uniform Hazaria ethnos. Possibly, by the khaganate end of story the process of ethnic consolidation of its population already achieved certain results.

So difficult integrated system consisting of many people and public strata allows to speak about formation to Entre Rios of the Lower Volga and Don in the IX-X centuries of the early state in which the main structure-forming sign of the state - existence of the power which is resolutely torn off from the people and resisting to it that found also the ideological registration is presented: the elite of Khazaria accepts Judaism while the mass of the population continued to profess various pagan cults, Christianity and Islam (Nomads. Page 378-384). Express this separation of the power from the people -

an elk also in creation of hired army from Muslims of Central Asia which is completely torn off from the population of a khaganate and became a support of the power of its iudaizirovanny elite.

Works as E.S. Galkina, in our opinion, are important for study both problems of the beginning of Russia, and the history of Khazaria and nomadic ethnic groups of Southeast Europe of a turn of the I-II millennium AD. By amount of new daring ideas and anew the questions posed these works are considerably allocated from a number of the similar researches published lately. It is possible to recognize not all proposed solutions as indisputable. Another is important: the birth of the new scientific concept stimulates a discussion, so, contributes to the further development of historical science.

1. E. Galkina. Page 1) of the Mystery of the Russian khaganate. M.: A veche, 2002 (further - the Russian khaganate); 2) Nomads of Eastern Europe: ethnic groups, society, power (I thousand N aa). M.: Prometheus, 2006 (further - Nomads).
2. The latest historiographic reviews see: A.A. Hlevov. A Norman problem in domestic historical science. SPb., 1997; Slavs and Russia: problems and ideas: The concepts which are given rise by three-century polemic in axiomatic statement / Sost. A.G. Kuzmin. M, 2001; V.V. Fomin 1) Varangians and Varangian Russia: to discussion results on a Varangian question. M, 2005; 2) Clematises. Genius of the Russian history. M, 2006; L.S. Klein. Dispute on Varangians. History of opposition and arguments of the parties. SPb., 2009.
3. See: Sakharov.H. Diplomacy of Ancient Russia. M, 1980. Page 22-46; H. Lovmyan-sky. Russia and Normans. M, 1985. Page 194-197; I.P. Shaskolsky. News of the Bertinsky annals in the light of data of modern science//Chronicle and the chronicle. 1980. M, 1981. Page 43-54; Novoseltseva. P.K to a question of one of the most ancient titles of the Russian prince//History USSR. 1982. No. 4. Page 150-159; V.V. Sedov. Russian khaganate of the 9th century//National history. I.G. Konovalova. About possible sources of loan of the title "kagan" in Ancient Russia//Slavs and their neighbors. Issue 10: Slavs and nomadic world. M, 2001; Filyushkin.I. Titles of the Russian sovereigns. M.; SPb., 2006. Page 18-24, etc.
4. See, e.g., latest work of A.I. Filyushkin (Filyushkin.I. Titles. Page 18-24).
5. PetruhinV.Ya. Beginning of ethnocultural history of Russia. Smolensk, M., 1995; Ancient Russia. People. Princes. Religion//From the history of the Russian culture: T. 1 (Ancient Russia). M, 2000.
6. See, e.g.: A.P. Novoseltsev. Formation of the Old Russian state and its first governor//history Questions. 1991. No. 2-3; Danilevskiy.H. Ancient Russia eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries): Course of lectures. M, 1999. Page 41-78; Gorsky.A. Russia: From Slavic resettlement to the Moscow kingdom. M, 2004. Page 36-76, etc.
7. Most fully they are stated in the latest work of the historian: A.G. Kuzmin. Beginning of Russia. Mysteries of the birth of the Russian people. M, 2003.
8. V.I. Abayev. Historical and etymological dictionary of Ossetic. M, 1973. T. 2. Page 435-437; TrubachyovO. N.K to sources of Russia (observations of the linguist). M, 1993.
9. V.V. Ivanov, V.N.O Axes ancient Slavic ethnonyms. Main problems and prospects//Slavic antiquities: ethnogenesis, material culture of Ancient Russia. Kiev, 1980; O.N. Trubachyov of a _moag_s in Northern Black Sea Coast: Reconstruction of relics of language: Etymological dictionary. M, 1999.
10. V.V. Sedov 1) Slavs in the ancient time. M, 1995. Page 233-286; 2) Slavs. Historical and archaeological research. M, 2002. Page 150-198.
11. M.I. Artamonov. History of Khazars. the 2nd prod. SPb., 2002. Page 297-301.
12. Artamonov M.I. Sarkel and some other strengthenings of Northwest Khazaria//Soviet archeology. 1940. Issue VI.
13. I.I. Lyapushkin. Monuments of saltovsky culture in the basin of the Don River//Materials and researches on archeology. M, 1958. No. 62.
14. Pletnev S.A. From kocheviya to the cities. Saltovo-mayatsky culture//Materials and researches on archeology. M, 1967. No. 142. Page 186.
15. In the same place.
16. I.I. Lyapushkin. Monuments of saltovsky culture...; N.Ya. Merpert. "Top Saltovo" (Saltovsky culture). Yew. edging. east. sciences. M.; L., 1949; About genesis of saltovsky culture//Short messages of Institute of history of material culture. 1951. Issue 36.
17. B.A. Rybakov. To a question of a role of Khazar Khanate in the history of Russia//the Soviet archeology. Issue XVIII. M, 1953; E.S. Galkina. The territory of Khazar Khanate IX - the 1st floor. 10th century in written sources//Questions of history. 2006. No. 9.
18. See, e.g., collection: Khazars / Edition stake.: V.Ya. Petrukhin (etc.). Jerusalem; M, 2005 (Jews and Slavs. T. 16) (especially A.V. Komar's articles, V.S. Aksenova and

>. Packs). See also: Tortika.A. East Slavic tribes of the Dnieper Left bank, Podonya - Pridonechya in the context of Hazaria history: et-nopolitichesky model of relationship//Hazaria almanac. Kharkiv, 2002. Issue 1.

19. Arkheolog_ya: Collection. T. XXIV Ki_v, 1970.
20. The only known exception is made by work of the Voronezh local historian A.G. Nikolayenko "Northwest Khazaria or the Don Russia?" (Waugh-lokonovka, 1991).
21. See, e.g.: Pletnyova S.A. Khazars. M, 1986; On a slavyano-Hazaria border zone. M, 1989; AfanasevG.E. Where archaeological evidence of existence of the Hazaria state?//Russian archeology. 2001. No. 2, etc.
22. B.A. Rybakov. Kievan Rus' and Russian principalities of the XII-XIII centuries of M., 1982. Page 55-90. Thanks to B.A. Rybakov's works the provision on srednedneprovsky sources of Russia became widespread. It is curious that in a question of origin of an ethnonym Russia B.A. Rybakov could not come to a certain decision, having assumed only its communication with the name of the small river Ros which origin remains not quite clear, and most veroyat-

ache just its Iranian etymology is (O.N. Trubachev. Names of the rivers of Right-bank Ukraine. M, 1968. Page 237, 262).

23. See, e.g.: A. Novoseltsev. Item 1) the Hazaria state and its role in the history of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. M, 1990; 2) Formation of the Old Russian state.; V.Ya. Petrukhin. 1) Beginning of ethnocultural history of Russia; 2) ancient Russia., etc.
24. TalisD.L. Dews in the Crimea//the Soviet archeology. 1974. No. 3. A.G. Kuzmin supported D.T. Berezovts's ideas (A.G. Kuzmin. Hazaria sufferings//A.G. Kuzmin. Marauders on roads of history. M, 2005. Page 272-277 and settlement), but, unfortunately, insufficiently they developed.
25. E.S. Galkina, Kuzmin A.G. Rossky khaganate and island of russ//Slavs and Russia.
26. Usually earlier they were treated as the boundary strengthenings of Khazaria directed against east Slavs - see: S.A. Pletnyova. On a slavyano-Hazaria border zone; AfanasevG.E. Where archaeological certificates.
27. For this reason governors of rus also accepted Kagan's title which was considered at the people of the Eurasian steppes - from zhuan-zhuany to Mongols - the highest that testifies to their claims for superiority in the region.
28. The previous researchers spoke in this regard about civil war (ArtamonovM.I. History of Khazars. L., 1962. Page 324 and settlement) or about "distemper" (Novoseltsev.P. Hazaria state. Page 132) in Khazar Khanate, followed adoption of Judaism by this state. According to E.S. Galkina and A.G. Kuzmin, it is more correct to speak about "a fight between two khaganates" (E.S. Galkina, Kuzmin A.G. Rossky a khaganate. Page 462).
29. E. Galkina. Page 1) Saltovo-mayatsky culture and problem of the Russian khaganate//Scientific works of the Moscow pedagogical state university. Series: Socio-political sciences. M, 1997; 2) To judgment of a title "hakan rus" in the Arab-Persian geography of the IX-XII centuries//In the same place. M, 2003; 3) To a problem of localization of the people of Southeast Europe on the ethnic card of geographers "schools al-Dzhaykhani"//Scientific notes of the Center of the Arab researches of Institute of oriental studies of RAS. M, 2003. Issue 3; 4) Hakan rus in medieval Arab geographical literature//Globalization and multiculturalism: Reports and performances. The VII International philosophical conference "Dialogue of civilizations: The East is the West", on April 14-16, 2003 M., 2004, etc.
30. About it see: Bubenok O.B. Alani-asi Dn_provsko-Donsky mezhir_chchya on v_yskov_y sluzhb_ in the Khazar//the Hazaria almanac. Issue 1. The author, however, proceeds from an unsubstantiated thesis about dependence saltovsky Alan from Khazaria that, however, does not change an overall picture of their military organization depicted by the researcher.
31. Konstantin Bagryanorodny. About management of the empire: text, translation, comment / Otv. edition G.G. Litavrin, A.P. Novoseltsev. M, 1989. Page 51, etc.
32. About development of agricultural economy at saltovsky Alan see the latest work: V.V. pack, Gorbanenko S.A. Agricultural complex of the early medieval population of the Top Saltov//Hazaria almanac. Kiev; Kharkiv; Moscow, 2004. Issue 2.
Sofia Marta
Other scientific works: