Khazars were descendants of the Turkic tribe, known as the Huns or Hun, who invaded and savaged Europe from Asia around 450 AD. Khazars were a semi-nomadic Turkic people who created what for its duration was the most powerful polity to emerge from the breakup of the western Turkish steppe empire, known as the Khazar Khanate or Khazaria.
Their influence in Eastern Europe extended well into the countries we now know as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. The Khazars were pagans before they became Jews. Around 740 AD, Bulan, the King of Khazaria, adopted the religion of Judaism and the whole nation followed him.
Their home was not the Dead Sea, but the Caspian Sea, which became known as the `Khazar Sea’.
Khazaria long served as a buffer state between the Byzantine Empire and both the nomads of the northern steppes and the Umayyad Empire, after serving as Byzantium’s proxy against the Sasanian Persian empire. The alliance was dropped around 900. Byzantium began to encourage the Alans to attack Khazaria and weaken its hold on Crimea and the Caucasus, while seeking to obtain an entente with the rising Rus’ power to the north, which it aspired to convert to Christianity.
Between 965 and 969, the Kievan Rus ruler Sviatoslav I of Kiev conquered the capital Atil and destroyed the Khazar state. Seal discovered in excavations at Khazar sites is the Jewish ‘Star of David‘.
Khazars were instrumental in the creation of the Magyar homeland of Hungary. Names like the Russian Cossack and the Hungarian Hussar came from ‘Khazar’, as did the German for heretic, Ketzer.
An ancient traditional pre-Christian account of Hungarian origins says they are the descendants of the Babylonian Nimrod. The legend claims that Nimrod had two sons, Magor and Hunor. It is said that Magor was the ancestor of the Magyars and Hunor was the ancestor of the Huns, so providing the common origin of the Magyars and the Huns (Khazars).
Turkic History in 6-minute video
Over the centuries of waning power and influence, the Khazar peoples began to emigrate in many directions. The Khazar ‘Jews’ were confined to ghettos as a result of papal dictat in the mid-16th century.After the demise of Khazaria, the Ashkenazi did not speak the Semitic language of Hebrew at all because they were not original Hebrews.They developed their own tongue called Yiddish, whch is the language of the Ashkenazi, and it did not come from Israel, but from Germany and Eastern Europe.
Khazars originally practiced a traditional Turkic form of cultic practices known as Tengriism, which focused on the sky god Tengri. (Similar to Mongolian Blue Sky God Koke Mongke Tengri. )
Rites involved offerings to fire, water, and the moon, to remarkable creatures, and to “gods of the road” (Old Türk yol tengri, perhaps a god of fortune). Sun amulets were widespread as cultic ornaments.
A tree cult was also maintained. Whatever was struck by lightning, man or object, was considered a sacrifice to the high god of heaven. The afterlife, to judge from excavations of aristocratic tumuli, was much a continuation of life on earth, warriors being interred with their weapons, horses, and sometimes with human sacrifices: the funeral of one tudrun in 711-12 saw 300 soldiers killed to accompany him to the otherworld. Ancestor worship was also observed (similar to Pitru Devatas in Vedic Religion).
In 965 AD, as the Qağanate was struggling against the victorious campaign of the Rus’ prince Sviatoslav, the Islamic historian Ibn al-Athîr mentions that Khazaria, attacked by the Oğuz, sought help from Khwarezm, but their appeal was rejected because they were regarded as ‘infidels‘ (al-kuffâr pagans). Save for the king, the Khazarians are said to have converted to Islam in order to secure an alliance, and the Turks were, with Khwarezm’s military assistance repelled. It was this that, according to Ibn al-Athîr, led the Jewish king of Khazar to convert to Islam.
BEGINNING WITH MUSTAFA KEMAL ATATURK, who created a secular Turkish state in 1921 through the Jewish-inspired Young Turks Movement, the ties between Turkey and the Zionist cabal have burgeoned into a full blown military relationship.
The Jewish-dominated Young Turks Movement, (AKA Committee of Union and Progress), was germinated in Paris in the late 1800’s and blossomed in the heavily Jewish populated area of Thessalonica, the headquarters of Jewish banking interests since the Ottoman 18th century.
Thessalonica at the time was made up of mostly Spanish Jews who outwardly converted to Islam—but—maintained their Jewish identity secretly as “Donmeh,” or “Crypto Jews.”
With ties to Bolshevik Jews such as Vladimir Jabotinksy, who was one of the founders of early Zionism, Ataturk and his “young Turks” (mostly Jews) began an ongoing alliance with global Zionism and its Jewish leaders through Ataturk’s military officer corps. View Entire Story Here, Here & Here.
In 1949, although with a Muslim majority but with a Zionist-controlling minority, Turkey was one of the first countries to recognize Israel as a sovereign nation.
The Fulani people have an old Berber element. This is not surprising, but it is only a part of the origin of light complexion Fulani. The remaining and the most surprising part about Solving the Mysterious Origin of the Fulani is not in Africa but might be by historical analysis is in Turkic speaking countries, particularly The Khazars. Their vast slavery campaigns brought them in contact with many peoples in East Europe, Turkey, the Levant, and the Berber and from that the Fulani people were formed.
R1b1c (R-V88) is related to R-M335 (R1b1b) mainly found in Anatolia (Asia Minor) and P297 and its division R-M73 (R1b1a1). Found in Anatolia, Caucasus, Urals, Hazara
Haplogroup R1b is not indigenous to Africa, and it is also not in Europe. Its homeland is only central and western Asia. What is called R1b in Europe must be something totally different from the R1b of R1b1c and R1b1b. R1b identification, maps and grouping need fresh investigations and further studies.
The tribes that were to comprise the Khazar empire were not an ethnic union, but a congeries of steppe nomads and peoples who came to be subordinated, and subscribed to a core Tűrkic leadership. Many Turkic groups, such as the Oğuric peoples, including Šarağurs, Oğurs, Onoğurs, and Bulğars who earlier formed part of the Tiĕlè confederation, are attested quite early, having been driven West by the Sabirs, who in turn fled the Asian Avars, and began to flow into the Volga-Caspian-Pontic zone from as early as the 4th century CE and are recorded by Priscus to reside in the Western Eurasian steppe-lands as early as 463.
This is historic approach. It is necessary to investigate it genetically. This could be a great discovery for the origins of the Fulani, the Roma and the Ashkenazi peoples that eluded everybody forever.
History of the Jews in Russia
The vast territories of the Russian Empire at one time hosted the largest population of Jews in the world. Within these territories the primarily Ashkenazi Jewish communities of many different areas flourished and developed many of modern Judaism’s most distinctive theological and cultural traditions, while also facing periods of antisemitic discriminatory policies and persecutions. Russian Jewry consists predominantly of Ashkenazi Jews but also comprises a number of other Diasporan Jewish groups, such as Mountain Jews, Crimean Karaites, Krymchaks, Bukharan Jews, and Georgian Jews.
The presence of Jewish people in the European part of Russia can be traced to the 7th–14th centuries CE. In the 11th and 12th centuries, the Jewish population in Kiev, in present-day Ukraine, was restricted to a separate quarter. Evidence of the presence of Jewish people in Muscovite Russia is first documented in the chronicles of 1471. During the reign of Catherine II in the 18th century, Jewish people were restricted to the Pale of Settlement within Russia, the territory where they could live or immigrate to. Alexander III escalated anti-Jewish policies. Beginning in the 1880s, waves of anti-Jewish pogroms swept across different regions of the empire for several decades. More than two million Jews fled Russia between 1880 and 1920, mostly to the United States.
Jews have been present in contemporary Armenia and Georgia since the Babylonian captivity. Records exist from the 4th century showing that there were Armenian cities possessing Jewish populations ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 along with substantial Jewish settlements in the Crimea. The presence of Jewish people in the territories corresponding to modern Belarus, Ukraine, and the European part of Russia can be traced back to the 7th-14th centuries CE. Under the influence of the Caucasian Jewish communities, the Bulan, the Khagan Bek of the Khazars, and the ruling classes of Khazaria (located in what is now Ukraine, southern Russia and Kazakhstan), may have adopted/converted to Judaism at some point in the mid-to-late 8th or early 9th centuries. After the conquest of the Khazarian kingdom by Sviatoslav I of Kiev (969), the Khazar Jewish population may have assimilated or migrated in part.
The Russian Empire hosted the largest population of Jews in the world isn’t this another proof that the Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites and they are Asian Turkic? If so then Antisemitism is actually Anti-turkism.
1- The History of the Jewish Khazars, New York: Schocken Books, 1967, by D. M. Dunlop.
[For the sober historian speculation about what might have been is a frivolous distraction, but for those of us with less responsibility it has its charms. What would have happened if Xerxes’ invasion had been successful, or if Charles Martel had not driven the Moslems back behind the Pyrenees, or if the Russians had adopted the Christianity of Rome rather than of Byzantium? With these questions we are familiar. We are less familiar with the questions that the Khazars suggest. What would have happened if the Khazars had not kept the Moslems from breaking out north of the Caucasus, or if they had been able to maintain their state, or if their kin the Turks, Bulgars, and Magyars and their neighbors the Russians had followed the example of their rulers and aristocracy and adopted Judaism?
These are idle questions, of course, but they are not fantastic. The Khazars were not a myth invented by Judah ha-Levi in the 12th century as a convenient narrative vehicle for his theology. They are not even an invention of the Arab League, which would have it that modern Jews are descended from them rather than from Palestinian ancestors; or of American anti-Semites, of whom some now refer to “Khazars” as they once referred to “Eskimos,” for coy concealment, and others try to invest the name with an uncanny and sinister quality.
From the 7th century until some hundreds of years later the Khazars were a power where Asia Minor meets Europe. Mr. Dunlop, citing Constantine Porphyrogenitus, reminds us that in the 10th century letters to their ruler from the Byzantine court, for which ceremony was no trivial matter, “bore a more handsome gold seal than that judged necessary for correspondence with the Pope of Rome or the successor of Charlemagne.” Khazar princesses were wives and mothers of emperors in Constantinople, and more than one Caesar of the Eastern Roman empire was enthroned with Khazar support.
The Khazars ruled in the area more or less clearly defined on the west, south, and east by the Black Sea, the Caucasus Mountains, and the Caspian Sea, and vaguely on the north by the Volga and Don Rivers. It was they who defeated the repeated attempts of Islam at its most virile and expansive to push into Eastern Europe. Poor as our reliable information about them is, we can be sure of their importance before the destruction of their state, probably in the second half of the 10th century, by the Russians, or at the latest in the 13th century by the Mongols.]
Douglas Morton Dunlop (1909–1987) was a renowned British orientalist and scholar of Islamic and Eurasian history. Born in England, Dunlop studied at Bonn and Oxford under the historian Paul Ernst Kahle (1875–1965). His work was also influenced by such scholars as Zeki Validi Togan, Mikhail Artamonov, and George Vernadsky.
In the 1950s and ’60s, Dunlop was Professor of History at Columbia University in New York. He is best known for his influential histories of Arab civilization and the Khazar Khaganate. Dunlop was the “most esteemed scholar of the Khazar monarchy.” He had command of the many languages needed to study the Khazars, information about whom is found in Arabic, Byzantine, Hebrew and Chinese literature.
To download a pdf copy of The History of the Jewish Khazars, by D. M. Dunlop book go to this page
2 – The Invention of the Jewish People (Hebrew: מתי ואיך הומצא העם היהודי?, Matai ve’ech humtza ha’am hayehudi?, literally When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?) is a study of the historiography of the Jewish people by Shlomo Sand, Professor of History at Tel Aviv University. It has generated a heated controversy. The book was in the best-seller list in Israel for nineteen weeks. It was reprinted three times when published in French (Comment le peuple juif fut inventé, Fayard, Paris, 2008). In France, it received the “Prix Aujourd’hui”, a journalists’ award given to a non-fiction political or historical work.
Sand argues that it is likely that the ancestry of most contemporary Jews stems mainly from outside the Land of Israel and that a “nation-race” of Jews with a common origin never existed, and that just as most Christians and Muslims are the progeny of converted people, not of the first Christians and Muslims, Jews are also descended from converts. According to Sand, Judaism was originally, like its two cousins, a proselytising religion, and mass conversions to Judaism occurred among the Khazars in the Caucasus, Berber tribes in North Africa, and in the Himyarite Kingdom of the Arabian Peninsula.
According to Sand, the original Jews living in Israel, contrary to popular belief, were not exiled by the Romans following the Bar Kokhba revolt. The Romans permitted most Jews to remain in the country. Rather, the story of the exile was a myth promoted by early Christians to recruit Jews to the new faith. They portrayed that event as a divine punishment imposed on the Jews for having rejected the Christian gospel. Sand writes that “Christians wanted later generations of Jews to believe that their ancestors had been exiled as a punishment from God.” Following the Arab conquest of Palestine in the 7th century, many local Jews converted to Islam and were assimilated among the Arab conquerors. Sand concludes that these converts are the ancestors of the contemporary Palestinians.
3 – Two Hundred Years Together (Rus. Двести лет вместе, Dvesti let vmeste) is a two-volume historical essay by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. It was written as a comprehensive history of Jews in the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union and modern Russia between the years 1795 and 1995, especially with regard to government attitudes toward Jews.
Solzhenitsyn published this two-volume work on the history of Russian–Jewish relations in 2001 and 2002. The book stirred controversy, and many historians reported it as unreliable in factual data. Some historians classified it as antisemitic, while others disagreed with this. The book was published in French and German in 2002–2003. A partial English translation of some excerpts may be found in “The Solzhenitsyn Reader”.
MOST BANNED BOOK IN THE WORLD: 200 Years Together, Russian-Jewish History – by Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn [English Translation Version]
4 – Ancient Jewish History: The Khazars, Jewish Virtual Library
5 – Turkic Migration, From Wikipedia
6 – Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine, The Times of Israel
[March 18, 2014 Jerusalem and Zhitomir, 16 March/Adar II 14
(Our Russian and Ukrainian correspondents Hirsh Ostropoler and I. Z. Grosser-Spass also contributed to this story, delayed due to the crisis over the Crimean referendum.)
Followers of Middle Eastern affairs know two things: always expect the unexpected, and never write off Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has more political lives than the proverbial cat.
Only yesterday came news that Syrian rebels plan to give Israel the Golan Heights in exchange for creation of a no-fly zone against the Assad regime. In an even bolder move, it is now revealed, Israel will withdraw its settlers from communities beyond the settlement blocs—and relocate them at least temporarily to Ukraine. Ukraine made this arrangement on the basis of historic ties and in exchange for desperately needed military assistance against Russia. This surprising turn of events had an even more surprising origin: genetics, a field in which Israeli scholars have long excelled.
The Times of Israel]
8 – Where Did Yiddish Come From? posted by Tablet Magazine.com
[The title of Paul Wexler’s detailed study, The Ashkenazic Jews: A SlavoTurkic People in
Search of a Jewish Identity, is not shy about his claim: Yiddish has Slavic grammar, syntax, morphemes, phonemes, and lexicon, with a smaller input from Turkic. Wexler made the case that Yiddish is a “relexification”—a massive borrowing of Germanic words onto a basically Slavic structure, as opposed to Weinreich’s view that Slavic words were added to a Germanic structure. Wexler’s claim applies not only to the language: “The bulk of their [Ashkenazi Jewish] religious practices and folkways also prove to be of Slavic origin” and thus “the Ashkenazic [sic] Jews may be in the main ethnic Slavs”—Wexler added his own italics, in case readers should not get the point. Wexler’s preferred term for modern Judaism was “Judaized pagano-Christianity,” though he used the term rarely on the grounds that it was too cumbersome.
Weinreich and Wexler agreed that the key to the deep history of the East European Jews—the history stretching back deep into the origins of Yiddish, where documentary evidence becomes scarce—would be found in linguistics. They also agreed that language was the key to understanding the culture of the European Jews over the millennium that followed, but their books disagreed diametrically on what the linguistic evidence meant.
It would have been easier to ignore Wexler’s argument if he had made it without grubbing through the details. But Wexler had already made a career as a respectable Slavic linguist. One reviewer called Wexler’s expertise “awe-inspiring” and wrote that Wexler practiced “a painstaking methodology that warrants emulation, working meticulously, never proposing a hypothesis unless thoroughly developed and supported.” Wexler knew Hebrew and had published analyses of it. And he had not only studied Yiddish but also taught it at YIVO. Wexler knew his argument would make people mad: “I am aware that discussions of ethnic reconstruction and the origins of religious and superstitious practices often provoke emotional reactions; this is especially true when traditional views are being challenged.” The reception to his argument by Yiddish, Germanic, and Slavic linguists, on the contrary, was, or at least seemed, quite dispassionate, framed in the jargon of the trade (discussions of dialectology, isoglosses, substratal and adstratal components, diphthongization, and such). Critics commended Wexler for being “interesting,” “striking,” and “provocative,” then dismantled his examples, poked holes in his logic, and dismissed his conclusions, in no uncertain terms.
Comparative linguistics poses two genuine, and interconnected, problems when its methods are used to make arguments about history. The first is that in its most specialized details, the evidence and arguments are inaccessible to outsiders; Wexler will not be able to persuade historians about the origins of the Jews by discussing lexical inventories and phonemeic shifts (especially as long as other linguists return fire with equally arcane and scientific-sounding counterarguments about other phonemic shifts). Second, despite its stress on precision and details, comparative historical linguistics is not as scientific or as purely historical as it seems; lost forms must be reconstructed, development must be interpolated, and thus no argument is definitive. The majority view among Yiddish linguists—a very small but committed cadre of scholars—is that Wexler’s argument is untenable.
Genetics might provide us with an exit to this uncomfortable, and vexingly arcane, linguistic argument. Recent studies of markers on the Y chromosome of Ashkenazi men hold out the possibility of determining, with apparent mathematical precision, how many Ashekenazi men share markers distinctive to the European, Middle Eastern, or other (for example, Central Asian Turkic) gene pool. The results are inconclusive, puzzling, and unexpected. David Goldstein, a molecular geneticist at Duke, undertook to trace Y markers among two Ashekenazi subgroups: the Cohanim (the class of priests narrowly defined) and the Levites (liturgical officiants from the tribe of Levi). He found that the Cohanim from both Ashkenazi and Sephardic populations shared an unusual marker on the Y chromosome that set them apart both from the surrounding non-Jewish populations—and from their own communities. He traced the marker to a mutation originating about 3,000 years ago and suggested in conclusion that this showed both groups had a real and unbroken genetic link with the original priestly Jews of Israel. (He received tremendous media coverage as a result.)
The Ashkenazi Levites, on the other hand, showed a puzzling genetic signature: they did not match particularly well with the Cohanim, nor with the broader population of Ashkenazi Jews. Comparing this group with the most common Y-chromosome micro-mutations in European and West Eurasian populations (i.e., Turkic and Caucasian tribes), Goldstein concluded that though he had at first been very skeptical of the “Khazar hypothesis” that Ashkenazi Jews came to Eastern Europe from the Eurasian steppe, rather than from Germany, he now found it “plausible, if not likely” and “worth investigating further.”
In his latest work—more linguistic studies, as well as an etymological dictionary of Yiddish—Wexler argues that the core of what became the Ashkenazi Jews originated not in post-exilic Judea, later dispersed through the Mediterranean Roman Empire, but in Persia: the Azhkenazi(c) Jews were “an outgrowth of Jewish Iranians who brought Judaism to the Khazars, and subsequently migrated westwards with Turkic-origin Jews and non-Jewish Khazars.” Wexler had begun his career in the Weinreich school in the 1960s. He had the language background to read all of Weinreich’s footnotes before they were translated, access to Weinreich’s papers in the archives at YIVO in Manhattan, and similar scholarly skills. Even as he set out to overturn the consensus, Wexler sincerely and ardently praised the work of Max Weinreich and his son Uriel: “without their pioneering scholarship, the hypothesis presented here [in “The Fifteenth Slavic Language”] would have been inconceivable and undemonstrable.” But after working for several decades within the historical framework laid out by Weinreich, he was not convinced. Wexler the gadfly had a point: there were many questions that Weinreich’s history made more difficult, rather than simpler.]
9 – Origins of Yiddish Are Anything But Understood, posted on The Forward Association
[Finally, and most recently, there are the DNA findings. Although difficult to interpret, they appear to indicate that a number of Eastern European Jews are genetically closer to populations in Central Asia, the Caucasus and Iran than to the Jews of Western Europe. This has led to a revival of the “Khazar theory,” the belief that part or much of Eastern European Jewry originally came not from points west, but rather from the Turkic tribes that inhabited the shadowy kingdom of Khazaria, the medieval state between the Black and the Caspian seas whose rulers, along with some of their subjects, were said to have converted to Judaism. When Khazaria was destroyed by its enemies in the 10th century, the theory goes, many of its Jews fled westward, multiplying by many times the numbers of Jews in Poland, western Russia and the Baltic states.]
It’s a theory that more or less affirms the understanding that many Jews themselves hold of who they are in the world: a people who, though scattered, share an ethnic-racial bond rooted in their common ancestral descent from the indigenous Jews of ancient Judea or Palestine, as the Romans called it after they conquered the Jewish homeland.
But now, Elhaik, an Israeli molecular geneticist, has published research that he says debunks this claim. And that has set off a predictable clash.
“Roxelana is believed to have been born in the western part of Ukraine around 1505. Sometime between 1515 and 1520, when she was around 15 years of age, she was abducted by the Crimean Tatars on one of their slave raids… She most probably followed the route that thousands of her compatriots followed in the sixteenth century – walking in long caravans of captives to the biggest slave market in the Black Sera region, Caffa… She then appeared in the Avret Pazari (“Women’s Bazaar”], a slave market in Istanbul, and, according to legend, was purchased for the imperial harem by Ibrahim Pasha, a close friend of the young Crown Prince Suleiman. Ibrahim presented her to Suleiman, probably before the latter became Sultan in 1520. Her playful temperament and greatest singing ability soon won her the name of Hurrem [the “joyful” or “the Laughing One”], and that was probably what attracted Suleiman’s eye. She quickly became Suleiman’s favourite concubine, ousting from that position the beautiful Circassian concubine Mahidevran, the mother of Suleiman’s first-born son Mustafa.”
Mustafa was killed on his father’s orders in 1553 after word spread that the son was planning to assassinate the Sultan, leaving Roxelana’s son Selim to inherit the Ottoman throne. Yermolenko cites a Polish work published in 1861, Poezye Samuela z Skrzypny Twardowskiego, as her source for all this.