The Khazars and the Scythians

Where did they go... assyria and babylon... Where did they disappear to? Who lays claim to lost tribe heritage. Are the modern day Western Europeans direct descendants of the 10 Northeran tribes...
Site Admin
Posts: 7781

The Khazars and the Scythians

Post#1 » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:51 am

The Khazars and the Scythians
Synopsis: The author concludes that the Khazars are a Scythian tribe.
Source: Flame
Published: January 1, 2001 Author: Vladimir Pomakov
For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.

An example of Scythian art: The Scythians are the common ancestors of the Indo-European people - including the people of Ireland, where according to the traditions of the Lebor Gabala Erren (Book of the Taking of Ireland), the Irish originated in Scythia and were descendants of a King Feinius Farsaid, a King of Scythia. For more on this check Irish mythology - the legendary descent of the Irish Clans.

Regarding history one of the most profound Bulgarian historians, Dr. Gancho Tzenov, prof. at the University of Berlin in the beginning of 20th century, believed that: (1) history is a positive, inductive science, which is based only on facts, systematized facts and never on assumptions, opinions and speculations. Consequently one must not believe in histories written by victors; (2) large sections of the officially accepted at his time European history of the past 2000 years or so, and particularly that of Eastern Europe, is based on assumptions, opinions and speculations and has nothing in common with the real history of the continent and its human inhabitants. The situation has not changed as of today. There is a lot of evidence supporting this stand of Dr. Tzenov, but I will allow myself to adduce the following few from his works:

1. Herodotus wrote extensively on the Scythians - the common ancestors of most of Indo-European peoples. He noted that this was the name they used to call themselves and that it translates in Greek as Nomads, or "wanderers". This is almost a direct proof that the tribes he describes under the common name of "Scythians" were proto-Slav peoples and that the name was derived from the Slav word "skitati" meaning "wander", "roam" (and thence the derivative word "skiti" - wanderers). Herodotus roughly outlined the territory inhabited by "Scythians": from the German mountains (Schwarzwald) in the west to the Black sea in the east and from the Baltic region in the North to the Mediterranean in the south. This was more or less half the known world at his times. What were the peoples that inhabited the world beyond these boundaries Herodotus did not say. (This was revealed and proven only now, in the 20th century AD, by the archeological findings in West China, Xin-jiang Province, in Mongol-Bouryatia, around lake Baikal, and in the vast lands between the Altai and Hindu Kush mountains. There archeologists excavated scores of mummies of Indo-European race, some of them as old as 5000 years and resembling very closely the peoples abiding the Atlantic coast roughly at the same time. Unfortunately Dr. Tzenov died in 1952). A number of the ancient authors often called the "Scythians" "K(C)eltoscythians", too. Among the "keltoscythian" peoples they mentioned "Gog", "Magog", "Geti", "Masageti", "Cimmerians", etc. (Today's historians regard the "Scythians" as a long extinct people, of whom only legends and some artifacts are left. However, ancient Skitians' gene stock is as alive today as it was 5 or 10 thousand years ago, being passed through Thracians, Illyrians, Dacians, etc., etc., into the present day Slav nations all over Central, Southeast and East Europe, and possibly into some other, unexpected ethnic group.)

Map showing the lands populated by the Scythians - they almost completely correspond with the state of the Khazars. From the The Scythians web site.

2. The legend, as told by Herodotus, have it that all "Scythians" were direct descendants of Hercules who had three sons from a mythical beast whose lower part was snakelike, and whose upper part was one of a hermaphrodite. Of this, let's call it 'marriage', the Hermaphrodite bore three sons: Agatirz, Gelon and Skit. (Readers will probably be aware that Hercules himself has nothing to do with the so-called Greek mythology and the Greek pantheon simply because he was a Thracian God much, much more ancient than the whole gang at Olympus Mountain.)

3. The Hercules' first son, called by Herodotus "Aga-tirz", was called by the people that descended from him "KOZAR". The Greek word "Agatirz" means "Goat-hunter" and is again a direct translation of the ethnonym "KOZAR" (goat-keeper or goat-hunter). Later, in the middle ages, in parallel with the changes in the Greek language, the pronunciation of the name of these peoples also changed and become "akatziri", "agatziri" or "agaziri". Something similar happened to the native, proto-Slav, name and it changed from "KOZAR" to "KOZAK" ("cossack"). (In antiquity, as partly in present days, they lived in the Carpathian Mountains, just to the north of the Lower Danube.)

4. In the 6th century AD, the Anonymous Chronograph of Ravenna, in its brief description of the KHAZARS, as one of the major peoples inhabiting Skitia (Scythia), specifies that, in the ancient times, they were called "akatzirs":

"In portione autem Iaphet filii Noae, quam philosophi Europam appellaverunt, sistuntur patriae, id est patria que dicitur Scythia, quae in omnibus cremosa existit. Ponitur ipsa patria litus Oceanum septentrionalem juxta prefatos montes Rimphaeos, quae patria longe lateque spatiosissima esse dinoscitur, item ponitur in locis planiciis longe lateque nimis spatiosissima quae dicitur Chazariae, et usque maior Scythia appellatur, quam Iordanis Cosmographus in modum Fungi scarifum esse dixit, quos Chazaros supra scriptus Iordanis Agaziros vocat per quam Chazarorum patriam plurima transeunt Flumina, inter cetera Fluvius maximus qui dicitur Cuphis. - Ravennati Anonymi Cosmographia ed. M. Pinder et G. Parthey. Berolini, 1860, p. 158 (IV-1)."

(In that part which the philosophers called Europe the fatherland of Iafet, Noah's son was located, i.e. a fatherland named Scythia, which is a wasteland (or abandoned land). This fatherland was located along the coast of the Northern Ocean by the mentioned before Rimphean Mountains and was very big by width and by length. Also, in a place flat, too spacious in length and width is the so called Chazaria, which was constantly called the Big Scythia, about which the geographer Jordanes tells that was in the shape of a mushroom. Those Chazars the above-mentioned Jordanes calls Agazirs. Through this fatherland of the Chazars flow many rivers, of which the largest one is called Cuphis).

5. Thus, for the first time, it was documented that the "KHAZARS" were the same "AGATZIRS", the same ancient Scythian, or Kelto-Scythian tribe "AGA-TIRZ", or as they called themselves in Herodotus time, "KOZARS". (Therefore, all this about the Khazars being Turkic, or Turkic-Caucasian (!) tribe was pure nonsense. The very term "Turkic-Aryan" is impossible and is in itself a transcendent folly. The Khazars, or KOZARs, or KOZAKS (COSSACKS) as they called themselves in more recent times, were one of the most ancient European peoples, the remnants of which, after Stalin's very successful attempt at their extermination, still inhabit today's Ukraina and Russia.)

6. What West-European historians (and most of East-European ones as well) call The Great Migration of Peoples in the early Middle Ages - between 4th and 7th AD - implying that huge masses of people from the depth of Asia, predominantly of Turkic origin, rushed into Europe and turned everything on their way into ruins, is to a very large extent dramatic fiction, myth, fabrication. What actually took place in the above period (and even as early as by the end of the 3rd century AD) was the dislocation and transposition of the different Scythian (Skitian if we would prefer the correct form) peoples within their vast European range. This tremendous movement of human masses was due to a large extent to overpopulation of their traditional home territories where the life supporting resources have become more or less exhausted. Thus the northern, Baltic Skitians (for instance the notorious Goths!) moved south, displacing those living in the more southern latitudes, who in turn pushed their neighbours further south. Similarly, there were movements along the parallel, like the one performed by the tribes of Huns. They left their homeland around Azov sea (Meothida) and moved westwards displacing, but mostly conquering their cousins, the Kozars and a few more of the Danube Valley Skitian peoples.

7. The Danube was generally the northern state border of the Roman Empire. Skitians inhabiting the lands on its right-hand riverside were subjects to the Roman Emperor. Skitians living on the river left-hand riverside were more or less "free" and were frequently called "barbarians" by their cousins and by other peoples living within the borders of the Empire. However, the Empire tried to exact tribute from them, too and in more than one way had made itself hated and non-welcomed by the free Skits. This obviously was one of the most important reasons to have many Skitian tribes united in the first half of the 5th century AD under the scepter of one of their kings in order to govern themselves in the way that would suit them best. It so happen that that king was called Attila (a Romanized form of a traditional and popular in the past Bolgarian name - Tilko). There are many ancient authors who wrote that the Huns were part of the Skitians (Claudius Ptolemeus, Philostorgius, Zosimus, etc.) and had nothing to do with the Turkic tribes. One of the most important of them was the Roman military leader Priscus. He was sent to Attila on a state mission by the Emperor and upon his return to Rome presented an extensive report on his visit to the "King of Skitians", although once or twice in his report he calls his hosts Huns, too. Prokopius identified the Huns with the mythical Cimmerians and Masageths, the same Skitian people that defeated ultimately the Persian Czar Cyrus. (Where from, then, did such a crazy notion came to some learned heads of historians, that the Huns were Asiatic, Turkic, undersized, bowlegged, stinking half-humans, drinkers of raw mare-milk and little short of being man-eaters, who threw the cultured, noble Roman citizens - who indulged in gladiatorial skirmishes in the circuses - in horror? The best advice to this scholars would be to have them read again and again the Priscus' report and make up for themselves a true picture of what the Huns were!).

8. (Now, Huns and Kozars (Khazars) were very close relatives, if not one and the same people. Both Huns and Khazars, or the part of the Danube Skitians they were, formed together with other Skitian tribes the Bolgarian people, state and nation south of the Danube. It is very possible that when Kozars/Khazars started leaving their homeland because of the overpopulation, they moved in more than one direction: i.e. while part of them went south, crossed the Danube and entered Mysia and Thracia, where they mixed with their kinsmen there, another part may had moved eastwards towards the plains between the Black and Caspian seas and mixed with the Skitians inhabiting those lands, may be as far south as the Caucasus Mountains. Probably it was in this way that the tale of the Volga-Kama Bulgaria was born. It is possible that some of them may have been converted to Judaism by the mountain Jews from Caucasus, but the notion that almost the whole of the contemporary Jewry, particularly the Jews from Russia, Poland, the Baltic States - the East Europe in general - originated from the Kozars/Khazars is right away improbable. Jews of definitely Semitic origin have lived in Bulgaria for at least 1000 years. They arrive here in greater numbers after they were driven away from Spain by the end of 15th century AD. Most of the Ashkenazim Jews settled in Bulgaria by the end of 19th century AD, when the country was already liberated from the Otoman rule, but no doubt there were many who had come to live here while the country was still within the Otoman Empire. As a whole Ashkenazim Jews were richer and of higher may be social status than the Sepharadim ones but one can hardly doubt in their Semitic origin.)

9. There is considerable evidence that the "famous" writing - the travel notes - of the Arab traveler Ibn Fazlan (or Fadlan? - 9th or 10th century AD?), on which all of the later Arabic "historical works" on Volga Bolgars, Khazars, etc. were based, has never been found in its original form - only copies of copies of copies! The careful analysis of these 'travel notes' reveals that he had simply cribbed almost everything from Priscus report on his visit to Attila in the first half of 5th century AD.

It is understandable when politicians want to have such a history that will serve in the best possible way their political goals and interests. It is understandable when victors in a war want to present the story of this war in such a way as to show themselves in the best possible light, not the least to cover the multitude of atrocities they have consciously and intentionally committed. However, all this has nothing to do with History as a Science. It should be the First and Most Important Obligation of all those vociferous advocates of justice, truth, etc. to have first of all THE WHOLE OF THE HISTORICAL TRUTH, irrespective of the effect this could have on the current or future politics. Now, here is indeed an impossible thing to achieve, isn't it!

Vladimir Pomakov is a writer from Bulgaria. He can be contacted c/o Flame the e-mail address above.

Sisyphus writes: "Were the Cossacks, Khazars, Huns and Scythians really the same people!? A very interesting view point that I am inclined to believe.

The Scythians were the wellspring of Western culture and the ancestor of the Celtic tribes.

Regarding the lion of Scythia conquering the holy land, the bible refers to them as the vengence of the Lord.


4:7 The lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate; [and] thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant.

4:8 For this gird you with sackcloth, lament and howl: for the fierce anger of the LORD is not turned back from us.

4:9 And it shall come to pass at that day, saith the LORD, [that] the heart of the king shall perish, and the heart of the princes; and the priests shall be astonished, and the prophets shall wonder.

4:10 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace; whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul.

4:11 At that time shall it be said to this people and to Jerusalem, A dry wind of the high places in the wilderness toward the daughter of my people, not to fan, nor to cleanse,

4:12 [Even] a full wind from those [places] shall come unto me: now also will I give sentence against them.

4:13 Behold, he shall come up as clouds, and his chariots [shall be] as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe unto us! for we are spoiled."

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

The History of the Khazars

Post#2 » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:52 am

An opposing comment from the source site:

The History of the Khazars
From: The Khazars Home Page, Greece

Subject: The Story of the Khazars

Date: May 9th, 1999

Is it true that Khazars make up over 90% of modern day Jewry? No! But any estimation of numbers depends on who is to be regarded as a Khazar or a Jew.

We regard decendants of Khazaria as Khazars. Like Americans are regarded Americans and Icelanders Icelanders, wether they are Irish or Scandinavian. A Khazar is a Khazar!

We conclude that just about half of the royal house of Khazaria were pre-rabbinical Mosaic sephardic (former Alexandrine Egyptian and Persian) royal Jews from Crimea and that the other half was of newly judaized Western Turkic royalty. However, Rabbinical Jewry immigrated to Khazaria in great numbers from esp. Byzantium. Just about all of the upper class Khazars of nobles and royalty, the White Khazars, were noble warrior and merchant Jews from Crimea, Sogdiana and Caucasus or noble warrior Turks that became Jews in due time. This is generally not very well interpreted by the common main-stream scholars of Jewish and Khazar history.

However, the great mass of common Khazars of Hunnic-Alanic-Turkic origin, the Black Khazars, stayed generally gentile. The Scandinavian God-Kings Othin and Thor basicly have the same geographical and Alan origin, but well before any Khazarian empire.

The majority of the Azkenasic Jewry descend from all kinds of Khazarian Jewry. A considerable minority descend from Jewish Rabbinical immigrants to Poland from Germany (Lothringen) and Austria (Vienna). We guess more than half of todays Jewry have forefathers that passed through Khazaria. The eventual Jewish Turks may constitute less than one third of Azkenasic Jewry. This was regretably not very well interpreted by Arthur Koestler in the Thirteenth Tribe.

Most of the common and gentile Khazars developed into Cossacks, Tartars, Russians, Ukranians and other today mostly Islamic peoples of the Caucasus, Southern Russia and Ukraine. Some common Jewish Black Khazars developed into Jewish Tartars of Crimea and turkish-speaking Karaite Jews of Crimea and Lithuania. A special group of common and gentry (former Alexandrine Egyptian and Persian) Khazar Jewish warriors developed into tat-speaking (Persian) Mountain Jews still living in north-eastern Caucasus.

There probably never was such a thing as "ethnical" nations, just "political" and "cultural". However, some seem in the long run to be neither, but "religious" groups and nations, like e.g. Muslims, Hindues, Egyptians, Tibetans, Byzantines and Jews.

God repeatedly made the covenants of the Chosen People and the Promised Land with such a "religious" nation of Israelites, most of them later to become the classical and modern Rabbinical Jewry, but yet some others to become e.g. Khazars or Christians. So "biblical" and political claims to this land of Zion by Rabbinical Jewry, Jewish Khazars or any Jew are historicly and basicly just. This is usually not very well recognized by anti-jewish racists, who in racistically and counter-historically strained terms try to proove that Jews are not really Jews but Khazars, with no connection whatsoever to Zion, Palestine and Israel. Eventually an effort in vain by ignorant imbecils!

We think we just showed that at least Jews and Jewish Khazars have certain rights to their Promised, and eventually inherited and native, Lands! A Jew is a Jew!

Hopefully this will neatly sort these things out for you. Any comments or questions?

Khazar Home Pages

Site Admin
Posts: 7781

more viewpoints on this train of thought

Post#3 » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:53 am

Reply from author:

From: Vladimar Pomakov, Bulgaria

Subject: The Story of the Khazars

Date: January 21st 2001

Hi Sean,

I was just overcome with the desire to write. I also took the trouble to look through the readers' comments. Do you know that there is a comment from some - it seems - very orthodox Zionist? I tend to think that there is a certain category of the world Jewish population today that is most certainly to be blamed for the chaos reigning in the science of history. And for having many authors and even ordinary people stating that there is no such science as history. Yes! Just take the first comments on the history of Khazars, the one from the Khazar Home Page, Greece in your magazine (Readers' comments). The fellow who wrote that piece seems to be a rather ignorant person who did not even bothered to read, though superficially, the Old Testament. And allegedly the Old Testament is the early history of the Biblical Jews, isn't it? Wasn't it written there, that the Jews, led by Moses invaded the land of Canaan and massacred no more and no less than 29 peoples (or tribes?)! Palestinians, or the ancient Philistines, among them!

And why did their God promised them the Holy Land and not some other land plot? Naturally, because during their endless roaming with their herds of sheep and goats among the settlements of the civilized agricultural peoples of those times, they used to pass twice each year by the rich fields and vineyards of Canaan and it seems likely that they envied bitterly the way of living of its inhabitants, of their having to eat enough every single day and not being forced (by the Fate?) to trod the year round the vast semi-dry steppe between the north of Mesopotamia and the Nile Delta. And even when the Biblical Jews managed at last to settle in the Delta they were soon driven away by the Egyptians. Perhaps it was then that they invented the whole story of the Promised Land? To have some moral justification for the evil they committed when conquering Canaan and killing out most of its aboriginal inhabitants? God knows, we say.

That fellow also seems to have omitted from his readings the story of the Babylonians keeping the Jews twice in captivity and finally finding themselves forced to expel them from Babylon or whatever it was called in order to preserve the country and its native people from the captive Jews destructive influence? Never mind, however. I would like to ask the fellow who made the above-mentioned comments whether he could supply evidence supporting his thesis below:

"We conclude that just about half of the royal house of Khazaria were pre-rabbinical Mosaic Sephardic (former Alexandrine Egyptian and Persian) royal Jews from Crimea (?) and that the other half was of newly judaized Western Turkic royalty. However, Rabbinical Jewry immigrated to Khazaria in great numbers from esp. Byzantium. Just about all of the upper class Khazars of nobles and royalty, the White Khazars, were noble warrior and merchant Jews from Crimea, Sogdiana and Caucasus or noble warrior Turks that became Jews in due time. This is generally not very well interpreted by the common main-stream scholars of Jewish and Khazar history."

Can he explain how it happened that the Jews were to emigrate from Crimea, or were warriors and merchants from there!? The Crimean Peninsula was from the times immemorial a Scythian heartland as was the rest of the Eurasian steppe lands, i.e. the homeland of Indo-Europeans and Jews' presence there was but the most occasional one, indeed they were to occur there as single merchants from time to time.

Regarding his statement of "Hunnic-Alanic-Turkic" origin this indeed comes beyond the most presumptuous historical, anthropological and ethnographical/ethnological ignorance. The "HUNS" are 100% Scythians (Skitians as I would have put it) and therefore Proto-Slav people and Europeans by origin. It is the same with the "ALANS". "Turks" or TURKIC peoples have appeared much later on the European historical stage - by the end of the 1st millennium AD - and they indeed came from the far Asia territories of today's Mongolia/Altai Mountains, etc. They certainly belonged to another race! Nowadays people of mixed blood between white and Turkic races are quite common, particularly in Russia, but it wasn't so 1000 or even 500 years ago. Turks were a very distinct people, rather a sub-race of the yellow race than of the white one. Not to speak of the languages! So there is simply no such creature as "Hunnic-Alanic-Turkic" Homo sapiens in those times. Most definitely.

Regarding the statement or assumption that there never were "ethnical" nations: it seems the concept of "no ethnic nations, only political, religious and cultural ones" is a very convenient one for the category of Jews I referred to in the beginning of my letter. However, it will take quite of an effort for the fellow to explain how then there is so many distinctive ethnic entities in the world today.

Vladimir Pomakov

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest