Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Jewish Nation in Khazar Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 11:55 |
How, exactly, was the Jewish nation in Khazar defeated in the end. This
is always something I found so very interesting. Does anyone know the
story of this nation?
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus
Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 12:25 |
I would object to the use of the term "jewish nation", since the khazars, while converted to the jewish religion, were actually turkic. Anyway, I believe that they were dealt a massive blow by the Kievan Rus in the early 11th century, and then their remains were finally anihilated by the mongols.
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte
Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
Spartakus
Tsar
terörist
Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 12:44 |
The khazars,loyal allies of the Byzantine Empire ,converted to Judaism,mainly for political reasons,in order to avoid to become a State under the direct influence of the Arabs(Islam) or of the Byzantines (Christian Orthodoxy)
|
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
|
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 14:14 |
Why would you object to the use of the term 'Jewish nation'? The
Khazars while their ethnicity may have been Turkish, were Jewish
converts. I was not referring to their ethnicity at all, but their
religion. I understand that the Khazar Jews were not Arabic in
appearance.
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus
Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 15:12 |
I think a more proper term would be judaic (or even mosaic) rather than jewish, because jewish has an ethnic connotation, whereas judaic refers strictly to the religion. This would help avoid the confusion. You may or may not know this, but there is a controversial theory out there which asserts that Ashkenazi jews are not jews at all, but khazars. This theory has not been proven and many jews consider it antisemitic. Anyway, while I don't take offense personally, not being jewish, others might be offended at the implication that khazars are jews.
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte
Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 15:28 |
Thats interesting. And I had heard about that claim but feel its not my
place to commentate as my knowledge of Judaism is virtually nowt.
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
Dan Carkner
Baron
Joined: 07-Nov-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 490
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 21:16 |
Anyone who converts properly to judaism is considered a jew though. So I disagree with your objection.. although from what I have heard mostly just the elite of the khazars actually converted.
|
|
vulkan02
Arch Duke
Termythinator
Joined: 27-Apr-2005
Location: U$A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1835
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 23:05 |
Originally posted by Decebal
I think a more proper term would be judaic (or even mosaic) rather than jewish, because jewish has an ethnic connotation, whereas judaic refers strictly to the religion. This would help avoid the confusion. You may or may not know this, but there is a controversial theory out there which asserts that Ashkenazi jews are not jews at all, but khazars. This theory has not been proven and many jews consider it antisemitic. Anyway, while I don't take offense personally, not being jewish, others might be offended at the implication that khazars are jews. |
Well thats because most Jews today are Ashenazi Jews (80% khazars) and that would prevent them from legitimately laying claim to the land of Israel. Its been well hidden so far from the majority of the public opinion but how long will it be hidden remains to be seen.
|
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao
|
|
Dan Carkner
Baron
Joined: 07-Nov-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 490
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 23:18 |
Originally posted by vulkan02
Originally posted by Decebal
I think a more proper term would be judaic (or even mosaic) rather than jewish, because jewish has an ethnic connotation, whereas judaic refers strictly to the religion. This would help avoid the confusion. You may or may not know this, but there is a controversial theory out there which asserts that Ashkenazi jews are not jews at all, but khazars. This theory has not been proven and many jews consider it antisemitic. Anyway, while I don't take offense personally, not being jewish, others might be offended at the implication that khazars are jews. |
Well thats because most Jews today are Ashenazi Jews (80% khazars) and that would prevent them from legitimately laying claim to the land of Israel. Its been well hidden so far from the majority of the public opinion but how long will it be hidden remains to be seen.
|
Where is your proof for this hidden truth? Look at this history of Ashkenazic jews, they became an identifiable group in what is now southern france and gradually made their way to German lands and eventually spread to eastern europe and multiplied in great numbers because of the relatively favorable conditions. Where do the khazars come in, from all the way over in central asia? I don't believe modern Jews "have a claim" to the land of israel, but that khazar logic is a pretty weak way to express that view. If anything they could simply reply that almost half the jews of israel are from other parts of the middle east (arab jews), wouldn't that counter your logic?
|
|
malizai_
Sultan
Alcinous
Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Jan-2007 at 23:43 |
I think vulkan is alluding to the fact that Ashkenazis are not semites, hence no claim. Yet they will pass themselves off as semites. Imagine if a german or turkish jew says that he was semite, or a black man pass himself off as chinese and start claiming Hunan province.
Khazars were not from central asia.
|
|
JanusRook
Sultan
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 01:02 |
I would agree with Dan Carkner in that those who convert to Judaism nowadays are considered jews so therefore the Khazar's should also be considered jews. While I agree that the Ashkenazi originated in Central Europe and not with the Khazars, I believe that many Ashkenazi have Khazar blood. For the sole fact that eastern europe prior to WWII had large jewish populations, and Khazar jews and Ashkenazi jews had to have intermarried with one another logically.
Well thats because most Jews today are Ashenazi Jews (80% khazars)
and that would prevent them from legitimately laying claim to the land
of Israel. |
Ancestry is only one claim, force of arms is another and I believe the Israelis have earned the right to dwell in the region. Anyway if we want to really get technical why do the jews legitimately belong where they say. Could they not as easily claim Iraq (where Abraham came from) or Egypt, the land of Moses, or even Iran where they spent their exile. I don't believe that they have a legitimate claim based on ancestry since the absence of a jewish nation there for two thousand years doesn't make sense to me. If that was the case the Germans should be allowed to have Eastern europe since the germanic peoples dwelt in that area two thousand years ago. Now to answer the question of this thread.
How, exactly, was the Jewish nation in Khazar defeated in the end.
|
This is all from memory so I may mess up some details. Khazaria was defeated by the 12th Century. During the two hundred years prior to that Russia after defeating the Pechenegs turned to the Khazar nation, eventually capturing their capitol of Itil which sat on the Volga. The russians wanted this area so that they could have access to the Caspian sea. Shortly after defeating the Khazar's though the russians fell under the mongol yoke, and nearly all records of the nation were lost.
|
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.
Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 01:58 |
The Khazars were dealt their first major blow by the expanding Rus in the 9th century, their decline continued for quite some time when it was finally internal discord and Penechegs that did them in.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 02:00 |
postscript:
The Rus also (possibly to wiipe out those sympathetic to the Khazars) evicted or killed alot of the more powerful Jewish merchants in the lands they conquered.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
Tar Szernd
Consul
Joined: 28-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 384
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 05:14 |
Originally posted by Denis
Why would you object to the use of the term 'Jewish nation'? The Khazars while their ethnicity may have been Turkish, were Jewish converts. I was not referring to their ethnicity at all, but their religion. I understand that the Khazar Jews were not Arabic in appearance. |
Hi!
Max. maybe 30-40 % of the khazar noble families had jewish religion. No more khazars. I dont think that some of them had survived since 962 - this is the datum of the occupiing of the kazhar kapitol Itil by the kiev-rus, not 9. or 12. Cent - until the 20 C. They were probably killed by their christian and true-pagan enemies. Or they married in such "enemy" noble families. And like the christian father of I (Holy) Stephen of Hungary, Geza (Gyeucha, a name what comes from a kazharian noble function) was "rich enough, to have more gods"-his own words...- so the khazarians could done the same.
So the khazarian conwerting to judaism was just politic, not more. They prayed to tengri after the converting, this is shure. Their main king was a god in person, too. If judaism had became a state religion, his (the king)own god-like power were away. I know that in the World there are not enough historical books with real facts about the kazhars, but in some questions you should think a little bit deeper (politically)
TSZ
Edited by Tar Szernd - 05-Jan-2007 at 09:10
|
|
vulkan02
Arch Duke
Termythinator
Joined: 27-Apr-2005
Location: U$A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1835
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 13:24 |
Originally posted by JanusRook
[QUOTE] Well thats because most Jews today are Ashenazi Jews (80% khazars)
and that would prevent them from legitimately laying claim to the land
of Israel. |
Ancestry is only one claim, force of arms is another and I believe the Israelis have earned the right to dwell in the region. Anyway if we want to really get technical why do the jews legitimately belong where they say. Could they not as easily claim Iraq (where Abraham came from) or Egypt, the land of Moses, or even Iran where they spent their exile. I don't believe that they have a legitimate claim based on ancestry since the absence of a jewish nation there for two thousand years doesn't make sense to me. If that was the case the Germans should be allowed to have Eastern europe since the germanic peoples dwelt in that area two thousand years ago. [QUOTE] Malizai explained it a little further. JanusRook, You led me through the path that I was going to walk through to arrive at my point. The average person claiming "this is our homeland" for any lot of land out there are equally deluded be they Germans, Italians, or whatever. Also if you want to be even more technical why not claim all the lands the the Jews have been to these past 2000 years. Let them claim Italy, Germany, Poland, Albania(which has I think about 50 people of Jewish religion right now ) etc. However it seems to me that your average Israeli commands the claim that "hey we've been here since time immemorial and thus it is our right to be here even though we were kicked out and wandered around for 2000 years". So if they don't consider fairly recent technicalities why should other people not try to point them that they are also incorrect in their way of thinking? But as you conveniently point out arguments go so far in this world when show of force kicks in. In that case the Palestinians have the equal right to claim it back... somehow...sometime.
|
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao
|
|
Amirsan
Janissary
Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 27
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2007 at 22:35 |
Personally I see no sense in who claims what debate. First of all, Jews as a people NEVER left the land of Israel, never. There were always a considerable population of Jews in Israel after their exile. So to say that Jews just left and never lived there for 2000 years and wandered around is not wholly true, and it implies it as if Jews chose to wander around the world.
And I should also say again what others have said that Jews have a right to the land not just from ancestry but also from arms. Arabs have no more right to the land than Jews, since they also conquered the land in the 600's AD. The Jews immigrated back, and took it back, with very little help from the outside. In fact, I believe that the Jews did not need any confirmation from the UN or any other nation to declare their own independence, they would have done it themselves either way. Although Balfour made a declaration, it was not because of this that England left, they left simply because of the burden of colonialism, and the pressure by both Arabs and Israelis. Therefore, once they left, it was inevitable that the Jews would declare their independence, with or without the support of the UN, and subsequently earn it by winning their war of independence.
Now, in light of this, if we are still going to question their right to the land, we might as well question EVERY nation's right to their land. Our very own America was created through conquest of other people's land, and we should be questioned even more. The same can be said for every Muslim country, who became Muslim and Arab through the conquest and expansion of Muhammad from Arabia.
Secondly, I should remind that a considerable amount of Jews in Germany and Central Europe came from Spain during the Inquisition. And before that, they were in Israel.
Edited by Amirsan - 05-Jan-2007 at 22:39
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 04:46 |
You right about one thing Amirsan, most Jews never left Palestine. They
converted to Christianity, then later to Islam, then they were kicked
off their lands by invading Jews who's ancestors had previously left
palestine for Europe.
Therefore, once they left, it was inevitable that the Jews would
declare their independence, with or without the support of the UN, and
subsequently earn it by winning their war of independence. |
Your use of the word independence sickens me, it wasn't the arab jews
who remained in palestine all these years that refused to live with
their neighbours.
|
|
Cryptic
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 09:36 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Your use of the word independence sickens me, it wasn't the arab jews who remained in palestine all these years that refused to live with their neighbours.
|
That is an oversimplification. Though semitic Jews tended to be more sympathetic to local Arabs than European Jews, mass expulsions of semitic Jews from Arab Yemen and factional fighting with Paletstinians probably reduced this sympathy.
The situation in Israel / Palestine is far more complex than simply being an imported Askhenazi (sp) problem. A good indicator of this is that Israeli Circassian, Bedouin and Druse Moslems all willingly serve in the IDF. Many of their units have excellent reputations. Additionally, Egyptian Bedouin in the Sinai viewed (and may still view) Israel favorably as well.
Perhaps some of the Palestinians have refused to live with their neighbors as well.
Edited by Cryptic - 06-Jan-2007 at 09:43
|
|
Aster Thrax Eupator
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2007 at 04:29 |
...But why would a bunch of Turkics want to convert to Judaism? It makes no sense! The religion is only really attractive, I find to you if you are actually ethnically and culutrally Jewish in the first place! Much of the religion is only really relivant to you if you are a Jew ethnically, it's a tribal religion!
|
|
Dan Carkner
Baron
Joined: 07-Nov-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 490
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Jan-2007 at 10:33 |
I think someone said it before, they didn't want to "take sides" between Christian and Islamic empires that surrounded them, so they weirdly picked Judaism as a "neutral" religion.
|
|