Ibn Rusta

Rouran epoch Göktürk epoch Uyghur epoch Kirghiz epoch

Rouran First Göktürk Tang rule Second Göktürk Uyghur Kirghiz Huns Western Göktürk Türgesh Karluk Khazar

Rouran 400–554
First Göktürk 552–630
Tang rule 630–682
Second Göktürk 682–744
Uyghur 744–840
Kirghiz 840–924
Huns 370–469
Western Göktürk 552–659
Türgesh 699–766
Karluk 766–800
Khazar 650–969

Ibn Rusta compiled a geographical encyclopaedia about 903, the Kitāb al-Aʿlāq an-nafīsa, and drew on al-Jayhani for the Khazars, and part of its material goes back to the first half of the ninth century and to al-Jarmi, about 846.^[1]

The Khazar passage

Ibn Rusta names two rulers. One is the Isha. The other is the supreme king, the Khazar Khagan. The khagan has the name only and is not obeyed. The power to command belongs to the Isha.^[2] The same account says that the supreme ruler is a Jew. The Isha and those of the generals and chief men who share his way of thinking are Jews as well. The rest of the people have a religion like that of the Turks.^[3] The Isha corresponds to the day-to-day ruler whom the Muslim sources call Ishad, Qagan-Beg or simply Beg.^[4]

The passage mentions two cities. In them live Muslims, who have mosques, imams, muezzins and schools.^[5] It also says that the cost of the army fell on the well-to-do.^[6]

Gardīzī preserves a parallel passage. It says that the rest of the people keep a religion that resembles the religion of the Oghuz Turks.^[7]

The Volga Bulgars

Ibn Rusta also describes the Volga Bulgars as they were in the early tenth century. They lived on the shore of the river that flows into the Sea of the Khazars. Their king professed Islam, and the Khazars traded with them.^[8]

Reliability

The passage is old. Some scholars conclude that the Khazar kings and some of the principal men were Jews when the account was first written, which was not later than the first half of the ninth century.^[9] A second Arabic note, from Ibn al-Faqih about 903, says that the Khazars are all Jews and have lately become so, and it goes back through the same line to al-Jarmi.^[9] The two notes are therefore one witness, not two.

What the passage shows is the extent of the Judaism. It was the faith of the ruler and his circle, and the rest of the people kept their old belief. This agrees with al-Istakhri, and it is the point on which the Hebrew reply of Joseph, in the Khazar correspondence, differs.