The Khazar Economy: Economic Integration or Disintegration? 199
fortified settlements in the Severski Donets Valley were surrounded by unfor-
tified ones that sometimes were much larger than them.120 Without denying
that the fortresses served as shelters in case of military threats, S. Pletneva
believes that they were some sort of castles of the Saltovo nobility. The lack
of a clearly defined cultural layer in the fortified territories gives additional
grounds to associate the hillforts with the nobility, which is believed to have
engaged in nomadism along with its herds in summer and inhabited the for-
tresses only during wintertime.121 An interesting addition is the fact that the
fortresses along the Tikhaia Sosna River are small in size and are built in the
center of already existing large settlements. They are not surrounded by sev-
eral settlements, like the fortresses in the Severski Donets area.122 According
to S. Pletneva, the hillforts along the Tikhaia Sosna combine the functions of
fortresses, castles and stops for trade caravans, similar to the hillforts along
the Severski Donets.123
In the northwest and the northeast, the forest-steppe settlements of the
Saltovo culture bordered with several Slavic hillforts that were subjected to
the Khazar Khaganate. The fortresses were situated along the trade route that
Romashov 2002–2003, 148, these fortresses traced the borders of the Khazar Khaganate,
beyond which stretched the lands of the Slavic “tributaries” of the Khazars.
120 One example is the hillfort near Sukhaia Gomol’sha, which occupies 2 hectares, while the
settlement next to it covers an area of 30 hectares; ten large settlements have been found
near the hillfort of Mokhnach; two settlements have been found next to the hillfort near
Maiaki, one of them covering 30 hectares and the other—9 hectares; and lastly, the area
with traces of inhabitation in the vicinity of the Sidorovo hillfort is around 100 hectares
(Mikheev 1985, 7–8, 12–13, and 19; Pletneva 1967, 30; Kravchenko 2004, 249 and 265–266).
121 Pletneva 1999, 27 and 33 (the assumption that the Saltovo nobility engaged in seasonal
pastoral nomadism is based on the account of the Khazar ruler Joseph); Pletneva 1989,
24–25.
122 See Pletneva 1999, 61–63; Vinnikov and Pletneva 1998, 38–40.
123 Pletneva 1999, 63; Since the necropoles in the forest-steppe zone usually contain weapons,
it is assumed that a militarized population was concentrated in that area (Pletneva 1999,
24–25 and 42; Pletneva 1989, 268 and 278. See also Tortika 2006a, 133). These necropoles
mostly contain Alanian burials. The Bulgar population that mainly inhabited the area
south of the Alans did not usually conduct burials with weapons (those burials were not
inherent to Danube Bulgaria either). It is therefore impossible to determine the nature
of its military services. It is hardly possible to accept the view of Tortika 2006a, 128–129,
according to whom the lack of inventory and weapons in the Bulgar burials in the steppe
zone indicates the greater poverty of the local population in comparison to that of the
forest-steppe zone. The appearance of a varied inventory and weapons in some Bulgar
necropoles is rather an exception (both in Khazaria and in Danube and Volga Bulgaria).
See Rashev 2003a.