The “Internal” Ethnic Communities in Khazaria 223
(tribes) through the formation of some sort of confederation or their subjec-
tion via taxes. These peoples (tribes) were of diverse origins, but were culturally
homogeneous within the state, which contributed to their ethnic integration.
The nobility (which also performed the functions of a state bureaucracy) was
concentrated in various trade and craft centers, which in time became admin-
istrative hubs.2
It is quite possible that the Saltovo culture was the homogeneous cultural
community, on which the existence of the Khazar Khaganate depended.
During the ninth and tenth centuries it included not only the Bulgars, Alans
and the Khazars (the main bearers of this culture), but also the Ugrians, the
Pechenegs and the Oghuz, the Slavs and various Caucasian tribes. They should
all be defined as “internal” for Khazaria, regardless of the fact that the khaga-
nate was in close proximity to states, formed by these very tribes and peoples.
They in turn were an important “external” factor, which influenced the integra-
tion processes in Khazaria. Often, these states were part of the khaganate. The
system of (cultural, commercial and ethnic) interaction between the peoples
of the khaganate was first labeled by P. Golden, who called it Pax Chazarica (or
the Khazar World/Order). This interaction was based on the acceptance of the
khagan’s authority by the society in question.3 According to S. Romashov, the
Khazar Order ensured good neighborly relations (or the peaceful coexistence)
between the numerous peoples of the khaganate.4 This point of view is some-
what idealistic, since one should not exclude the possibility of internal con-
flicts in the Khazar World. The khaganates are one good example of constant
conflicts between the various ethnic groups that constituted them. In this
sense, military conflicts were not the reason behind the secession of various
regions or the collapse of the khaganate. They did not always lead to significant
changes in the structure of the lands that were under the rule of the khagan.
If one was to look away from the evolutionary approach in search of a model
that can be used in the case of Khazaria, one would come to the conclusion
that it was a state entity and a version of the steppe empires. Steppe empires
differ in their state structure, administrative system and territorial division.5
Perhaps closest to the Khazar Khaganate is the Khaganate of the Turks, along
2 On these issues, see: Claessen and Skalník 1978, especially the article of Cohen 1978, included
in this collected volume, as well as the articles of Khazanov 1978 and 1994, 164–169; Earle 1987;
Vasil’ev 1980 and 1981; Pletneva 1982, 79–80; Mel’nikova 1995; Belkov 1995a and 1995b.
3 See Stepanov 2005a, 9–10.
4 Romashov 2002–2003, 82–83 and 2004, 218.
5 Pritsak 1981a, 17–18; Barfield 2001a and 2001b; Kradin and Skrynnikova 2006, 51–55; Kradin
2001b; Khazanov 1994, 231–233; Kliashtornyi and Sultanov 2000, 8–11 and 80–82.