The Ideology Of The Ninth And Tenth Centuries 19
last but not least—of religions.7 T. Zhumaganbetov notes the coexistence of
Manichaeism, Nestorianism, Zoroastrianism, Confucianism and Buddhism
among the Medieval Turko-Mongol ethnic groups, along with their ancient
traditional cults. Each one of these religious systems “if not in principle con-
trary to the traditional worldview, can, under various circumstances, become
stronger than the old gods”. The flexibility of Tengrism consists in the ability
of the Turks not to cast aside the new worlds, new relations and new religious
systems they encountered, but on the contrary, to integrate and modify them
organically. They very quickly became a part of Turkic culture”.8
In his analysis of the Tibetan religion Bon, B. Kuznetsov examines the belief
embodied in its ideological system and inherited by the Iranian tradition that
leads to religious tolerance and according to which the major deities of the
various peoples are the same, regardless of their names.9 In view of the steppe
tradition, which unifies ideas and myths of different origins and accepts the
various religions as parts of a whole, it is possible to understand both the reli-
gious tolerance of Khazaria’s population and the reason why it did not resist
the khagan and his entourage’s Judaism.10 In S. Pletneva’s opinion, “the religion
of the pagan nomads is characterized by extreme syncretism. It unified many
cults, which were otherwise incompatible with each other”.11
A similar syncretism is also noted regarding the Bulgars. According to Iu.
Stoianov, this syncretism “should be evaluated in itself and in light of the
overwhelming influence of Iranian and Sassanid traditions in Bulgar art and
architecture; furthermore, the Bulgar ethno-cultural symbiosis with the Pontic
Sarmato-Alanian tribes whose beliefs definitely contained some Zoroastrian
traits, traces of which remained even after the Bulgaro-Alanian migrations
to the lands along the middle reaches of the Volga, should also be taken into
account. The complex data collected from Bulgar religious monuments is still
being examined, but it definitely speaks of tolerance and syncretism in the
religion and arts of the pagan Bulgar state”.12 It is precisely because of this
7 Khazanov 2001, 1–3.
8 Zhumaganbetov 2006, 157.
9 Kuznetsov 1998, 191–192.
10 On this matter, see Bubenok 2004.
11 Pletneva 1967, 171.
12 Stoianov 2006b, 190. Iu. Stoianov also notes the similarity between the Bulgar pagan
temples and the Iranian fire temples from the Parthian and Sassanid era. On Bulgarian
shrines, see Stepanov 1999, 48 and 156–160; Ovcharov 1997, 50–58; Vaklinov 1977, 112–114;
Chobanov 2006, 27–35; Chobanov 2008, 60–65; Boiadzhiev 2008, 310–338; Bidzhiev
1984, 121–122. On the influence of Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism among the Bulgar
and Khazars, see also Stepanov 2002a, 7–8; Stepanov 2005a, 122; Poliak 2001, 99–100;