The Ideology Of The Ninth And Tenth Centuries 79
and in a certain sense also the Turks believed in a clearly defined divine celes-
tial triad that consisted of two male deities and a female one (Ahura Mazda,
Mithra and Anahita). The celestial goddess is usually the daughter of the
earthly goddess or her incarnation as the Maiden-Goddess. It is not clear to
what extent the notions of the wolf and the bull overlapped in the minds
of the steppe peoples. Most probably, it was a chthonic, earthly connection to
the ruling royal family. It differs from the commitment of the khagans to the
deity of the Skies and suggests a duality in the notion of their power. Among
the Iranian and Turkic peoples the goddess that had an exceptionally strong
influence was not so much the earthly one, as the celestial one (Anahita and
Umay respectively).
In Thrace, the son of the Great Goddess Dionysus was sacrificed in the form
of a bull. Mithra was also sacrificed in this form. And the bull is also one of the
animal reincarnations of Indra. According to traditional Turkic notions from
the region of the Altai Mountains the deity of the Lower World Erlik is depicted
as a bull, which in A. Golan’s opinion could be a remnant from some older
beliefs, associated with the Neolithic deity of the Underworld. Furthermore,
the Sun represented the female principle and was sometimes depicted in a
female form by the Turkic people of the Altai Mountains. It should be borne in
mind that Erlik was also the first blacksmith, and according to the Altai Turks
only the inhabitants of the Lower World had the privilege of power over metal
and fire.277 The she-wolf and the cow are reincarnations of the Great Goddess
and their offspring are culture heroes and founders of dynasties. One of the key
capabilities of the culture hero is the ability to cross between worlds, perhaps
because by birth he belongs to both the Upper, Middle and the Lower World.
Based on the inscriptions of the Bulgar rulers Krum (802–814), Malamir
(831–836) and Persian (836–852), some scholars assume that the kavkhan was
a co-ruler in the Bulgar state. He stood at the head of the left (the eastern and
more prominent) wing of the army and in some cases took on the function of
army commander as well, substituting the ruler. The kavkhan also had duties
related to construction. His post was not elective and did not depend on the
will of the Bulgarian kana, but was rather passed on through kinship.278 It is
277 L’vova, Oktiabr’skaia, Sagalaev, and Usmanova 1988, 23, 35, and 109–110; the mythological
attachment between rulers and blacksmiths is typical for the steppe world (see Stepanov
2005a, 110).
278 Stepanov 1999a, 85; Giuzelev 2007, 70, 88, and 115. During the reign of Kana Malamir,
Kavkhan Isbul was definitely presented as co-ruler. It is generally believed that he held
this position due to the ruler being a minor. Venedikov 1995b, 139–142 assumes that it is
quite possible for Malamir actually to have been of age.