228 CHAPTER 5
to the Danube Delta region.20 Joseph emphasizes the importance of the ban-
ishment of the V-n-n-tr people for the establishment of the Khazar state (there
is no mention whatsoever of any other tribe in this sense). At the same time,
this is the only reference to the Unogundurs in the letter of the Khazar ruler.
It is they, and not all of the Bulgars, that are indicated as the main opponent,
after whose defeat the foundations of the Khazar Khaganate were laid (accord-
ing to the interpretation of Joseph’s letter).21
Joseph mentions the Bulgars two more times in his letter, but as B-lg-r (son
of Togarmah) and Bul-g-r (a people who paid tribute, most probably the Volga
Bulgars). We should therefore ask ourselves whether the Khazar nobility could
distinguish between the banished Bulgars (V-n-n-tr) and those that obeyed the
khagan. What should also be taken into account is the possibility that some
Bulgars were part of the khaganate and its army long before the defeat of
Great Bulgaria. This is evidenced by archaeological finds in Dagestan (which
M. Magomedov regarded as the initial territory of the Khazar Khaganate),
where Bulgars among the main ethnic groups during the whole period of the
khaganate’s existence.22 This could also explain to a certain degree the ambig-
uous behavior of Kubrat’s sons during the war with Khazaria.
The literature dedicated to Great Bulgaria, the Bulgar ruler Kubrat and his
sons is vast. It is impossible, and also quite unnecessary, to examine here the
genesis and development of all the different opinions on the matter, so let
me just mention the ones that focus on the different attitude of Kubrat’s sons
towards Khazaria. I shall not linger on the question whether Bezmer from the
Nominalia of the Bulgarian Khans and Batbayan, mentioned by Theophanes
and Nicephorus, were actually the same person. I. Bozhilov and Kh. Dimitrov
assume that Batbayan pursued a conciliatory policy with Khazaria, i.e. that he
accepted the khagan’s authority (and began paying tribute to the Khazars),
which was why his brothers did not recognize his authority and dispersed,
along with their respective tribes. Initially, there was no consensus among the
brothers regarding their policy towards Khazaria. The Unogundurs of Asparukh
20 Here and further on the quotes or references to the texts of King Joseph’s letters are from
Kokovtsov 1932.
21 See Pletneva 1976, 22; Magomedov 1983, 178; Shapira 2002, 215. According to Giuzelev 1981,
124, “a focal point in Khazar historical memory is the conquest of the land of the Proto-
Bulgarian Unogundurs (V-n-n-t-r) and their subsequent pursuit by the Khazars, i.e. this
is the fate of the Proto-Bulgarians of Asparukh”. In Rashev’s opinion, Joseph’s account
indicates that “the beginning of Khazar history was initiated by the resettlement of the
Bulgars” (Rashev 2001, 161).
22 Magomedvov 1983, 87, 91, and 177; Fedorov and Fedorov 1978, 92, 115–123, 139, and 151–160;
Dimitrov 1987, 67–68; Pletneva 1976, 22 and 26–28; Pletneva 1997, 36.