The word Semitic does not describe a blood‑race but the people of a locality ‑ exactly as all the peoples living in the United States are classed roughly as Americans. That does not necessarily mean that the Dutch of Pennsylvania or the Swedes of Minnesota were actually descended from North American Indians. At the time the modern Jew came into prominence, he was labeled Semitic because he was resident of the Arabian Peninsula. All peoples who inhabited the Arabian Peninsula were known as Semites. The Arabs are particularly Semitic. It has nothing to do with the Hebrew bloodstream at all.
Students of the Jewish Question frequently run across astounding bits of historic record full of proof that the "Jewish Question" has been recognized as existing down through the centuries. In "The Original Mr Jacobs,"; the Minerva Press, in 1888, presented the findings of a trial instigated by the French King, St. Louis, known as "The King Without Fear," who determined to ascertain for himself the cause of the complaints and bitter animosities against the Jews.
"This great and good king, who had an inexhaustible love for justice, sought to know why the Jews were the object of the hatred of all. Upon the demand of Pope Gregory IX., whose attention was also called to this fact, he caused the TALMUD to be examined in a solemn assembly, over which presided William d'Auvergne, and in which the Rabbis were invited to take part. 'It was in Paris, in the beginning of summer, the 24th of June, 1240, when this memorable council took place. The Court of St. Louis was presided over on that day by Queen Blanche...volumes, covered with strange characters, attracted the attention of the curious, and it became known through Nicholas, a converted Jew, that the characters were Hebrew letters, and that the books were the TALMUD.
But soon a more interesting spectacle attracted the attention of the assembly. Four Rabbis had just entered the room. They were Jechiel, of Paris; Judah, son of David; Samuel, son of Solomon, and Moses, of Coucy, son of Jacob ‑ the latter a famous orator known throughout France and Spain. They entered, sad and uneasy, into the palace of the King, while the assembled Jews scattered themselves about like a flock of sheep without a shepherd.' Every opportunity was given to the Jews to defend themselves, which they did with courage and ability.
They, however, were forced to acknowledge that the TALMUD contained precepts not only contrary to the good of Christian society, but of every civilized society. Passages were read which horrified the listeners. The book said that Jesus Christ was plunged into hell, into ever‑boiling mud; that the Divine Son of the Holy Virgin was the fruit of adulterous intercourse with a soldier named Pandara, and that the ministers were no better than howling dogs. Other passages were read that increased the fear of the Jews and the indignation of the Christians...
St. Louis, the King, displayed an extraordinary amount of moderation. As Jechiel was trembling with fear, one of the officers of the King said, 'Jechiel, who thinks of doing any harm to the Jews?' The TALMUD alone was condemned, and all copies that could be found were cast into the flames."
Students of the Jewish Question in analyzing the "chosen people" angle to the problem are driven to certain conclusions. If the Hebrew people had been chosen for the express purpose of exemplifying to the rest of the world all the faults which it is possible for any nation to commit they could hardly have acted otherwise than their Scriptures record of them.
One redeeming feature lies in the fact that, up until a few years ago, there arose from time to time members of it, with the vision to see the right, and the courage to warn the wrongdoers, in which no fault was hidden or glossed over and no attempt was made to make wrong appear right. The greatest kindness which the nations of the earth can do for these brave and honest Jews are to take their warnings seriously and act upon them; thereby encouraging others to do the same. Jews were not yet known as such in the world until about 500 years before the advent of Our Lord. Even then they were a retrogressive clan, even old Ezra putting into the Lord's mouth the criticism: "Thou art a stiffnecked people."
It was the Sadducee's priestcraft, organized as a Sephardim for purely temporal power, that proceeded to give the Jews a racial consciousness down to modern times. And Terrible indeed has been the growth of that organized temporal power unto the present day. Instead of being a small religious oligarchy over a restive and non‑social people in a corner of Palestine, as it was in the day of Christ, the Sephardim has now branched out and become world wide, under a name which few Gentiles are ever allowed to hear: The Cahilla!
Wherever the Jews have, there trouble has arisen for political authority. We have not the time in this article to trace a careful history of the Jews. It is enough to begin the story with the disgust of Titus, the Roman Emperor, who in 70 A.D. determined to blot out the Sephardim as an unhallowed power for political mischief in his empire, by scattering the Jews to the four corners of the world. Again other commentators say, "The authority of the Jewish leaders in the time of Augustus had been widely extended by a learned but unscrupulous priesthood, over an ignorant, superstitious people. In that age while a struggle was going on between two rival sects, Pharisees and Sadducees, certain political clubs were formed which concealed under a religious mask the grasping aims of a clique."
These clubs were not slow to take advantage of their country's misfortunes. A few years later during the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian, they won, by the betrayal of the Jewish cause, the favor of the Roman Conqueror, and were subsequently entrusted by the Imperial government with the administration of Palestine.
Moreover, with the sack of Jerusalem, the destruction of the Temple, and the death of the patriotic leaders, the common people found themselves utterly dependent, in spiritual as well as civil matters, upon these same self‑styled societies of the learned, who alone possessed the secrets of the priesthood and copies of the sacred texts. By interpreting, altering and augmenting the rules and rituals these texts contain, and by a system of espionage and assassination, the new rulers established a strict control over the daily lives of their co‑ religionists. Thus having taken hold of the Jewish people through the medium of the Roman authority, this clique easily placed its laws above the Ten Commandments and formed a government whose control over its subjects was absolute. This government became henceforth known as the "Kahal."
The dispersion of the Jews which followed in 135 A.D. instead of destroying the Kahal, served on the contrary, to set it on a new and firmer basis, on which it has continued ever since. Wherever Jewish immigrants settled, they founded communities apart under the direction of the fraternities, and held to the precepts of the Talmud. Each community had its miniature Kahal. The different aims of these communities always found themselves intimately related with those of the Central body upon which their existence depended.
So it was possible for the Jews to develop and operate a perfected system of espionage which they still maintain. In olden days as now, they sent agents to watch over Jewish affairs at police stations and other agents were posted at the doors of shops, hotels, business houses, law courts, and even in private homes to get advance information of all kinds. In this manner all kinds of things became possible, even blackmail, with which all kinds of political pressure could be brought to bear on Gentiles who had political influence in the Roman Government at that time.
Hence, it is easy to understand the reason for the concentration of trade into Jewish hands with all these instruments of political pressure and advance business information at their finger tips at all times. There is a colloquial term that should always be coupled with the Dispersion. That is "Der Tag," or "The Day of Redemption," when World Jewry shall be gathered together attain under one head, with all Gentile nations subservient to this world‑wide Jewish empire whose governing seat is to be in Jerusalem. (Zionist Movement)
It is then that the Ashkenazie Jews have stated that they will search out and utterly annihilate the Sephardim Jew, but until that time they will use them by killing some and blame the so-called Gentiles to keep alive the Myth of Anti-Semitism!! Talk about Stupid the Sephardim Jews Take The Cake!
Millions of gullible Germans, as well as millions of gullible, illiterate Christians everywhere, thought back in 1914 that Der Tag meant the Day of Recognition for Germany as to her place in the sun as a nation. It was a phrase and a term artfully "sold" to the German people, or rather, put in their mouths. Really it was Hebrew in meaning, indicating in the secret councils of Jewry that having provoked and produced the world war, with the white pariah nations thus engaged in slaughtering one another by the hundreds of thousands, the outcome could only mean the achievement by the Jews of an age‑long goal; winning to the pinnacle of world‑wide political and economic power.
So the Germans, French, English and Russians went forth to fight this war of self‑extermination, not knowing that in greeting Der Tag they were playing the game of Jewish world imperialists ‑ as will be explained and authenticated more in detail further along. The true story of the rise of Hitlerism to power in Germany, how and why it could get the support of the whole German people and why the Jews are execrating it all over the earth, is really the story of how the Germans discovered the Jewish influence about the Kaiser that worked to project the world war, not only from Berlin, but from Paris, London and Washington.
Real Germans were smashing Jewish influence; weeding it out of Germany. Because of this setback to their plans, world Jewry is turning the full blast of its temporal power and control of instruments of publicity in all countries against Hitler to vilify, misrepresent, and destroy him. This too will be dealt with later.
That World War II was brought about by the Jews because they were losing influence and power in Germany is shown in the following:"GERMANY IS THE ENEMY OF JUDAISM AND MUST BE PURSUED WITH DEADLY HATRED. THE GOAL OF JUDAISM OF TODAY IS; A MERCILESS CAMPAIGN AGAINST ALL GERMAN PEOPLES AND THE COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF THE NATION. We demand a complete blockade of trade, the importation of raw materials stopped, and retaliation towards every German, woman and child." (Jewish professor A. Kulischer, October, 1937) "WORLD WAR II WAS A WAR TO RENEW JEWISH DOMINATION OF GERMANY AND CENTRAL EUROPE AND FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE POWER AND GLORY OF THE BRITISH/JEWISH EMPIRE. The conspirators in America, England and France are responsible for the greatest tragedy the world has ever known and their names will be dishonored and execrated in history. It never would have started had not Roosevelt and the half Jew Bullitt guaranteed to Britain and France all of America's resources, which meant, first, repeal of our neutrality act and supplying them with munitions and bombers without stint; second, in time the extension of unlimited credit; third the use of our fleet in the Pacific to protect British, French and Dutch interests; if these did not suffice for victory, then our young men as air pilots and our fleet to be sent to Europe; and lastly, if World Jewry and the British/Jewish Empire could not win without them, millions of our lads to die in Europe's babbles. The premeditated killing of human beings by another, save in self defense, is murder, a crime against Christianity, morality, humanity, and civilization, and this applies with greatest guilt to the wholesale slaughter by one nation of the people of another who have not attacked or harmed them. After this illegal, secret plot was negotiated, Roosevelt, the Jews and the war-mongers of this country, of England and France sought to overthrow the Chamberlain government and to replace it with the Jews Churchill, Eden, Hore-Belisha and Duff Cooper. They plotted to get Bonnet out of the French Cabinet and to substitute the Jews Reynaud, Blum and Mandel. The ardent but unsuccessful courtship of Stalin and Soviet Russia was insisted upon by Roosevelt, World Jewry and war-mongers of America, England and France. One of the reasons for the Roosevelt/Eden plot to overthrow the Chamberlain government and remove Bonnet from the French Cabinet was because they would not agree to pay the price Stalin demanded to encircle and defeat Germany. At Roosevelt's and the Jews' insistence, England and France guaranteed the boundaries of Poland in order to encircle Germany and renew Jewish control. This guarantee of the boundaries of Poland was the direct cause of World War II, it knowingly necessitated it." (War! War! War!, by Cincinnatus, pp. 188-189)
The point to be registered here is, that from the Roman Titus thru the long line of medieval monarchies to Queen Isabella and Ferdinand, where ever the Jews have won political or financial prominence in a country, seeds of disruption, unrest and sedition have been sown to such an extent that in a greater or lesser degree monarchies have had to deal harshly with this people in consequence.
To counterbalance or suppress such unrest or sedition, one of three expedients has been resorted to: Jews have been either expelled from such royal domain, or "dispersed," or they have been confined in restricted areas called Ghettos with orders not to leave the same under pain of death, or they have been butchered in massacres called "pogroms."
Jewish publicists by the thousands have trained the Christian public to believe this "persecution" is chastisement inflicted on this people by Almighty God, and has resulted from religious prejudice or the competitive cleverness of the Jew, which Gentiles fear or resent. Delving soberly and clinically into the facts, we discover that such persecution has come about from far different causes.
Jews are everywhere persecuted, and have been persecuted consistently throughout generations, as mass reprisals against their own behavior and their own predatory or seditious acts. There are ample admissions by Jewish authorities that this is a statement of fact.
In 1923, Maurice Samuels, a Jew, wrote and published a disastrously frank book called "I, the Jew!" In it he stated: "We Jews are born revolutionists. God made us and constituted us so that even if we achieved any of the ends which we so professedly desire, we would at once set about the overthrow of them as a matter of policy," and more to the same effect.
The Jew, Dr. Munzer, in his book "The Way to Zion" boasts as follows: "We Jews have spoiled the blood of the races. We have tarnished and broken their power. We have made everything foul, rotten, decomposed and decayed."
The Jew, Dr. Weizman, in a pamphlet entitled "Great Britain, Palestine and the Jews" states: "Here we are, just Jews and nothing else, a nation among nations."
The Jew, Isaac Adolphe Cremieux, the founder of the Universal Jewish Alliance, says: "Our union is not a French one, nor English, nor Swiss, nor German. Nay, our union is Jewish and it is universal. Living in lands of dispersion, we cannot be concerned about the changing aims of those lands which are strange to us until the time when our own aims, both moral and material, are in danger. If you realize that, in spite of your cover nationalities, you form only one and the same people, if you believe that only Judaism constitutes the religion and political truth, you will listen to our appeal and you will accept it."
The Jew, Theodore Herzl, in an address, said: "It is our opinion that the Jewish question can be solved by the Jews themselves. We no longer want to wear the mask of any other nationality."
The Jew, Disraeli, in 1844, in his book "Coningsby" said: "The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
Later, in his book "Life of Lord Bentinck," P. 497‑8, Disraeli says in regard to revolutionary outbreaks: "The influence of the Jews may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or the Christian form, the natural equality of man and the abrogation of property, are proclaimed by the secret societies who form proviso governments, and men of the Jewish race are found at the head of every one of them. The people of God co‑operate with atheists; the most skillful accumulators of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen race touch the hand of all the scum and low caste of Europe! And all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name and whose tyranny they can no longer endure."
The Jew, Walther Rathenau, financial adviser to the Kaiser and agent of the Rothschild, in the Wienar Press, December 24, 1921, said: "Only 300 men, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of Europe. They select their successors from their own entourage. These German Jews have the means in their hands of putting an end to the form of any State which they find 'unreasonable.'" On June 24, 1922 he was assassinated.
This sort of testimony is not manufactured to advance race prejudice from religious or economic spleen. It is the testimony of representative and responsible Jews themselves. Wherever Jews cliqued together, in any country, there they are traditionalized to bring about in some form the emasculation of that country, that the worldwide Zionist government may eventually be realized. Let us see briefly where this conspiracy began.
In the twelve centuries that transpired between the dispersing action of Titus, and the 1306 expulsion fiat of Philip IV of France, world Jewry had taken on a two‑fold aspect. Jewry out of the Tribe of Judah and presided over in a temporal way by the Sadducean Sephardim, had in a manner of speaking, split into two parts or racial divisions. One‑half migrated northward out of Palestine into what is now the Soviet Ukraine. Here they interbred further with Asiatic and Tartar Mongols, and caught in the western onrush of the horde of Genghis Kahn, they were swept in vast numbers through Poland into the Danube Valley. They became in time the Ashdanazi, or Mongoloid branch of world Jewry, comprising the great mass of Russian and German Jews. We have them today throughout America, round-headed, grasping, alternately whining and arrogant, strict materialists, who openly consider Jewry to be not followers of a religion but a world‑wide political State, in other words, a nation competitive with all other nations.
The other branch of Jewry migrated westward through countries adjacent to the Mediterranean, particularly throughout North Africa, where they intermarried with the Moors and Berbers and later with the Spaniards and the Portuguese. This radical division is known as the Sephardim and its members are called Sephardim Jews. Because of their strong infusion of Aryan blood, these Jews have the cleanly cut Grecian features, the cherry‑black eyes, and the general characteristics of Spaniards and Arabs. They represent all that is finest and best in Jewry as we find it in the world today. Sephardim Jews are artistic and esthetic. They hold generally that Jewry is a religion and not a political State, though by no means are they adverse to standing with their Ashkenazim brethren in presenting a united Jewish front against the White Race, the True Israelites. Nevertheless, there is a certain schism fundamentally between these two major divisions of world Jews, and internal rivalry between their leaders has been responsible for more changes in international politics among the world's Gentile nations than the layman dreams.
In world finance, economics and politics, the Mongoloid Ashkenazim Jews are represented by the great banking families of the Rothschild (or Mayers) of Germany, the Sassoon families of Bagdad and the Orient, and the Samuels families of London. The Sephardim Jews are largely officialized by the Ginsberg families of France and Spain.
In the substance of the foregoing paragraph, if the Christian layman only knew it, lies the key that unlocks the seemingly inconsistent moves making for war or peace in scores of the world's Gentile nations.
About 1492 King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella found their kingdom in the same compromising situation from Jewish encroachments, as earlier monarchs had confronted since the year 70 A.D. and which they had uniformly solved by consigning this non‑social trouble‑ breeding people to live in Ghettos.
The well known edict of Charles VIII of France in 1489 ordered all Jews to embrace Christianity and become loyal citizens and good subjects or suffer forfeiture of their goods and chattels, also expulsion from his domain.
The heads of Sephardim Jewry thereupon wrote in their extremity to the Elders of Zion, the Sanhedrin, then sitting in Constantinople, asking for advice as to what they should do. The mischievous reply to this appeal has come up to us across the years of history, and shows itself as being directly responsible for the growth of the Zionist Movement throughout the earth. These Constantinople Elders responded: "Dear beloved brethren in Moses: We have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as yourselves. The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following: As for what you say that the King of France obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise, but let the law of Moses be kept in your hearts. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your goods make your sons merchants, that little by little they may despoil the Christians of theirs. As for what you say about their attempts on your lives; make your sons doctors and apothecaries, THAT THEY MAY TAKE AWAY CHRISTIANS' LIVES. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: MAKE YOUR SONS CANONS AND CLERICS IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY DESTROY THEIR CHURCHES. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix themselves up with the affairs of State, in order that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that, humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power."
Such was the direful and subtle Protocol of 1489 whose authenticity has never yet been successfully refuted or honestly denied by well‑informed Jews. That it was acted upon in the Southern European countries with manifest success, the pages of history will attest. Jews everywhere penetrated the Catholic Church and arose to Christian religious power. The entire Jesuit Order, responsible for so much Catholic mischief throughout the world, was founded by a Jew, Ignatius Loyola. Out of Jesuitry came Adam Weishaupt and his infamous Illuminati, the vast and terrible secret society of Europe founded upon an introvert form of the Jewish CAHILLA, which at one time swept millions of Gentile Europeans into its murderous net.
This society, strongest in Germany where it had its home and where it perverted and subverted Christian masonry through the machination of Frederick the Great, introduced what is known as the Grand Lodge Orient to Europe ‑ or the co‑Masonry against which every European monarch has set himself from time to time. Mussolini being the last to excommunicate its political intrigue. The most complete, detailed, and authenticated history of this movement, how it was financed by Jews as a gesture to get their release from European Ghettos are recounted in the works of the famous historian, Nesta H. Webster, author of "The French Revolution," "World Revolution," "Secret Societies & Subversive Movements" and "The Socialists Network."
The Illuminati, under the renegade Weishaupt, became in time an openly destructive Satanic society, with everything in its doctrines and rituals the exact antithesis of Christianity. Enticing its victim into the first initial degrees by the most beautiful and altruistic of fraternal ideals and noble aspirations, gradually it wove about them a net of murderous Satanism. Implications in secret rites at length bound them securely to the organization with chains of steel. As Mrs. Webster has shown, the "ideals" of Illuminism were:
1). Hatred of God and all forms of religion.
2). Destruction of private property and inheritance.
3). Absolute social and racial equality, promotion of class hatred.
4). Destruction of all forms of either monarchial or democratic governments, including civil liberties, such as freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of trial by jury.
5). Destruction of all nationalism, love of country, patriotism and allegiance to civil or political rulers.
6). Abolition of marriage and practice of free love.
On page four of report No. 2290, Seventy First Congress, III Session, investigation of Communistic propaganda in America, the same articles are advanced as the definition of Russian‑Jewish Communism in its fundamental aspirations. Indeed, the Jews, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, in their nefarious works on Socialism and the instigation of the First International, "borrowed" the Illuminati program bodily, a flagrant plagiarism from Weishaupt's Satanism which has not been generally revealed.
The point we are getting at is, that the Ghetto‑imprisoned Jews beheld in Illuminism exactly the weapon they needed to effect their emancipation. This brand of revolutionary philosophy further suited their inherent revolutionary temperaments. So we find indications of the German Jews embracing and helping to finance Weishaupt, until it became such a danger to the throne that the Illuminati was ordered to be disbanded. But it never disbanded. This edict but sent it underground. Thereupon, speaking figuratively and literally, the Ashkenazim Jews "took it over," and the history of Europe for the next hundred years, from the effects of this control, reads like a nightmare.
Mrs. Webster has brought out the full manipulations of the Illuminati Jews in organizing, conducting, and later suppressing, the French Revolution and Reign of Terror, when they had accomplished their hidden purpose and removed certain royal personages who stood in the way of their ultimate command of Europe. We cannot enter into that long and sordid story here. But we must pay some attention to the escape of the German Jews from the Ghettos and the rise of the House of Rothschild or "Red Shield" in Germany. It presages the active identification of the most terrible international Jewish organization of modern times, the CAHILLA, to which we will give much attention in a moment.
When William the Landgrave of Hesse came to power in Germany he was somewhat fanatical in the pursuit of his hobby, the collecting of rare and precious coins. in the adjacent Ghetto lived old Amshel Mayer, with his five sons and five daughters. This Jew set himself to cultivate William and win his favor by presenting him with precious coins.
A strange and intimate friendship grew up between the two. Then comes a fearsome event, too little known to patriotic Americans. George III needed mercenaries to fight the revolting Colonials in the Americas. A deal was made with William the Landgrave for the use of 17,000 Hessians for which George III was to pay the sum of $20,000,000. Amshel Mayer was secretly in touch with the Colonial situation through American Jews, particularly Haym Salomon of Philadelphia, who made it possible for Robert Morris to finance the colonials who thus unwittingly placed themselves under obligations to the Jews as the following will show.
Observe what happened and how the pernicious circle of international events was maneuvered to spill the blood of colonial Americans, that the Jews might escape the Hamburg and Frankfort Ghettos. George III did not have the English soldiers requisite to fight a successful war with the colonies, yet was egged on by predatory and scheming Jews in the New World, of whom American historians are careful to make no mention. The Colonials were revolting and George III had to do something about it to maintain the prestige of the Crown. William's 17,000 Hessians were "offered" him. but only recently has it become known that back of it all was a deal whereby Amshel Mayer "Red‑Shield" (Rothschild) was to get the loan of that $20,000,000 for 20 years.
Naturally Haym Salomon, now eulogized for his great financial services to the struggling Colonials, was agreeable to backing them. By producing the Revolution in America, it meant that George III would have to use those Hessians to put down the insurrection. That meant that William the Landgrave would get the twenty millions that Amshel and his strategizing Jews could and would use to make the Ghettos things of history and finance his progeny and compatriots into important banking positions among the squabbling Christian monarchs of the continent. So America had Bunker Hill, Yorktown, Valley Forge, Monmouth and Brandywine. When the smoke had cleared away and the dead were buried, in spite of all Jewry could do to the contrary, our founding fathers, after great hardship and political chaos, brought forth a Republic. A Republic is the Golden Mean between an Autocracy (where the few rule) and a Democracy (where the many rule through direct action). When some of the delegation to the Constitution Convention tried to inject the nostrums of Democracy into the Constitution, George Washington arose in anger and said: "Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair. The event is in the hands of God."
Our Constitution provides for a Republic. A Republic is poison to World Jewry. On the other hand, it is easy for those with evil designs to gain control of a government which operates as a Democracy; hence the steady assault on the Constitution. A sleeping America has allowed its plan of government, as guaranteed in the Constitution, to be tossed aside and have embraced the phobia of Democracy by adopting the initiative, the election of judges, the referendum and the direct primary. In doing this we have opened wide the gates for Internationalists to promote their campaigns against the Republic of the United States.
Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention. Our founding fathers repeatedly warned us to avoid this type of government. Our Constitution means to the science of Government what the digits mean to the science of arithmetic or the chromatic scale means to the science of music: in other words, it is the key to the science of government. In a Republic, the few are protected from the many, and the many, from the few, or, in other words, Communism, easily takes a Democracy, turns it upside down, makes the many think they are to govern themselves, but in actuality, the many are controlled by the worst sort of Autocracy. it is in that direction we are drifting today.
Amshel "Red Shield" Rothschild got his twenty millions and freedom for his people from the Ghettos. Whereupon Jews immediately scuttled like cockroaches all over Europe. All the five sons of Amshel immediately made themselves solid with the leading bankers of five great continental capitals, and the five daughters were artfully married off to various foreigners and political Big‑Wigs.
France was an especial goal of exploitation where the German Jews wanted to "dig in" and entrench themselves against any influences of the more esthetic and spiritual Sephardims. So utilizing the nefarious Illuminati again, the French Revolution was subtitlety precipitated. For a fuller history of Jewish manipulation of this Red Terror, read Mrs. Webster's books.
At any rate, when the French Revolution had accomplished its purposes, Count Cherep‑Spiridovich tells us that it had to be halted. So a conscienceless young Corsican was found who would have no compunction about shooting down his own people if it served his personal vanities and the aims of his military career. Napoleon was "chosen" by the "Red‑Shields," (Rothschild) equipped, financed, and sent forth to serve the further continental aims of International Jewry.
Napoleon is everywhere acclaimed as a great military genius. Nowhere except in the world's secret history is it revealed that "Red‑Shield" (Rothschild) gold preceded him, made his military pathways as easy as possible without giving away this secret alliance, and made and unmade monarchs as it pleased the House of Rothschild to have them toppled around. But note that when Napoleon broke with the Jews and gave evidence of co‑operating with the Catholic Pope, the skids were mysteriously put under him and he found himself on Elba. He staged a return and came to Waterloo.
De Grouchy "mysteriously" was delayed in supporting him and his star had set. Meantime, Nathan Mayer, son of Amshel, on Sunday the eighteenth of June, 1815 on the battle field at Waterloo, noting that the battle had gone strictly according to his plans, mounted a horse, rode to the coast, got a fast boat across to London, and sprang a panic on the English Exchange simulating a victory for Napoleon, which tumbled stocks down to zero where Nathan's agents scooped them in at panic prices.
Next day, when the real truth became known, Nathan didn't need any more German loans to finance International Jewry. He had cleaned up in one of the greatest stock market coups in modern history. (And they are still doing the same thing today with their sock market manipulations). The "Red‑Shield" (Rothschild) fortune which proceeded to make and unmake political regimes on the continent up to the time of the World War, was first founded on the dead bodies of American Patriots and then securely established on a colossal lie which beggared thousands of English men.
So the Rothschild fortune was launched, and its repository in America today the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, whose late president Jacob Schiff, presented Lenin with a cool 20 million dollars to finance Russian‑Jewish Bolshevism, now known as Communism, and whose younger generation helped to formulate through Paul Warburg, the Federal Reserve banking system. With these facts as background ‑ facts, by the way, that have never been denied by international Jewry ‑‑ is it not rather apparent why we cannot make headway in cleaning up America until this pernicious element is shorn of its power?
But there is yet a more fearsome factor in world Jewry of which the average layman knows next to nothing, which must be now considered: The ancient Sanhedrin Jesus had excoriated in language that left nothing to diplomacy, and that had sent the pleasing response to the Sephardim Jews being "persecuted," had by no means been inactive throughout this time. Outgrowing Palestine, capitalizing on all Jewish "persecutions," effectively carrying on the fight for Christian tolerance toward this scheming, predatory people, it began to adopt a world‑wide aspect after the admirable maneuverings of the Mayer clan. Thus do we arrive at the impressive construction of the CAHILLA.
Americans living in New York frequently hear of the Jews giving Cahilla parties in various city blocks, but that the Cahilla is a vast network of espionage and predatory activism for worldwide Jewry, and that it correlates the progress of the Jewish nationalists all over the earth, has only been authentically uncovered since the Boer War, mostly by British military and secret service agents.
Try to grasp fully what now is to be disclosed. In the time of George Washington there were about 4,000 Jews in this country. Most of them were already well‑to‑do traders. In 1783 the United States became the first country to grant them full civil equality, and ever since then they have enjoyed political equality.
Today there is said to be, taking the Jew's word for it, 18,000,000 Jews in the world, and about 4,400,000 of that number are in the United States, where they control 60 percent of the vital interests of our country (remember this was written in the 1930's).
Taking the word of the military of the various countries, instead, however, it is probable that the figure of 23,000,000 Jews for the whole world is the more nearly accurate. Whether the true figure is 14,000,000 or 23,000,000, when the statement is made they are entirely effectively controlled by one International Organization, so constructed that one man rules it from the top, the information is labeled fantastic. But wait! Listen to what espionage agents of several countries have attested before responsible committees: "The Jews of the World divided the earth first into two hemispheres, the Eastern and the Western."
As the United States lies in the Western Hemisphere, we will confine ourselves to that alone.
The Cahilla is constructed on the symbol of Seven. First, however, over each hemisphere is put a Prince of Jewry known as a Sponsor. There is a Sponsor for the Eastern Hemisphere, and a Sponsor for the Western Hemisphere. Reliable authority has attested by the way, the Sponsor for the Western Hemisphere is none other than "a pinch hitter for Presidents" which explains why this gentleman occupies his position of such tremendous economic, financial and political importance in American State affairs. He is the absolute overlord of about ten millions of Jews in this Western Hemisphere. He orders their lives and their affairs, and they in turn make it their business to see that he is kept ensconced in his power over American Officialdom.
The Sponsor for the Eastern hemisphere is not of consequence in this article. But do not miss the very important fact that both Sponsors for both hemispheres are accountable only to Akad Ha'am, the Unknown and Uncrowned King of Jewry throughout the earth, whose identity is kept a guarded secret.
Akad Ha'am rules the Jews of the earth by an effective devastating system. He has, as has been said, his Prince-Sponsor in each hemisphere. Then under these Prince-Sponsors falls the seven‑times‑seven organization.
Under each Sponsor there are Seven Arch-Censors.
Under each Arch-Censor there are Seven Ministers.
Under each Minister there are Seven Heralds.
Under each Herald there are Seven Couriers.
Under each Courier there are Seven Schrivenors.
Under each Schrivenor there are Seven Auditors.
Under each Auditor there are Seven Mutes.
This figures out to almost 1‑million influential Jews in each hemisphere organized into a tight, rigidly‑controlled body, every man knowing all the men under him but only the one man above him, and all responsive to the Prince-Sponsor at the top.
There is no Jew of Consequence in North America who is not involved in this terrible organization, terrible at least in its power for predatory control of Christian society, or who is not listed somewhere down the line on the roster of its obedient adherents. Until this organization is broken and stamped out of American life, the United States can know neither peace nor stability, not to mention safety. For its control puts it in perfect working mechanism with all the influential Jews of the European continent and the Orient.
At this moment it is making and unmaking governments, starting or stopping wars at its pleasure, controlling the most intricate dealings of the League of Nations (presently the United nations), dominating political officialdom, determining the money standards of nations, including America's, directing its economics, intimidating or controlling the nation's newspapers, radio, and movie screen, so that nothing can be released by any of these that is inimical to its far‑flung interests.
Careful students and economists who are not in its pay, have traced the prevailing depression in America directly to its threshold. Presidents have been elected by its money. Its directing heads and their satraps often camouflaged politely in press and congress as "International Bankers" have been assiduously engaged at Buying‑in‑America at bankrupt prices, completely looting and eliminating the United States permanently from its pathway as a major power, reducing it to the status of a third rate vassal state subject to their officer ‑ Isaacs, Sassoon, Samuels, et al ‑ in the so‑called "British" Cabinet.
This is the atrocious cabal to whom President Wilson referred on his return from Versailles when he said that "there was a secret power in Europe with which he could not cope." This is the terrible power that had started the World War in furtherance of its schemes, so powerful in British as well as German affairs, that the statement is made on reliable authority that orders were given to the British Admiralty and air forces that at no time during the war were Berlin, Hamburg or Frankfort to be raided, shelled or bombed, because their homes and families were there and they had no intention of suffering physically or jeopardizing their lives in this war which they had conceived for their own world plans and financial profit.
Sir Douglas Haig, English Field Marshal, strictly under the thumb of his Cahilla‑agent secretary, Philip Sassoon of the family of Bagdad Jews, gave it out that the English were to "humane" to bomb cities holding innocent women and children. That suited gullible Christians, and heaped full odium on the "Germans" who ordered such atrocities from Berlin to be perpetrated on London.
Small wonder that with the Whole Christian World Hoodwinked into an International War, killing each other's nationals off by the Hundreds of Thousands, The Cahilla Jews celebrated Der Tag, the Day of Judah Coming into its own when the Christian Corpses were buried and that many odoriferous Christians, Removed from Terra Firma!
The Cahilla officials had perfected their power over Germany and the Germans long before the outbreak of the war. In fact, their ascendancy dates back to Bismarck, the half‑Jew (Bismarck's mother was the Jewess Louisa Menken) who saw to it that Germany was turned over to the Princes of Jewry back in 1870 exactly as America is being turned over to the Princes of Jewry in 1934.
The Youth Movement of Germany, smashing this oligarchy, will be viewed in the proper perspective as one of the great social phenomena of our times. Consider the war situation and its aftermath in Germany. The Jews were the only people who were able to use Bismarck so that all liberal reforms in Germany would turn out to be profitable for them.
An industrialist who visited the Prussian War Ministry in September, 1914, told with amazement that he found Jews predominating in this high office, and not German officers and military officials as he had expected. Herr Walther Rathenau, a Jew, sat in a large room, at an enormous secretary writing table and "dispensed" or gave away army contracts. Around him were seated, almost without exception, Jewish clerks and Jewish business people.
The feeble government under Emperor Wilhelm II which had already favored Jews in all important positions, allowed this to happen, owing to its embarrassment and perplexity. In the course of the war, the fact arose conspicuously to the surface that since the beginning of Wilhelm II's reign, the Jews had been the real rulers of the German Empire.
For the previous 15 years those in immediate personal contact with the Kaiser were mainly Jewish financiers, Jewish manufacturers and Jewish merchants like Emil and Walther Rathenau, Balin, Schwabach, James Simon, Friedlander‑Fuld, Goldberger, Guttman, Hulshinisky, Katsenstein and others.
Upon the change from the old regime to the new, that is, from the monarchy to the so‑called republic the cabinet composed of six men which substituted the Ministry of State, was dominated by the Jews Haase and Landsberg. Haase had control of foreign affairs. His assistant was the Jew Kautsky, a Czech, who in 1918 was not even a German citizen.
Is it any wonder that with such a state of affairs obtaining, Hitler should have been espoused by the pure‑blooded German people as a leader who would rid them of this Cahilla Frankenstein, whose American arm has already become quite as offensive to enlightened persons here in the United States.
Hitler preached a doctrine of "Germany for the Germans" and we should preach a doctrine of "America for Americans." Hitler used a steel wedge to "split a hardwood block" and immediately when he had gained power and started breaking up this CAHILLA monopoly, the CAHILLA set its machinery at work all over the world to vilify and misrepresent him, suggest boycotts, and to introduce resolutions in the houses of government which if acted upon would easily have led to war.
It is obvious that the public Cahilla press ‑ which constitutes about 90% of American metropolitan newspapers‑the radio and the screen received their orders to acclaim Hitler as a monster and "persecutor" who had "set Europe back into the Dark Ages."
Protest meetings were held, the old whine about Christian tolerance for God's Chosen People was dragged forth again, dusted off, and made to do service in stirring up protests. Hitler had thrown a big monkey wrench into the CAHILLA'S machinery in its steady progress for international domination, and with characteristic lack of any sportsmanship, the Jews began to gather around a new wailing wall and fill the air with their hypocritical lamentations.
Wherever a Jew is blocked in the accomplishment of a predatory scheme against Gentiles, he will immediately whine "persecution" or "lack of tolerance." (Just as blacks will cry racism when they do not get their desires) The story of what happened in England, placing England in Jewish Cahilla power, is too long to be told here, but Great Britain's vassalage to the Sassoons, the Samuels, the Monds, is quite as complete as that of pre‑Hitler Germany.
The conquest of Russia by them, resulting in Jewish Communism, would require several reams to be told completely. It is obvious that here in the United States, since 1917, the oligarchy has been conducting affairs with a very high hand, until America has been pulled down to ruin and near‑chaos...It is obvious that the sack of the United States Treasury, the collapse of American Industry.
The taking of America off the gold standard, the repudiation of its fiscal contracts by the Federal Reserve, the agitation for the cancellation of the war debts, are naught but carefully laid maneuvers for so emasculating and undermining Christian America that she can never again offer effective resistance to Europe, or to Jerusalem, when the latter City has been made the Capital of a completely Judaized world.
With the foregoing as a brief background, you will grasp to some extent, the scope of the rehabilitation which must be accomplished in America. Nothing is the matter with America but the aliens who have been admitted to her hospitality, and who have shamefully abused Christian sportsmanship and tolerance to sack her commerce and debauch her institutions. It only remains for enough American to grasp the facts which are daily becoming everywhere more apparent.
What will happen then? We must sweep out our half‑baked radical theorists with whom we have been tolerant too long. We must prevent the approaching Jewish domination and insure Anglo‑Saxon supremacy that is free from international control. We must not persecute a minority group and, on the other hand, we must not permit such a group to enslave the majority. The racial theorists should find no shelter in our schools or churches where they spread their poisonous doctrines among the young.
We must sweep from our legislative halls the tainted and dangerous meddlers and replace them with practical men who know the difference between an unworkable theory and a workable fact. We must acquire the sturdy stamina of our forefathers whose grim determination knew no compromise with the forces of Anarchy wherever found. It is true that there is no time to waste; but before we act, we must be in possession of the facts that have been withheld. These facts have not been spread before the reader for his examination and his verdict.
The hour for decision has come. America's fate hangs in the balance. Whether we are to continue an orderly march towards a higher civilization or are to witness the overthrow of our progress, depends upon the action we take not next year nor next month but upon the action we take today. The situation will be corrected when the now unorganized majority realizes that our times demand that the majority must organize and, matching organization against organization, regain the ascendancy because of their superior numbers. The hour has passed for disputations.
"Actions, not words," must be our motto. It was through action, following straight thinking, that our country was fashioned and formed and only through action and straight thinking will America be preserved. If loyal Americans, the majority of the population, organize without further delay to combat the organized subversive minorities that have made headway only because of organization, the menace of internationalism, socialism, communism and all other anti‑Americanisms, and anarchy will be stamped out and real liberty will be preserved. Any further delay will be fatal.
The perpetuity of our ideals and our institutions depends upon immediate action and immediate organization of right thinking, patriotic Americans. We must drive from control those organized minorities who are conspiring to overthrow the Republic and the Constitution of the United States of America. And surely no one can deny that the American Constitution has been and is the victim of assault by those whose vagaries would wreck a world. (This has been reprinted as a tribute to Lt. Col. Edwin Marshall Hadley and the Paul Reveres)
Returning to our presentation on the Seed of the Serpent. "Flee, therefore, those evil offshoots (of Satan), which produce death bearing fruit...These men are not the planting of the Father, but are an accused brood. And says the Lord, 'Let every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted be rooted up.' For if they had been branches of the Father, they would not have been 'enemies of the cross of glory.' But now, by denying the cross, and being ashamed of the passion, they cover the transgression of the Jews, those fighters against God, those murderers of the Lord; for it were too little to style them merely murderers of the prophets.' 'Keep yourselves, then, from those evil plants which Jesus Christ does not tend, but that wild beast, the destroyer of men, because they are not the planting of the father, the seed of the wicked one."
The "Jewish World," February 9, 1883, contained the following program: "The great ideal of Judaism is...that the whole world should be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that in a universal Brother hood of nations, A Greater Judaism in fact, all the Separate Races and Religions Shall Disappear."
That means the elimination of Christianity. The Jews need not be surprised that such pretensions evoke "anti‑Semitism." That program is a challenge to the Christian faith to a duel to the death.
But what is the reason of the peculiar persistent opposition to the Jews? The ultimate reason is in the perversion by them of the supernatural mission they as a nation espouse. With study, we can see the opposition of the Jewish nation to Christianity since Calvary, we find it codified and crystallized, so to say, in the Talmud and Kabbala. While the Talmud represents the codification of Jewish opposition to the Kingship of Christ, the Kabbala reflects rather the opposition to the priesthood of Christ. In the latter we see chiefly, but not exclusively, the divinations from Christianity. The Kabbala furnishes the key to the Pantheism of Freemasonry, Theosophy, and the other occult societies which promise to reveal the secrets of a higher life to their adepts.
The Talmudic formation, then, is responsible for the attitude of the Jewish nation to other nations which leads to the special friction they provoke. What are the characteristic traits of that formation? Following is a condensation of the teachings of the Talmud and the Kabbala, the denials of the Jews notwithstanding:
1). There exists no Supreme Being, perfect in His Wisdom and in His Providence and distinct from the universe. God is identical with nature and consequently subject to change. God is evolving in man and in the world, and all things and all men are God and have the very substance of God. God is thus one and the same thing as the world and consequently spirit is identified with matter, necessity with liberty, truth with falsehood, good with evil, and justice with injustice.
2). Any action of the part of God upon men and the world must be denied.
3). Human reason is the exclusive judge of truth and falsehood, good and evil, God being left completely out and of no account; man is his own law and by his own natural resources is sufficient to procure the good of men and of people.
4). All the truths of religion have their origin in the innate vigor of the human reason: hence it follows that reason is the sovereign guide by which man can to attain to the knowledge of all truths of every kind.
5). Divine Revelation is imperfect and consequently subject to a continual and indefinite progress which corresponds to the progress of human reason.
6). The Faith in Christ is opposed to human reason; and Divine Revelation is not only useless but is even injurious to the perfection of man.
7). The prophecies and miracles set forth and related in the Holy Scriptures are poetical fictions and the mysteries of the Christian Faith are the sum total of philosophical investigations. In the books of the Old and the New Testaments are to be found mythical inventions and Jesus Christ Himself is a myth.
8). Since human reason is to be placed on the same level as religion itself, the theological sciences must be treated in the same way as the philosophical sciences.
9). All the dogmas of the Christian religion, without distinction, are the object of natural science or philosophy. Human reason with merely its historical development can, by its own natural strength and intelligence of all dogmas, even those that are most abstruse, provided these dogmas have been proposed to reason as its object.
10). Since the philosopher is one thing and philosophy another, the former has the right and the duty to submit to an authority which he himself has proved to be true, but philosophy neither can nor ought to submit to any authority.
11). The Church not only should not proceed with rigor against philosophy, but should even tolerate the errors of philosophy and allow it to correct itself.
12). Christianity and Christians impede the free progress of science.
13). The method and principles, according to which the ancient scholastic Doctors cultivated Theology, are in no way suited to the necessities of our times and to the progress of the sciences.
14). No account must be taken of supernatural revelation in dealing with philosophical questions.
15). Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall have come to consider as true.
16). Men can find the way of eternal salvation and reach eternal salvation in any form of religious worship.
17). The State is the source of every right, its own are unrestricted.
18). The civil power, even when exercised by a prince who is an infidel, has an indirect negative power over sacred things. It has consequently not only the right that goes by the name of exequatur but also of the right of appeal from abuse of power as it is called.
19). In case of a conflict of laws between the two powers, the civil law will prevail.
20). The secular (or civil) power has the authority to rescind, to declare and render null and void the solemn agreements concluded with Christianity about the use of rights concerning ecclesiastical matters.
21). The civil authority can interfere in matters which concern religion, morality and the government of souls. Hence it follows that it can pass judgment on Christian instructions.
22). The (whole) complete direction of the public schools in which the youth of a Christian State is being educated, excepting to a certain degree episcopal seminaries, can and ought to be reserved to the civil authority and in such wise that no right of interference in the discipline of schools, in the regulation of the courses of studies, in the conferring of degrees, in the choice or approval of teachers, be conceded to any other authority whatsoever.
23). Even in clerical seminaries, the method to be adopted in studies is subject to the control of the civil authority.
24). The best interests of society require that the elementary schools, which are open to all children of every class of the people, as well as all other public institutions destined for the teaching of literature and of higher studies and for the education of youth, should be exempted from all authority, direction and interference on the part of Christianity and be placed under the full control of the civil political power, following the views of those in power and the standard of contemporary opinion.
25). That the civil authority can prevent ministers from communicating freely with their congregations if not politically correct.
26). The government can, of its own right, change the forbid all religious bodies to admit anyone to solemn vows without its authorization.
27). Laws relating to the protection of the status of religious institutes, their rights and functions, should be abrogated. Nay more, the secular government can assist all those who may desire to abandon religious life; it can also suppress completely these same religious institutes as well as collegiate churches and simple benefits, even where there is a right of patronage, transferring and subjecting their goods and revenues to the administration and control of the civil authority.
28). The Church should be separated form the State and the State from the Church.
You will find, upon careful examination, that the literal truth of Genesis 3:15 has been a solid building block in the foundation of Christian Theology, from the writings of the Old Testament, the teaching of Jesus Christ Himself, the Apostles after him, and by early Church Fathers during the first centuries A.D. The truth of Genesis 3:15 cannot be spiritualized away by the ignorance of man. For nearly six thousand years the very presence of both the
(1) Seed of the Serpent,
(2) The Seed of the Woman has been on earth. That enmity planted by God, still rages between these two forces.
Today it reaches forth in a grand finale, the climax of the Ages is upon us. In this crucial hour of history, we dare not surrender, compromise, or talk ourselves out of this most fundamental Kingdom Identity Bible Truth. This is not time to white‑wash the Satanic Jew offspring of Satan.
We are today faced with the very climax of this Enmity, this Warfare, between these two seed lines, and God give us the courage to Stand, for Through Jesus Christ, and His Shed Blood, the Head of the Serpent Race, the very Kehilla itself shall be Crushed, by the power of Christ. Jesus described the reapers of this Satanic harvest in Matthew 13:41, Psalms 149 and Jeremiah 51:20.
In the meantime the Battle rages outside the comfort of your living room. Every television newscast, every Radio broadcast, every major newspaper in the United States is alive and pulsating with the Enmity between the two seeds of Genesis 3:15. This the story of history, this is what Jesus said would happen to us as recorded in Revelation 12:17. "And the dragon was worth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
The Dragon, that International Satanic Race of Jewish Pharisees has declared a total war on the seed of the woman, just as Christ foretold. Praise the Name and Power of Jesus Christ White Christian People, the Seed of the Woman, will have a total Victory over this Satanic seed line just as it is recorded in Revelation 15:2‑3. "And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name...having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvelous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints."
In Revelation 19:6: "And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth."
In closing I would like to leave you with the following verse of the great song, Battle Hymn of the Republic. This great song is no longer used in most churches for obvious reasons. It contains the final judgement that shall come upon the Serpent and his seed.
"I have read the fiery Gospel,
Writ in burnished rows of steel,
As ye deal with my contenders,
So with you my grace shall deal.
Let the Hero born of woman,
Crush the Serpent with His Heel,
Since God is marching on!"
The Sons of Judah
One other aspect we must take into consideration. That being, a small portion of 5 to 10 percent of the Jews today are descendants of the marriage between Judah and a Canaanite woman. Many when told that we, the Anglo‑Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian and Celtic peoples, are Israel, exclaim: "Impossible, I'm no Jew." Of course you're not a Jew, nor am I. A portion of the Jews are of a mixture of Israel and Canaanite women because of the marriage of Judah and Esau. Part of the Jews are of Israel, but Israelites are not Jews. A small portion of the Jews are a remnant of Judah, who was only one of Jacob/Israel's twelve sons. Why our theologians should call Abraham, Isaac and Jacob "Jews," is difficult to understand, for There were no Jews in existence during their lifetime!
The first reference to any Jews in the Scriptures is found in 2 Kings 16:6. The name was applied to a remnant of Judah's descendants of the Shelah branch. Shelah/Judah was born in Chezib (Genesis 38:5) and his descendants centuries later inherited this territory. (Joshua 15:1, 13, 44) Remember a strict Genealogy was kept of each tribe and branch, 2 Kings 16:5‑7; 1 Chronicles 2:1‑15; Ezra 2:59, 62, 64; Matthew 1:1‑25; Luke 3:23‑38.
Chezib, (Genesis 38:5) Achzib (Joshua 15:44) and Chozeba (1 Chronicles 4:21‑22) refer to one and the same place. It was a town in the lowlands of western Judah and was given to the Shelah branch of Judah for their inheritance. (Joshua 15:1, 13, 44) "This then was the lot of the tribe of the Children of Judah by Their Families..."
The word Chezib means "falsified‑deceive." (#3576 and #3580 Strong's Concordance) Chozeba means "fallacious‑deceive." (#3576 and #3578 Strong's Concordance) The word Achzib means "deceitful‑falsehood." (#391 and #392 Strong's Concordance) The place received its name from a winter spring or brook, which failed in the summer heat: Symbolic of the failing of the Shelah branch of Judah under trial. It is the place where Judah was at the time of the birth of his half‑breed son, Shelah. (Genesis 38:5) In 1 Chronicles 4:21‑22 it is called "Chozeba."
It is in the valley of Elah and north of Addulum. Note 2 Kings 16:6; the first reference to this branch of Judah and the first mention of "Jews"; "...the Jews of Elah." This part of the Jews are "the remnant" or "Yehudim" of Judah. This branch of Judah rejected Christ. They are the open witness; "The shew of their countenance doth witness against them: their tongue and their doings are against the Lord; they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not." (Isaiah 3:8‑9)
Herod Was On The Throne In Palestine
In the days of Christ, Herod, a Shelah/Judah Jew, was on the throne in Palestine. He Was Not An Israelite. The Pharisees and Sadducees were in absolute control of the temple and the Sanhedrin. They were not the lawful descendants of the Tribe of Levi. They did not follow the law of Moses, although they claimed to do so. Instead they set up their own Babylonian traditions, Traditions of the Elders, later to become known as the Jewish Talmud.
The Ark of the Covenant and the Shekinah glory had long since disappeared from the Holiest of Holies. There was no supernatural cloud to guide them by day nor a pillar of fire to guide them by night. God's presence had left the temple and Jerusalem in Ezekiel's day. "Moreover the spirit lifted me up, and brought me unto the east gate of the Lord's house (The Temple in Jerusalem), which looketh eastward: and behold at the door of the gate five and twenty men...Then said he (God) unto me, Son of man, these are the men that devise mischief, and give wicked counsel in this city...Son of man, thy brethren, even thy brethren, the men of thy kindred, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord: unto us is this land given in possession...Then did the Cherubims lift up their wings, and the wheels beside them; and The Glory of the God of Israel was over them above. And the Glory of the Lord went up from the Midst of the city, and stood upon the mountain which is on the East Side of the City. Afterwards the spirit took me up, and brought me in a vision by the Spirit of God into Chalde, to them of the captivity. So the Vision that I had seen went up from me. Then I spake unto them of the captivity (The ten tribes which had been taken captive by Assyria ‑ By this We know, God was not talking of the Children of Israel when He said 'these are the men that devise mischief, and give wicked counsel in this city!: We know God was speaking of The Jew!!!) all the things that the Lord had shewed me." (Ezekiel 11:1‑25)
There were seven in succession in that Herodian dynasty. This false and spurious Herodian Kingdom also controlled the Temple and the High Priesthood which had been turned into a political office. As a result, there was a constant political battle for the high priesthood.
When Christ came into the world, he did not recognize that false kingdom and would have nothing to do with that spurious priesthood and so‑called "Jews' religion." He did not join the Pharisees, the Scribes, the Sadducees, nor any so‑called Jewish sect or political party. He lived and taught entirely outside the establishment. Herod the Great was determined to kill Christ during the first two years of his life, and all of the kings who succeeded Herod wanted to kill Him also. With few exceptions, the high priests, the Sanhedrin and council also want to kill Him.
One exception was Zacharias the priest who was the father of John the Baptist. He was a true priest and a descendant of Aaron and was murdered also by the Jews. (Matthew 23:35) It would appear there were only a few thousand people in Jerusalem and all of Palestine in the days of Christ who were of the Tribe of Judah along with remnants of the other twelve tribes, but they were outside of the false kingdom and did not belong to the so‑called "Jews' religion."
God never gave the true kingdom to the Jews. He kept His true kingly line in exile, or hidden from them as it were. If the true kingdom, had been, in Palestine at the time of Christ, Joseph the husband of Mary, Jesus' step‑father would have been the king on the throne. It is a pity that most protestant minister, preachers, evangelists and catholic priests are under, "...strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." (2 Thessalonians 2:11)
They believe, falsely, that the so‑called Jews are Hebrews, or Israelites and of the Bible Tribe of Judah, which is a lie and a terrible deception. Again, because of the false teachings of the past decades about the Jews: We must repeat and repeat that 90 ‑ 95 percent of the people known to the world today as "Jews" are descendants of the Khazars of Russia.
They are "False Jews." They are like the false Jews that crucified the Lord Jesus Christ. Following is a brief outline of what the Bible and Christ said to and about them:
1. "Ye (Jews) are not my sheep." (John 10:26)
2. "Ye (Jews) are of your father the devil." (John 8:44)
3. "Ye (Jews are) serpents, ye (Jews are a) generation of vipers..." (Matthew 23:33)
4. "...the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus..." (1 Thessalonians 2:14‑15)
5. "...they please not God." (1 Thessalonians 2:15)
6. "...are contrary to all men." (1 Thessalonians 2:15)
7. "Are the Synagogue of Satan." (Revelation 2:9; 3:9)
8. "Hypocrites." (Matthew 23:14)
9. "Blind guides." (Matthew 23:16)
10. "Full of extortion and excess." (Matthew 23:16)
11. "White washed sepulchers." (Matthew 23:23)
12. "Full of dead mens' bones." (Matthew 23:27)
13. "Degenerate plant of a strong vine." (Jeremiah 2:21)
14. "Evil figs." (Jeremiah 24:2‑8)
15. "Broken cisterns." (Jeremiah 2:13)
16. "Broken bottle." (Jeremiah 19:10)
17. "Spots in your feast of love." (Jude 12)
18. "Cannot blush." (Jeremiah 6:15; 8:12)
19. "An astonishment and hissing." (Jeremiah 25:9‑18; 51:37)
20. "The show of their countenance doth witness against them." (Isaiah 3:9)
21. "Pray Not For This People (The Jews)." (Jeremiah 7:16; 11:14; 14:11)
22. The present day, so‑called and false Jewish State of Israel is a sister of Sodom and Gomorrah, and called Hittites, Amarites the descendants of Cain. (Ezekiel 16:1‑3; 16:53‑57)
Yet in spite of these and hundreds more Bible revelations America's evangelists, preachers, ministers and priests continue teaching The Big Lie; that the Jews are Israel. While our Government keeps right on giving that false Murderous Jewish‑Zionist State, billions of dollars a year. And of the 530 members of our Congress and Senate, few have the courage to oppose anything the Jews say and will vote for anything the Jews want.
The throne rights and honors were bestowed upon the Tamar/Judah twins (Genesis 38:26); "And Judah Acknowledged Them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son..."
Ezekiel 47:19, reveals that God names the land, from Kedesh to the river Nile, After Tamar, the mother of the twin sons, Pharez and Zarah. The Jews were chosen as Judah for a definite work. A work which they are characteristically fitted to do. "Have not I chosen you twelve and One of You is a devil. He Spake of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simeon, for He It Was That Should Betray Him." (John 6:70‑71)
Read Genesis 37:26‑27 and Matthew 26:14‑15. The final betrayal of Joseph/Israel by this same "remnant," into the hands of the Red anti‑Christ Russian Beast is near at hand. (Read Zechariah 14:14 and 12:1‑5) They still say "Let us slay their heir and take the birthright." But the birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph and not to Judah. (See 1 Chronicles 5:1‑2)
The Jews Are Not The Chosen People, They Are The Rejected Nation. (Matthew 21:19, 43) "And when he (Jesus) saw a Fig Tree (the symbol of the nation or tribe of Judah, the olive tree was Israel's symbol) in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let No Fruit Grow on Thee Henceforward Forever. And presently the fig tree withered away...Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be Taken From You (Jews), and Given To A Nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."
They were broken off because of unbelief, but God is able to graft them in again (individually) if they remain not still in unbelief; accept Christ as Savior and renounce Judaism. (Romans 11:17‑23) Nationally, this Shelah portion of Judah is cursed forever. This can only be done by telling them the truth. Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.
Jacob had twelve sons. Six of these sons and one daughter, were born by his wife Leah, the wife thrust upon him by Laban. The names of Leah's sons were, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun and a daughter Dinah. Leah's handmaid Zilpah bare two sons, Gad and Asher, to Jacob.
Dan and Naphtali were born to Jacob by Rachel's handmaid, Bilah. Joseph and Benjamin were born to Jacob by Rachel. Rachel and her eldest son, Joseph, were Jacob's favorites and it was Joseph, who received the birthright in preference to the other brothers. (Genesis 33:1‑2; 37:3; 48:3‑5; 49:22‑26; and 1 Chronicles 5:1‑2) It was by these two, Rachel and Leah (Ruth 4:11) that God built the house of Israel. Why our theologians and their blind followers should insist upon giving everything to the Jews who are but a small remnant of one tribe is difficult to understand. Satan surely hath blinded the eyes of them that believe not.
Joseph was the eldest of the Rachel family; while Reuben was the first born of Leah's family. But inasmuch as Reuben defiled his father's bed, (Genesis 35:22) the birthright was transferred to Joseph, the eldest of the Rachel family. (1 Chronicles 5:1‑2) Judah prevailed above his brethren in two ways. FIRST: He saved the life of Joseph. (Genesis 37:26‑27)
Second: He gave greater assurance than did Reuben for the safe return of Benjamin. Compare Genesis 42:37‑39 with Genesis 43:8‑9. Judah preferred selling to killing as did Judas Iscariot and as do the Shelah‑Judah Jews of today.
While Judah prevailed above his brethren; Joseph, however, prevailed above Judah. A study of Joseph's life will convince anyone that Joseph was the outstanding son of the twelve. Joseph was separate from his brethren. (Genesis 49:26) All of these sons were the offspring of Jacob‑Israel and could be called Israelites, but only the sons of Judah could be called Judaites. The descendants of Gad were called Gadites, the offspring of Reuben were called Reubenites; of Benjamin, Benjaminites; of Dan, Danites; etc. As only one branch of Jacob‑Israel were Judaites, so also were the Jews from one part of the Judah‑Shelah part of Judah.
Part of the Jews of today are descendants of the "Shelah" branch of Judah and still hate Jesus of the "Pharez" branch and they still say, "We will not have This Man (Christ ‑ of the Pharez line) To Rule Over Us." (Luke 19:14)
Let us consider the three branches of Judah as given in Genesis chapter thirty‑eight. Following the sale of Joseph, by his brethren, to the Ishmaelites, Judah married a Canaanite wife. (Genesis 38:3) This was a violation of God's will, for the Israelites were forbidden to intermarry with the godless heathen. (Genesis 27:46; 28:6‑9 etc) Three sons, Er, Onan, and Shelah, were born to Judah by his Canaanite wife. The eldest son, Er, died without leaving an heir and as was customary, Judah gave his second son, Onan, to Tamar, the widow of Er, in marriage. Onan, refusing to raise seed to his brother, was slain by the Lord. (Genesis 38:6‑10) This left Judah but one son, Shelah.
Having lost two sons, Judah refuses to give his third son, Shelah, to Tamar for fear he too would die. But Tamar was not so easily put off. She knew the law of the Lord and she immediately took steps to bring her father‑in‑law, Judah, in line. She played the harlot and Judah became the father of her twin sons, Pharez and Zarah. (Genesis 38) Judah acknowledges these twins as his own. He is now the father of three boys; one, Shelah, the half‑breed son by his Canaanite wife and the twins, Pharez and Zarah, by his daughter‑in‑law, Tamar, of Israelitish descent. Judah, knowing the law of the Lord concerning heathen marriages says of Tamar, "She hath been more righteous than I." (Genesis 38:26)
The very fact that God honors Tamar in naming a large part of Israel's Kingdom after her, reveals that Judah's half‑breed son, Shelah, was rejected Ezekiel 47:19. Just as Isaac was chosen in preference to Ishmael and Jacob chosen in preference to Esau, so too Tamar's sons were chosen and the Shelah son of Judah was rejected.
We can only imagine the strife in Judah's household with each of these three sons claiming to be the heir of Judah. Shelah calling the two twins bastards because they appeared to have been born out of wedlock, and the twins claiming to be the heirs because of their pure Israelitish descent. Zarah claimed the rights of the eldest on the strength of the scarlet thread; whereas Pharez disputed that claim on the strength of being born first. (Genesis 38:27‑30)
These three branches of Judah can be traced all through the Bible. The Bible story reveals that each one of these branches of Judah was given an opportunity to assume the rights of the firstborn. The Pharez branch terminated with Jeconiah or Coniah. (Jeremiah 22:28‑30) Joseph, the husband of Mary, was one of this man's descendants. (Matthew 1:12) The daughters of Zedekiah, the last King of Judah were carried to Ireland where one of them, Tea Tephi, married Eochaid, a tribal prince of the Zarah‑Judah line.
Thus the breach (Genesis 38:29) between Pharez‑Judah and Zarah‑Judah was healed. The Royal House of Britain traces its descent directly to this twin Pharez‑Zarah line. Although descendants of Judah, They Are Not Jews. The word Jew is taken from the word "Yehudim" and means "remnant." The Jews therefore were that part of Judah that descended from the half‑Canaanite, half‑Israelite sons of Judah. These were the "Jews" the "remnant" or "Hehudim" of 2 Kings 16:6.
They were the remnant "that inherited their father Shelah's character as well as his birthplace." (Genesis 38:5; Joshua 15:1, 13, 44) They were chosen to fulfill their cup of iniquity and come to their end even as Judas was chosen and came to his end. "Have not I chosen you twelve and one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70) The name Judas reveals his descent. The rest of the Apostles were Galileans. (Acts 2:7)
The Jews are a hiss and a byword. (Deuteronomy 28:37) The byword "Sheeny" is derived from Shelah and cannot be applied to any other tribe or branch of Israel. They were the bad figs of Jeremiah 24:8‑19. They were considered more treacherous than backsliding Israel. (Jeremiah 3:6‑11) They were the broken bottle nation of, (Jeremiah 19:7‑11) whereas, Israel was to be remade into another vessel. (Jeremiah 18)
They were given the opportunity to prove their right to the heirship of Judah by being permitted to return to Judea and placed in charge of the nation's affairs. The Shelah Jews were in charge of the Temple during the time of Christ. Mary and Joseph, both of the Pharez‑Judah line, were poor and abased. Joseph, of the Solomon line, was a carpenter and could never become King because his ancestor, Coniah, had forfeited his rights to that exalted position.
Joseph was Not "poor." "Carpenter" means "The Builders Race." (Jeremiah 22:28‑30) Mary too, although of the Pharez‑Judah line, through Nathan, was abased. In them was fulfilled. (Ezekiel 21:26‑27) "Thus saith the Lord God; Remove the Diadem, and Take off the Crown: this shall not be the same. Exalt him that is low and Abase him that is High. I will Overturn, Overturn, Overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he comes whose right it is: and I will give it to him."
Of Arab inhabitants, demolition of villages, collective punishment, ill treatment of prisoners. It is the United States Government which has and still makes it impossible for the United Nations to compel Israel to obey the International Law the Jews set up. It should, by now, become obvious to any honest student of the Scriptures and history that those people who call themselves "Jews" have spent countless millions of dollars to manufacture the fiction that "Jesus was a Jew," and that the "Jews" are God's "Chosen People;" that the Chief Priests, Pharisees and scribes of His (Jesus') time can be identified with few of the "Jews" of today, and that the Christian religion is an offshoot of Judaism.
This is Blasphemy; It is Satanic Teaching; It is Straight From the "Pits of Hell"; It is False; It is a Lie: Jesus Was Not A Jew!!!!!
Jesus Did Not practice the "religion of the Jews: Judaism." He Abhorred It. The religious beliefs taught in the synagogues of Judea during Christ's lifetime Were Not the religious beliefs of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and Moses. It Was and Still is A Heathen Religious Belief Known as Pharisaism, and was soundly condemned by our Lord on many occasions. As we have already shown, from Scriptural sources, Jesus condemned the Jews as being "Children of Satan."
In other words, the Jewish rabbinate of the 1980's is the same religious crowd to which Jesus spoke in Matthew 12:34, when He said: "O generation of vipers, how can ye (Jews), Being Evil, speak good things?"
The Semitic Peoples
The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary states on page 768: "The term Semite is derived from Noah's son Shem and is used to identify a diverse group of ancient peoples, whose languages are related belonging to the Semitic family of languages..."
So we can see that the word "Semitic" or "Semite" was derived from Shem and the application of the word is "racial" and is directed towards the descendants of Shem.
The Semite Language
The World Book omits any reference to the Jews, and under the word Semite it states: "Semite...Semites are those who speak Semitic languages. In this sense the ancient Hebrews, Assyrians, Phoenicians, and Cartaginians were Semites. The Arabs and some Ethiopians are modern Semitic‑speaking people. Modern Jews are often called Semites, but this name properly applies only to those who use the Hebrew Language. The Jews were once a sub‑type of the Mediterranean race, But they have mixed with other peoples until the name 'JEW' has lost all racial meaning."
Please notice that this definition does make reference to the Hebrews as a people speaking the Semitic language but it does not mention the Jews. It makes the point that "Arabs" and "Ethiopians" are modern day "Semitic speaking people" but again omits the Jews. In addition this encyclopedia specifically points out that the Jews are erroneously referred to as Semites and insists that a Semite had to speak the "Hebrew" (Semitic) language, concluding that the Jews have so "intermixed" with other races, "the name Jew has lost all racial meaning."
The World Book states the Jews are a "sub‑type...race..." and a "mixed" people. It seems obvious that a mixed people would speak a mixed language. According to the same encyclopedia the 20th century Palestinian Jews living in the land presently known as Israel and speak the Yiddish language which: "...grew from High German, and has some words from the Hebrew, Polish, Russian and English languages."
When the Khazars in the 1st century B.C. invaded Eastern Europe their mother‑tongue was an Asiatic language, referred to in the Jewish Encyclopedia as the "Khazar languages." They were primitive Asiatic dialects without any alphabet or any written form. When King Bulan was converted in the 7th century he decreed that the Hebrew characters he saw in the Talmud and other Hebrew documents was to become the alphabet for the Khazar language.
The Hebrew characters were adopted to the phonetics of the spoken Khazar language. The Khazars adopted the characters of the so‑called Hebrew language in order to provide a means for providing a written record of their speech. The Adoption of the Hebrew Characters had no racial, political or religious implication.
The Western European nations which had no alphabet for their spoken language adopted the alphabet of the Latin language under comparable circumstances. With the invasion of Western Europe by the Romans the civilization and the culture of the Romans was introduced into these areas. Thus the Latin alphabet was adopted for the language of the French, Spanish, English, Swedish and many other Western European languages. These languages were completely foreign to each other yet they all used the same alphabet. The Romans brought their alphabet with their culture to these nations Exactly like the rabbis brought the Hebrew alphabet from Babylonia to the Khazars when they introduced writing to them in the form of the Talmud's alphabet.
Since the conquest of the Khazars by the Russians and the disappearance of the Khazar Kingdom the language of the Khazars is known as "Yiddish." for about six centuries the "Jews" of Eastern Europe have referred to themselves while still resident in their native Eastern European countries as "Yiddish" by nationality. They identified themselves as "Yiddish" rather than as Russian, Polish, Galician, Lithunian, Rumanian, Hungarian or by the nation which they were citizens.
They also referred to the Common Language They All Spoke as "Yiddish." There are today in New York City many "Yiddish" newspapers, "Yiddish" theaters and many other cultural organizations of the "Jews" from Eastern Europe which are identified publicly by the word "Yiddish" in their title. Before it became known as the "Yiddish" language, the mother‑tongue of the Khazars added many words to its limited ancient vocabulary as necessity required. These words were acquired from the languages of its neighboring nations with whom they had political, social or economic relations.
Languages of all nations add to their vocabularies in the same manner. The Khazars adopted words to their requirements from the German, the Slavonic and the Baltic languages. The Khazars adopted a great number of words from the German language. The Germans had a much more advanced civilization than their Khazar neighbors and the Khazars sent their children to German schools and universities.
However, the "Yiddish" language is not a German dialect. Many people are led to believe so because "Yiddish" has borrowed so many words from the German language. "Yiddish" must not be confused with "Hebrew" because they both use the same characters as their alphabets. There is not one word of "Yiddish" in Ancient "Hebrew" nor is there one word of Ancient "Hebrew" in "Yiddish." They are as totally different as Swedish and Spanish which both likewise use the same Latin characters of their alphabets.
The "Yiddish" language is the cultural common denominator for all the "Jews" in or from Eastern Europe. To the "Jews" in and from Eastern Europe. "Yiddish" serves them like the English language serves the populations of the 50 states of the United States. Whose common denominator is the English language and is the tie which binds them to each other. It is the same with the "Yiddish" language and "Jews" throughout the world.
Besides that the ancient Hebrew language is a dead language as it has not been spoken for centuries. Since the Palestinian Jews do not speak Hebrew. They are not now nor have they ever been Semites. Therefore making critical remarks against them cannot make a person anti‑ Semitic.
The Jews now living in Palestine and the United States, are a mixed race of people, a "Turko‑Finn, Mongolian tribal people," from Khazaria, and have no racial identity (other than stated above) and practice many variations of what is called "Judaism" which is nothing more than a new name for "Pharisaism." For whatever reason, these people have chosen to call themselves Jews and practice Judaism but they are not direct descendants of "Shem" nor did any of their ancestors ever live in Palestine. Therefore, it is Impossible, by being against a Jew one could be anti‑Semitic. Anti‑Khazarian: yes. Anti‑Jew: yes. Anti‑Semitic: No!
The Jews Are Not Semitic
The best way to understand who the Jews are is by reading what the Jews themselves have to say about who they are. Benjamin H. Freedman, himself a Jew, said: "Relentless research established as equally true that the so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe at no time in their history could be correctly regarded as the direct lineal descendants of the legendary 'lost ten tribes' of Bible lore. The so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe in modern history cannot legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor who ever set even a foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible history. Research also revealed that the so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe were never 'Semites,' are not 'Semites' now, nor can they ever be regarded as 'Semites' at any future time by any stretch of the imagination. Exhaustive research also irrevocably rejects as a FANTASTIC FABRICATION the generally accepted belief by Christians that the so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews in Eastern Europe are the legendary 'Chosen People' so very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy from their pulpits...
A secret mysterious power has been able for countless generations to keep the origin and the history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom out of history textbooks and out of classroom courses in history throughout the world? The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom are certainly incontestable historic facts. These incontestable historic facts also establish beyond any question of doubt the origin and history of the so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe. The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom and their relationship to the origin and early history of the so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe was one of history's best kept secrets until wide publicity was given in recent years to my research on this subject...Prior to the 10th century the Khazar Kingdom had already been reduced by Russian conquests to an area of 800,000 square miles...The populations of the Khazar Kingdom was made up for the most part of Khazars with the addition of the remnants of the populations of the 25 peaceful agricultural nations of the populations of the 25 peaceful agricultural nations which had inhabited this approximate 1,000,000 square miles before their conquest by the invading Khazars. In the 1st century B.C. the Khazars had invaded Eastern Europe from their homeland in Asia. The Khazars invaded Eastern Europe via the land route between the north end of the Caspian Sea and the south end of the Ural Mountains.
The Khazars were not 'Semites.' They were an Asiatic Mongoloid Nation. They are classified by modern anthropologists as Turco‑Finns racially. From time immemorial the homeland of the Khazars was in the heart of Asia. They were a very warlike nation. The Khazars were driven out of Asia finally by the nations in Asia with whom they were continually at war. The Khazars invaded Eastern Europe to escape further defeats in Asia. The very warlike Khazars did not find it difficult to subdue and conquer the 25 peaceful agricultural nations occupying approximately 1,000,000 square miles in Eastern Europe. In a comparatively short period the Khazars established the largest and most powerful kingdom in Europe, and probably the wealthiest also.
The Khazars were a pagan nation when they invaded Eastern Europe. Their religious worship was a mixture of phallic worship and other forms of idolatrous worship practiced in Asia by pagan nations. This form of worship continued until the 7th century. The vile forms of sexual excesses indulged in by the Khazars as their form of religious worship produced a degree of moral degeneracy the Khazar's King could not endure. In the 7th century King Bulan, ruler at that time of the Khazar Kingdom decided to abolish the practice of phallic worship and other forms of idolatrous worship and make one of the three monotheistic religions, about which he knew very little, the new state religion. After a historic session with representatives of the three monotheistic religions King Bulan decided against Christianity and Islam and Selected as the future State Religion of the Religious Worship then known as 'Talmudism,' and now known and practiced as 'Judaism.' This event is well documented in history. King Bulan and his 4,000 feudal nobles were promptly converted by rabbis imported from Babylonia for that event. Phallic worship and other forms of idolatry were thereafter forbidden. The Khazar Kings invited large numbers of rabbis to come and open synagogues and schools to instruct the population in the new form of religious worship. It was not the state religion. The converted Khazars were the first population of so‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe. So‑called or self‑styled 'Jews' in Eastern Europe after the conversion of the Khazars are the descendants of the Khazars converted to 'Talmudism,' or as it is now know as 'Judaism,' by the 7th century mass conversion of the Khazar population..." (Facts are Facts, p. 52‑53)
Mr. Freedman points out quite clearly that the people, known as Jews, living in Palestine and America in the 20th century have no "racial or historic connection with Palestine" and that they are really descendants from a "Turko‑Finn, Mongolian tribal people" who created a kingdom called Khazaria which existed until the 12th century. These Khazarian Jews could just as easily have practiced Christianity, but for political reason they chose Judaism and there is nothing that can be done about it. Obviously, if these people have "no racial or historic connection with Palestine" they have no claim to the promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Now let's return once more to "Facts are Facts" by Mr. Benjamin H. Freedman, who relates the following very interesting information: "The international 'crime of crimes' of all history, that reprehensible iniquity in which this nation (The United States) played the major role, was committed in Palestine almost totally as a result of the interference of the United States in that situation on behalf of the Zionist World‑wide organization, with its headquarters located in New York City. The interference of the United States on the behalf of the aggressors illustrates the power exerted upon domestic and foreign policies of this government by the 'male prostitutes' fearlessly functioning on behalf of Zionist conspirators. It is the Blackest Page in our History.
The responsibility for this un‑Christian, non‑Christian and anti‑Christian 'cause' can be honestly deposited on the doorstep of the (so‑called) Christian clergy. Therefore, they must assume the full guilt for that inhuman and unholy crime committed in the name of Christian 'charity.' Sunday after Sunday, year in and year out, the Christian clergy dinned into the ears of...Christians who go to church regularly that Christians must regard it as their 'Christian duty' to support the Zionist conspirators conquest of Palestine. Well, we 'sowed a wind, 'now we will reap a whirl‑wind.'
The Christians of the United States were 'high pressured' by the so‑called Christian clergy to give their unqualified support to the Zionist program to 'repatriate' to their 'homeland' in Palestine. The so‑called 'Jews' of Eastern Europe, who were the descendants of the Khazars. Christians were exhorted by the Christian clergy to regard the so‑called 'Jews' from Eastern Europe as God's 'Chosen People' and that Palestine was their 'Promised land.' They knew better all the time. It was simply a case of 'Cupidity' not 'stupidity' you can be sure.
As a direct result of the activities of the 'male prostitutes' on behalf of the Zionist program, contrary to all international law, to justice and to equity, anything to the contrary notwithstanding, the Christians of the United States, with few exceptions, demanded that the Congress of the United States use the prestige and the power of this nation, diplomatic, economic and military to guarantee the successful outcome of the Zionist program for the conquest of Palestine. This was done and the Zionists conquered Palestine. We are responsible. It is a well‑established undeniable historic fact that the active participation of the United States in the conquest of Palestine, on behalf of the Zionists, was the factor responsible for the conquest of Palestine by the Zionists. Without the active participation of the United States on behalf of the Zionists, it is certain they would never have attempted the conquest of Palestine by force of arms. Palestine would be an independent sovereign country under a form of government established by self‑determination of the lawful and legal Palestinians. This was aborted by payment of countless millions of dollars to Christian 'male prostitutes' by the Zionists on a scale difficult for the uninitiated to even imagine." (Facts are Facts, p. 74‑76)
Before we go on, let us present here a custom of the Jews that few Christians know anything about. That custom being the invoking of the "Kol Nidre." It is referred to in the Talmud as "the law of revocation in advance," and is obtained for all who recite it each year on the eve of the Day of Atonement, and is considered by the Jews to be Divine Dispensation from all obligations acquired under "Oaths, Vows and Pledges" to be made or taken in the coming year. The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the "Kol Nidre." (All Vows) prayer are referred to in the Talmud in the book of Nedarin 23a‑23b ‑‑ as follows: "And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'every vow which I make in the future will be null' (1) His vows are then invalid, providing that he remembers this at the time of the vow. (1) Footnote: This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity."
But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual is later than The Talmud, and, as seen from the following statement of R. Huna S. Hinene; "the law of revocation in advance was not made public."
In Russia, about 1000 A.D. it was the custom, as in other Christian countries in Europe at that time to take an oath, vow or pledge of loyalty to the rulers, the nobles, the feudal landholders and others in the name of Jesus Christ. It was after the conquest of the Khazars by the Russians that the wording of the "Kol Nidre" (all vows) prayer was altered.
The effect of the "Law of Revocation in Advance" obtained for all who recited it each year, on the eve of the Day of Atonement was, as stated before believed by the Jews to be divine dispensation a release from all obligations acquired under "Oaths, vows and pledges" to be made or taken in the Coming Year. The recital of the "Kol Nidre" (All vows) prayer Released "Jews" from any obligation taken under "Oaths, Vows or Pledges" entered into during the next twelve months. Therefore, any and all "Oaths, Vows, and/or Pledges" made or taken by "Jews," were made or taken "with tongue in check," for the next twelve months. Of course this altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All vows) prayer creates serious difficulties for the "Jews" whenever its wording becomes public knowledge. It apparently did not remain a secret very long, although the Talmud states "the law of the revocations in advance was not made public."
Thus the "Kol Nidre" (All vows) prayer soon became known as the "Jews Vow" and cast, and not without reason, serious doubt upon Any and All "oaths, vows or pledges" given by "Jews." This was/is the basis for the Jews cry of "discrimination" by governments, nobles, feudal landholders, and those who entered their service were required to take an oath, vow or pledge of loyalty. What's wrong with that: Do we not cite the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America? Well you can be certain that no "Jew" means it when he takes it!
Really could we expect anything else from a people who have never been loyal to any government or people they have lived under or with; the Jews are a people who are, without a doubt, the most traitorous People that has ever existed upon the Earth for their loyalty is always for sale! If this is true, and it is, then there should be more evidence to support this position, and there is.
The American People's Encyclopedia for 1954 at 15‑292 records the following in reference to the Khazars: "In the year 740 A.D. The Khazars were officially Converted to Judaism. A century later they were crushed by the incoming Slavic‑speaking people and were scattered over central Europe where they were known as Jews."
It is from this grouping that most German, Polish and Hungarian Jews are descended, and they likewise make up a considerable part of that population now found in America. The term Aschenazim is applied to this "round‑headed, dark‑complexioned division."
"Nathan M. Pollock has a beef with the Israeli government. His elaborate plans to celebrate this September the 1000th anniversary of the Jewish‑Khazar alliance were summarily rejected. An elderly, meek‑looking man who migrated to Israel from Russia 43 years ago. Pollock ekes out a living as a translator of scientific texts and proofreader in a publishing firm. But his great passion, hobby and avocation is historic research.
He has devoted 40 of his 64 years to trying to prove that six out of ten Israelis and none out of ten Jews in the Western Hemisphere are not real Jews' Jews, but descendants of fierce Khazar tribes which roamed the steppes of Southern Russia many centuries ago. For obvious reasons the Israeli authorities are not at all eager to give the official stamp of approval to Pollock's theories. 'For all we know, he may be 100 percent right,' said a senior government official. 'In fact, he is not the first one to discover the connection between Jews and Khazars.
Many famous scholars Jews and non‑Jews, stressed these links in their historical research works. But who can tell today what percentage of Khazar blood flows in our veins, if at all? And who can declare with any degree of scientific accuracy which Jews are Jews and which are descendants of this Tartar‑Mongol race? As a matter of fact, our alleged descent from the Khazars is the central theme of Arab propaganda,' he added. 'The Arabs claim most European Jews have no right to be in Israel in the first place because they are not descended from Biblical Hebrews, but from Tartar‑Mongol nomad tribes, including the Khazars who were converted to Judaism en masse 1000 years ago.'
Scientific opinion in Israel is divided on the subject. No one argues the basic premise: that a group of 12,000 Jews fleeing from persecution and wars in the Holy Land, in the wake of Byzantine and Moslem conquests, made the long overland trek to Persia, crossed the territory of today's Turkestan in Central Asia and found asylum in the Khazar Kingdom, which occupied a vast area between the Caspian Sea, Volga River, Ural Mountains, Black Sea and the Pollack borderlands.
In the year 965 the Khazars were defeated for the first time in 500 years, by Prince Sviatoslav of Kiev. King Bulan III of Khazaria concluded that Prince Sviatoslav emerged victorious from the war because his troops and mercenaries were Christians, while his nomads were pagan worshipers. The king and his nobles embraced Judaism in 965, and in 966 a royal edict was passed enforcing Judaism as the only legal religion in the Khazar Kingdom.
Tribesmen had to undergo circumcision, learn Hebrew prayers and recognize Jewish rabbis as their spiritual leaders, on paid of death. As other Jews who were persecuted in the Middle East, medieval Europe and Spain at that time, heard of the new Jewish‑Khazar Kingdom, rumors spread that the Messiah had arrived at long last. There were several consecutive migration waves to Khazaria, via Persia, Greece and Poland.
Pollock believes the traditional Russian anti‑Semitism probably stems from that epoch when Hebrew‑speaking Khazar raiders attacked Russian villages, killed the men folk, abducted women, forcibly converted them to Judaism and married them in fulfledged religious ceremonies. This also would explain why so many European Jews are Blond and Blue-eyed, with a Slight Mongol Slant to Their Eyes, as well as the total absence of Semitic features among many Israelis of European descent.
The flourishing Jewish‑Khazar Kingdom was destroyed in 1239 by the Mongol invasion of Batu Khan. Following the Mongol invasion and conquest, surviving members of Jewish‑Khazar tribes trekked west and settled in Poland, Hungary, Bohemia, Austria, Romania and the Ukraine.
How can one find out if he is a 'Khazar Jew' or a 'Hebrew Jew?' According to Pollock, whose parents came from Poland, if your name is Halperin, Alpert, Halpern, Galpern, etc., you are 100 percent Khazar. 'Alper' means 'brave knight' ihn the Khazar tongue, and the name was granted by the king to the most distinguished warriors.
Names like Kaplan, Caplon, Koppel, and the like are positive proof of Khazar descent, according to the scholar. 'Kaplan' means 'fierce hawk' in the Khazar language. Kogan, Kagan, Keganovich show aristocratic descent from Kagan‑Hagan, King Bulan's chief minister..." (San Diego Union, August 28, 1966)
From the above, we can clearly see that the Jews fully understand their Khazarian heritage as the third edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia for 1925 records: "CHAZARS (Khazars): A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the Jews of Russia. The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855).
Jews have lived on the shores of the Black and Caspian seas since the first centuries of the common era (after the death of Christ). Historical evidence points to the region of the Ural as the home of the Chazars. Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages they were known as the 'Chozars,' 'Khazirs,' 'Akatzirs,' and 'Akatirs,' and in the Russian chronicles as 'Khwalisses' and 'Ugry Byelyye.'
The Armenia writers of the fifth and following centuries furnish ample information concerning this people. Moses of Chorene refers to the invasion by the 'Khazirs' of Armenia and Iberia at the beginning of the third century: 'The chaghan was the king of the North, the ruler of the Khazirs, and the queen was the chatoun.' (History of Armenia, ii. 357).
The Chazars first came to Armenia with the Basileans in 198. Though at first repulsed, they subsequently became important factors in Armenian history for a period of 800 years. Driven onward by the nomadic tribes of the steppes and by their own desire for plunder and revenge, they made frequent invasions into Armenia. The latter country was made the battle‑ground in the long struggle between the Romans and the Persians.
This struggle, which finally resulted in the loss by Armenia of her independence, paved the way for the political importance of the Chazars. The conquest of eastern Armenia by the Persians in the fourth century rendered the latter dangerous to the Chazars, who, for their own protection, formed an alliance with the Byzantines. This alliance was renewed from time to time until the final conquest of the Chazars by the Russians.
Their first aid was rendered to the Byzantine emperor Julian, in 363. About 434 they were for a time tributary to Attila, Sidonius Apollinaris relates that the Chazars followed the banners of Attila, and in 452 fought on the Catalanian fields in company with the Black Huns and Alans. The Persian King Kobad (488‑531) undertook the construction of a line of forts through the pass between Derbent and the Caucasus, in order to guard against the invasion of the Chazars, Turks and other warlike tribes. His son Chosroes Anoshirvan (531‑579) built the wall of Derbent, repeatedly mentioned by the Oriental geographers and historians as Bab al‑Awab. In the second half of the sixth century the Chazars moved westward. They established themselves in the territory bounded by the Sea of Azov, the Don and the lower Volga, the Caspian Sea, and the Northern Caucasus. The Caucasian Goths (Tetraxites) were subjugated by the Chazars, probably about the seventh century.
Early in that century the kingdom of the Chazars had become powerful enough to enable the chaghan to send to the Byzantine emperor Heraclius an army of 40,000 men, by whose aid he conquered the Persians (626‑627). The Chazars had already occupied the northeastern part of the Black Sea region. According to the historian Moses Kalonkataci, the Chazars, under their leader Jebu Chaghan (called 'Ziebel Chaghan' by the Greek writers), penetrated into Persian territory as early as the second campaign of Heraclius, on which occasion they devastated Albania.
Nicephorus testifies that Heraclius repeatedly showed marks of esteem to his ally, the chaghan of the Chazars, to whom he even promised his daughter in marriage. In the great battle between the Chazars and the Arabs near Kizliar 4,000 Mohammedan soldiers and their leaders were slain.
In the year 669 the Ugrians or Zabirs freed themselves from the rule of the Obrians, settled between the Don and the Caucasus, and came under the dominion of the Chazars. For this reason the Ugrians, who had hitherto been called the 'White' or 'Independent' Ugrians, are described in the chronicles ascribed to Nestro as the 'Black' or 'Dependent,' Ugrians. They were no longer governed by their own princes, but were ruled by the kings of the Chazars. In 735, when the Arab leader Mervan moved from Georgia against the Chazars, he attacked the Ugriaus also. In 679 the Chazars subjugated the Bulgars and extended their sway farther west between the Don and the Dnieper, as far as the head‑waters of the Donetz in the province of Lebedia. It was probably about that time that the chaghan of the Chazars and his grandees, together with a large number of his heathen people, embraced the Jewish religion.
According to A. Harkavy, the conversion took place in 620, according to others, in 740. King Joseph, in his letter to Hasdal ibn Shaprut (about 960), gives the following account of the conversion: 'Some centuries ago King Bulan reigned over the Chazars. To him God appeared in a dream and promised him might and glory.
Encouraged by this dream, Bulan went by the road of Darian to the country of Ardebil, where he gained great victories (over the Arabs). The Byzantine emperor and the calif of the Ishmaelites sent to him envoys with presents, and sages to convert him to their respective religions. Bulan invited also wise men of Israel, and proceeded to examine them all. As each of the champions believed his religion to be the best, Bulan separately questioned the Mohammedans and the Christians as to which of the other two religions they considered the better. When both gave preference to that of the Jews, that king perceived that it must be the true religion. He therefore adopted it.'
This account of the conversion was considered to be of a legendary nature. Harkavy, however, proved from Arabic and Slavonian sources that the religious disputation at the Charzarian court is a historical fact. Even the name of Sangari has been found in a liturgy of Constantine the Philosopher (Cyrill). It was one of the successors of Bulan, named Obadiah, who regenerated the kingdom and strengthened the Jewish religion. He invited Jewish scholars to settle in his dominions, and founded synagogues and schools. The people were instructed in the Bible, Mishna, and Talmud, and in the 'divine service of the hazzanim.' In their writings the Chazars used the Hebrew letters.
Obadiah was succeeded by his son Hezekiah; the latter by his son Manasseh; Mannaseh by Hanukkah, a Succession brother of Obadiah; Hanukkah by his son Isaac; Isaac by his son Moses (or Manasseh II); latter by his son Nisi; and Nisi by his son Aaron II. King Joseph himself was a son of Aaron, and ascended the throne in accordance with the law of the Chazars relating to succession. On the whole, King Joseph's account agrees generally with the evidence given by the Arabic writers of the tenth century, but in detail it contains a few discrepancies.
According to Ibn Fadlan, Ibn Dastah, and others, only the king and the grandees were followers of Judaism. The rest of the Chazars were Christians, Mohammedans, and heathens; and the Jews were in a great minority. According to Mas'udi, the king and the Chazars proper were Jews; but the army consisted of Mohammedans, while the other inhabitants, especially the Slavonians and Russians, were heathens. From the work 'Kitab al‑Buldan,' written about the ninth century, it appears as if all the Chazars were Jews and that they had been converted to Judaism only a short time before that book was written. But this work was probably inspired by Jaihani; and it may be assumed that in the ninth century many Chazar heathens became Jews, owing to the religious zeal of King Obadiah. 'Such a conversion in great masses,' says Chwolson. 'May have been the reason for the embassy of Christians from the land of the Chazars to the Byzantine emperor Michael. The report of the embassy reads as follows: 'Quomodo nunc Judaei, nunc Saraceni ad suam fidem eos molirentur convertere.'
The history of the kingdom of the Chazars undoubtedly presents one of the most remarkable features of the Middle Ages. Surrounded by wild, nomadic peoples, and themselves leading partly a nomadic life, the Chazars enjoyed all the privileges of civilized nations, a well‑constituted and tolerant government, a flourishing trade, and a well‑disciplined standing army. In a time when fanaticism ignorance, and anarchy reigned in Western Europe, the kingdom of the Chazars could boast of its just and broad‑minded administration; and all who were persecuted on the scorn of their religion found refuge there. There was a supreme court of justice, composed of seven judges, of whom two were Jews, two Mohammedans, and two Christians, in charge of the interests of their respective faiths, while one heathen was appointed for the Slavonians, Russians, and other pagans.
The Jewish population in the entire domain of the Chazars, in the period between the seventh and tenth centuries, must have been considerable. There is no doubt that the Caucasian and other Oriental Jews had lived and carried on business with the Chazars long before the arrival of the Jewish fugitives from Greece, who escaped (723) from the mania for conversion which possessed the Byzantine emperor Leo the Isaurian. From the correspondence between King Joseph and Hasdai it is apparent that two Spanish Jews, Judah ben Meïr ben Nathan and Joseph Gagris, had succeeded in settling in the land of the Chazars, and that it was a German Jew, Isaac ben Eliezer' from the land of Nyemetz' (Germany), who carried Hasdai's letter to the king. Saadia, who had a fair knowledge of the kingdom of the Chazars, mentions a certain Isaac ben Abraham who had removed from Sura to Chazaria. Among the various routes enumerate by the Arabic geographer Ibn Khurdadhbah (860‑880) as being used by the Rahdanite Jewish merchants, there is one leading from Spain or France, via Allemania, through the land of the Slavonians, close by Atel, the capital of the Chazars, whence they crossed the Sea of the Chazars (Caspian Sea) and continued their voyage, via Balkh, Transoxania, and the land of the Tagasga, to India and China. These merchants, who spoke Arabic, Persian, Greek, Spanish, French, and Slavonic, 'traveled continuously from west to east from east to west by sea and by land.' They carried eunuchs, serving‑maids, boys, silks, furs, swords, imported musk, aloes, camphor, cinnamon, and other products of the Far East.
Hasdai ibn Shaprut, who was foreign minister to Abd al‑Rahman, Sultan of Cordova, in his letter to King Joseph of the Chazars (about 960), relates that the first information about that kingdom was communicated to him by envoys from Khorassan, and that their statements were corroborated by the ambassadors from Byzantim. The latter told him that the powerful Chazars were maintaining amicable relations with the Byzantine empire, with which they carried on by sea a trade in fish, skins, and other wares, the voyage from Constantinople occupying fifteen days.
Hasdai determined to avail himself to the services of the Byzantine embassy to transmit his letter to the king of the Chazars, and with that view he despatched Isaac ben Nathan with valuable gifts to the emperor, requesting him to aid Isaac in his journey to Chazaria. But the Greeks interposed delays, and finally sent Isaac back to Cordova. Hasdai then decided to send his message by way of Jerusalem, Nisibis, Armenia, and Bardaa, but the envoys of the king of the Gebalim (Goleslav I of Bohemia), who had then just arrived in Cordova, and among whom were two Jews, Saul and Joseph, suggested a different plan. The offered to send the letter to Jews living in 'Hungarian' (Hungary), who, in their turn, would transmit it to 'Russ' (Russia), and thence through 'Bulgar' (probably the country of the Bulgarians on the Kuban) to its destination (Atel, the capital of Chazaria). As the envoys guaranteed the safe delivery of the message, Hasdai accepted the proposal. He further exprebrewis thankfulness that God, in His mercy had not deprived the Jews of a deliverer, but had preserved the remnant of the Jewish race.
Taking a keen interest in everything relating to the kingdom of the Chazars, hasdai begs the king to communicate to him a detailed account of the geography of his country, of its internal constitution, of the customs and occupations of its inhabitants, and especially of the history of his ancestry and of the state. In this letter Hasdai speaks of the tradition according to which the Chazars once dwelt near the Seir(Serir) Mountains; he refers to the narrative of Eldad ha‑Dani, who thought he had discovered the Lost Ten Tribes; and inquires whether the Chazars know anything concerning 'the end of the miracles' (the coming of the Messiah).
As to Eldad ha‑Dani's unauthenticated account of the Lost Ten Tribes on the River Sambation, it may be interesting to note that, according to Idrisi, the city of Sarmel (Sarkel‑on‑the‑Don) was situated on the River Al‑Sabt (Sambat), which is the River Don. The name for Kiev, as given by Constantine Porphyrogenitus, is also Sambatas. These appellations of the River Don and of the city of Kiev point evidently to Jewish‑Chazar influences.
A complete account of the correspondence between, Hasdai and King Joseph, has been written by A. Harkavy, one of the leading authorities on the history of the Chazars, from which the following is, in substance, an extract: 'The Chazarian correspondence was first published in the work 'Kol‑Mebasser' of Isaac Akrish (Constantinople, 1577), into whose hands these documents came while on a voyage from Egypt to Constantinople.
He published them with the view of proving that even after the destruction of Jerusalem the Jews still had their own country, in accordance with the well‑known passage in Genesis xlix.10, 'the scepter shall not depart from Judah.' Among European scholars Johann Buxtorf, the son, was the first to become interested in the Chazarian letters, which he printed together with the text of Akrish in his Latin translation of 'Cuzari' (Basel, 1660).
Buxtorf believed that the letters themselves and the entire history of the Chazarian kingdom were but fable, for the reason that no seafarers, merchants, or other travelers had brought any information concerning such a flourishing kingdom as that of the Chazars was reputed to be. The learned Orientalist D'Herbelot, misled by a wrong conception of the 'Cuzari' and its relation tot he conversion of the Chazars to Judaism, leaves the authenticity of the correspondence an open question.
One of the greatest scholars of the 17th century, Samuel Bochart, in his derivation of the name of the Chazars, introduces the account of Joseph ben Gorion (Yostpon), and in his notes to the 'Yuhasin' of Zacute gives information about the Chazarian kingdom and the Sea of the Chazars obtained from the 'Geographia Nubiensis' of the Arabian writer Idrisi (12th century).
Pochart's views, however, are not important because he had no knowledge of the 'Cuzari' or of the Chazarian letters. All the skeptics of that time and those mentioned below had no knowledge of the facts concerning the Chazars and Chazarian Judaism as contained in Slavonic Russian sources, or of the 'Acts Sanctorum,' which discusses those sources. It is therefore not surprising that the first author of a comprehensive history of the Jews, Basnage, who in his 'Histoire des Jifs,' v. 446, Rotterdam, 1707, prints the Chazarian letters, has the boldness to declare as idle fancy, not only the kingdom of the Chazars, but even the existence of the Chazarian people, which was invented, he considers, by Jewish boastfulness.
About the same time Dom Augustine Calmet issued his Biblical researches, part of which treats of 'the country whither the Ten Tribes were led away and where the said tribes now live.' Calmet considers Media near the Caspian Sea to be 'the country,' and that it is also identical with 'the country of the Chazars,' which was glorified so much in the rabbinical writings. According to them the czar of the Chazars adopted the Jewish religion in the eight century. Calmet, however, considers the whole story a fiction.
Baratier, 'the remarkable child,' also considered the story of the Chazars to be only a pleasing novel; but it may serve as an excuse for his opinion that when he wrote his work he was only eleven years of age. The Danish historiographer Frederick Suhm, who in 1779 wrote a remarkable work, for that time, on the Chazars, and who could not free himself from the view of the Hebraists of the time with regard to the letter of King Joseph, was the first to give a decided opinion in favor of the genuineness of the letter of Hasdai.
The ignorance of these writers is accounted for by the fact that only at the end of the eighteenth century, were translations of the old Arabic writers, Mas'udi, Istakhri, Ibn Haukal, etc., on the Chazars, issued. The first to make use of the testimony of the Arabic writers to corroborate the accounts of the Jewish writers on the Chazars, was the Lithuanian historian Tadeusz Czacki, who had the advantage of using copies of the Arabic manuscripts relating to the subject in the Library of Paris. The Russian historian karamsin also made use of Mas'udi's information, given in the 'Chrestomathy' of Silvestre de Sacy, and of Abulfeda's researches published in the fifth volume of Busching's 'Historical Magazine.'
The Russian academician Ch. Frähn and the Swedish scholar D'Ohsson collected and published, in the first quarter of the nineteenth century, all the Arabic testimony on the subject of the Chazars known at that time. The authenticity of the letter of King Joseph has, however, since been fully established by the very material which those scholars had at their disposal, Frähu acknowledges the genuineness of Hasdai's letter, but not that of King Joseph. In the same way D'Ohsson, although he found the information of the Arabic and Byzantine writers in conformity with the contents of the Chazar letters, could not help doubting its genuiness. This may be explained by the fact that as they did not understand Hebrew they did not care to commit themselves on a question which lay outside of their field of investigation. But the Jewish scholars had no doubts whatever as to the genuineness of the Chazarian documents, especially since the beginning of the critical school of Rapoport and Zunz. They were made use of by many writers in Spain in the twelfth century; as, for instance, by Judah ha‑Levi (1140), who displayed a close acquaintance with the contents of King Joseph's epistle, and by the historian Abraham ibn Daud of Toledo (1160), who distinctly refers to the same letter.
Later on, with the persecutions which ended with the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, the Chazarian documents, together with many other treasures of medieval Jewish literature, were lost to the learned, and were not recovered until the end of the sixteenth century, when they were found in Egypt by Isaac 'Akrish. The Jews of that time took little interest, however, in the history of the past, being absorbed by the cheerless events of their own epoch. The first reference, therefore, to the Chazar letters is by Rabbi Bacharach of Worms, in 1679, who discovered proofs of the genuineness of Hasdai's letter in an acrostic in the poem which served as a preface, and which reads as follows: 'I, Hasdai, son of Isaac, son of Ezra ben Shaprut.'
This acrostic, however, again remained unnoticed until it was rediscovered by Frensdorf, independently of Bacharach, in 1836. Four years later (1840) the genuineness of Hasdai's letter was absolutely proved by Joseph Zedner. He also acknowledged the authenticity of the Chaghan's letter, but did not submit proofs. At the same time Solomon Munk gave his opinion in favor of the genuineness of both letters. Since then most of the Jewish scholars have adopted his view, including Lebrecht, 1841; Michael Sachs, 1845; S.D. Luzzatto, 1846‑50; Z. Frankel, 1852; D. Cassel and H. Jolovicz, 1853, 1859, 1872; Leop. Löw, 1855‑74; Hartog, 1857; Jost, 1858; Steinschneider, 1860; Grätz, 1860 and 1871; harkavy, beginning with 1864; Geiger, 1865; Kraushar, 1866; D. Kaufmann, 1877; and many others. A comparison of Jewish with other sources, especially with Arabic, as far as they were then known, must be credited to E. Carmoly. He began his work with the comparison of the various sources in his 'Revue Orientale' (1840‑44). he completed it in 1847. Some useful supplements to Carmoly's works were presented by Paulus Cassel in 1848 and 1877. The results of these investigations were accepted by the following Christian scholars: Grigoryev, 1834; Schafarik, 1848; Lelevel, 1851‑60; Vivien de San Martin, 1851; S. Solovyov, 1851‑1874; Byelevski, 1864; Brun, 1866‑77; Bilbasov, 1868‑71; Kunik, 1874 and 1878; and many others. Still there were some writers who were misled by the earlier opinions, and on the strength of them spoke skeptically of the documents; as Jacob Goldenthal (1848); Dobryakov (1865); and even the historian Ilovaiski (1876) (The translation of the letters given by Harkavy is from a manuscript in the St. Petersburg Public Library. The genuineness of the St. Petersburg manuscript has been demonstrated by him).
In 960 Atel (or Itil), at that time the capital of the kingdom of the Chazars, was situated about eight miles from the northern Astrakhan, on the right bank of the lower Volga, which river was also called 'Atel' or 'Itil.' The meaning of 'Atel' in the Gothic language is 'father' or 'little father,' that of 'Itil' in the Turanian language is 'river'; it is difficult to decide which of these two words gave the river its name. The western part of the city was surrounded by a wall pierced by four gates, of which one led to the river, and the others to the steppes. Here was situated the king's palace, which was the only brick building in the city. According to Mas'udi, the city was divided into three parts, the palace of the chaghan standing on an island. The king had twenty‑five wives, all of royal blood, and sixty concubines, all famous beauties. Each one dwelt in a separate tent and was watched by a eunuch. The authority of the chaghan was so absolute that during his absence from the capital, even his viceroy, or coregent (called 'isha,' or 'bek,' or 'pech'), was powerless. The viceroy had to enter the chaghan's apartments barefooted and with the greatest reverence. He held in his right hand a chip of wood, which he lit when he saluted the chaghan, whereupon he took his seat to the right of the latter, on the throne, which was of gold. The walls of the palace were also gilded, and a golden gate ornamented the palace.
All the other dwellings of the then populous city were insignificant mud huts or felt tents. The position of the chaghan of the Chazars was evidently similar to that of the former mikados of Japan, while the bek, his military coregent, corresponded to the shogans of the latter. Emperor Heraclius in 626 concluded a treaty with the chaghan of the Chazars, and Constantine Copronymus, in his description of the embassy of the Chazars (834), states that it was sent by the 'chaghan and the pech.' Ibn Fadlan relates that the king of the Chazars was called the 'great chaghan,' and his deputy 'chaghan‑bhoa' ('bey,' 'beg,' or 'bek'). The bek led the army, administered the affairs of the country, and appeared among the people; and to him the neighboring kings paid allegiance. It will thus be seen that the extent of the powers of the bek varied with the times. When the chaghan wanted to punish any one, he said, 'Go and commit suicide' ‑ a method resembling the Japanese custom of hara‑kiri.
The mother of the chaghan resided in the western part of the city, whose eastern part, called 'Chazaran,' was inhabited by merchants of various nationalities. The city and its environs were heavily shaded by trees. The Turkish and the Chazar languages predominated. The entourage of the chaghan, numbering 4,000 men, consisted of representatives of different nationalities. The White Chazars were renowned for their beauty; and according to Demidov, the mountaineers of the Crimea contrasted very favorably with the Nogay Tatars, because they were considerably intermixed with the Chazars and with the equally fine race of the Kumans. Besides the White Chazars, there were also black Chazars (who were almost as dark as the Hindus), Turkish immigrants, Slavonians, Hunno‑Bulgars, Jews, who lived mostly in the cities, and various Caucasian tribes, such as the Abghases, Kabardines, Ossetes, Avares, Lesghians, etc.
The Chazars cultivated rice, millet, fruit, grains, and the vine. They had important fisheries on the Caspian Sea, and the sturgeon constituted the main article of food. The Arabic writer Al‑Makdisi remarks: 'In Chazaria there are many sheep, and Jews, and much money.' From the upper Volga they brought down from the Mordvines and Russians honey and valuable furs, which they exported to Africa, Spain, and France. They supplied the market of Constantinople with hides, furs, fish, Indian goods, and articles of luxury. The chaghan and his suite resided in the capital only during the winter months. From the month of Nisan (April) they led a nomadic life in the steppes, returning to the city about the Feast of Hanukkah (December). The estates and vineyards of the chaghan were on the island on which his palace was situated. Another city of the Chazars, Semender, between Atel and Bab al‑Abwab, was surrounded by 40,000 vines. It was identical with the modern Tarku, near Petrovsk, which is now inhabited by Jews and Kumyks. The latter are supposed to be descended from the Chazars. At the Byzantine court the chaghan was held in high esteem. In diplomatic correspondence with him the seal of three solid was used, which marked him as a potentate of the first rank, above even the pope and the Carlovingian monarchs. Emperor Justinian II after his flight from Kherson to Doros, took refuge during his exile with the chaghan, and married the chaghan's daughter Irene, who was famous for her beauty (702) Emperor Leo IV 'the Chazar' (775‑780), the son of Constantine, was thus a grandson of the king of the Chazars.
From his mother he inherited his mild, amiable disposition. Justinian's rival, Bardanes, likewise sought an asylum in Chazaria. Chazarian troops were among the body‑guard of the Byzantine imperial court; and they fought for Leo VI, against Simeon of Bulgaria in 888.
King Joseph in his letter to Hasdai gives the following account of his kingdom: 'The country up the river is within a four months' journey to the Orient, settled by the following nations who pay tribute to the Chazars: Burtas, Bulgar, Suvar, Arissu, Tzarmis, Ventit, Syever, and Slaviyun. Thence the boundary‑line runs to Buarasm as far as the Jordjan. All the inhabitants, of the seacoast, that live within a month's distance pay tribute to the Chazars. To the south Semender, Bak‑Tadlu, and the gates of the Bab al‑Abwab, are situated on the seashore. Thence the boundary‑line extends to the mountains of Azur, Bak‑Bagda, Sridi, Kiton, Arku, Shaula, Sagsar, Albusser, Ukusser, Kiadusser, Tzidlag, Zunikh, which are very high peaks, and to the Alans as far as the boundary of the Kassa, Kalkial, Takat, Gebul, and the Constantinian Sea. To the west, Sarkel, Samkrtz, Kertz, Sugdai, Aluss, Lambat, Barnit, Alubida, Kut, Mankup, Budik, Alma, and Grusin; all these western localities are situated on the banks of the Constantinian (Black) Sea. Thence the boundary‑line extends to the north, traversing the land of Basa, which is on the River Vaghez. Here on the plains live nomadic tribes, which extend to the frontier of the Gagries, as innumerable as the sands of the sea; and they all pay tribute to the Chazars. The king of the Chazars himself has established his residence at the mouth of the river, in order to guard its entrance and to prevent the Russians from reaching the Caspian Sea, and thus penetrating to the land of the Ishmaelites. In the same way the Chazars bar enemies from the gates of Bab al‑Abwab.' Even the Russian Slavonians of Kiev had, in the ninth century, to pay as yearly tax tot he Chazars a sword and the skin of a squirrel for each house.
At the end of the eighth century, when the Crimean Goths rebelled against the sovereignty of the Chazars, the latter occupied the Gothic capital, doros. The Chazars were at first repulsed by the Gothic bishop Joannes; but when he had surrendered, the Goths submitted to the rule of the Chazars.
In the second quarter of the ninth century, when the Chazars were often annoyed by the irruptions of the Petchenegs, Emperor Theophilus, fearing for the safety of the Byzantine trade with the neighboring nations, despatched his brother‑in‑law, Petron Kamateros, with materials and workmen to build for the Chazars the fortress Sarkel on the Don (834). Sarkel ('Sar‑kel,' the white abode; Russian, 'Byelaya Vyezha') served as a military post and as a commercial depot for the north.
In the second half of the ninth century the apostle of the Slavonians, Constantine (Cyril), went to the Crimea to spread Christianity among the Chazars. At this time the kingdom of the Chazars stood at the height of its power, and was constantly at war with the Arabian califs and their leaders in Persia and the Caucasus. The Persian Jews hoped that the Chazars might succeed in destroying the califs' country. The high esteem in which the Chazars were held among the Jews of the Orient may be seen in the application to them ‑ in an Arabic commentary on Isaiah ascribed by some to Saadia, and by others to Benjamin Nahawandi ‑ of Isaiah xlvii.14: 'The Lord hath love him.' 'This,' says the commentary, 'refers to the Chazars, who will go and destroy Babel'; i.e. Babylonia, a name used to designate the country of the Arabs.
The chaghans of the Chazars, in their turn, took great interest in and protected their coreligionists, the Jews. When one of the chaghans receive information (c. 921) that the Mohammedans had destroyed a synagogue in the land of Babung (according to Harkavy the market of Camomile in Atel is meant), he gave orders that the minaret, of the mosque, in his capitol should be broken off, and the muezzin executed. He declared that he would have destroyed all the mosques in the country, had he not been afraid that the Mohammedans would in turn destroy all the synagogues in their lands. In the conquest of Hungary by the Magyars (889) the Chazars rendered considerable assistance. They had, however, settled in Pannonia before the arrival of the Magyars. This is evident from the names of such places as Kozar and Kis‑Kozard in the Nσgrad, and Great‑Kozar and Ráczkozar in the Baranya district.
Mas'udi relates the following particulars concerning the Chazars in connection with Russian invasions of Tabaristan and neighboring countries: 'After the year 300 of the Hegira (913‑914), five hundred Russian (Northmen's) ships, every one of which had a hundred men on board, came to the estuary of the Don, which opens into the Pontus, and is in communication with the river of the Chazars, the Volga. The king of the Chazars keeps a garrison on this side of the estuary with efficient, warlike equipment to exclude any other power from its passage. The king of the Chazars himself frequently takes the field against them if this garrison is too weak.
When the Russian vessels reached the fort they sent to the king of the Chazars to ask his permission to pass through his dominions, promising him half the plunder which they might take from the nations who lived on the coast of this sea. He gave them leave. They entered the country, and continuing their voyage up the River Don as far as the river of the Chazars, they went down this river past the town of Atel and entered through its mouth into the sea of the Chazars. They spread over el‑Jil, ed‑Dailem, Tabaristan, Aboskum, which is the name for the coast of Jordjan, the Naphtha country, and toward Aderbijan, the town of Ardobil, which is in Aderbijan, and about three days' journey from the sea. The nations on the coast had no means of repelling the Russians, although they had put themselves in a state of defense; for the inhabitants of the coast of this sea are well civilized. When the Russians had secured their booty and captives, they sailed to the mouth of the river of the Chazars and sent messengers with money and spoils to the king, in conformity with the stipulations they had made. The Larissians and other Moslems in the country of the Chazars heard of the attack of the Russians, and they said to their king: 'The Russians have invaded the country of our Moslem brothers; they have shed their blood and made their wives and children captives, as they are unable to resist; permit us to oppose them.' The Moslem army, which numbered about 15,000 took the field and fought for three days. The Russians were put to the sword, many being drowned, and only 5,000 escaping. These were slain by the Burtas and by the Moslems of Targhiz. The Russians did not make a similar attempt after that year.'
Notwithstanding the assertions of Mas'udi, the Russians invaded the trans‑Caucasian country in 944, but were careful in this expedition to take a different route. This seems to have been the beginning of the downfall of the Chazar kingdom. The Russian Varangians had firmly established themselves at Kiev, while the powerful dominions of the Chazars had become dangerous to the Byzantine empire, and Constantine Porphyrogenitus, in his instructions on government written for his son, carefully enumerates the Alans, the Petchenegs, the Uzes, and the Bulgarians as the forces on which he must rely to check the influence of the Chazars.
Five years after the correspondence between the king of the Chazars and Hasdai ibn Shaprut (965), the Russian prince Swyatoslaw made war upon the Chazars, apparently for the possession of Taurida and Taman. The Russians had already freed from the rule of the Chazars a part of the Black Bulgars, and had established a separate Russian duchy under the name of 'tmutrakan'; but in the Crimean peninsula the Chazars still had possessions, and from the Caucasian side the Russian Tmutrakan suffered from the irrution of the Kossogian and Karbardine princes, who were tributary to the chaghan of the Chazars. The fortress of Sarkel and the city of Atel were the chief obstacles to Russian predatory expeditions on the Caspian Sea. After a hard fight the Russians conquered the Chazars. Swyatoslaw destroyed Sarkel, subdued also the tribes of the Kossogians and Yass (Alans), and so strengthened the position of the Russian Tmutrakan. They destroyed the city of Bulgar, devastated the country of the Burtas, and took possession of Atel and Semender.
Four years later the Russians conquered all the Chazarian territory east of the Sea of Azov. Only the Crimean territory of the Chazars remained in their possession until 1016, when they were dispossessed by a joint expedition of Russians and Byzantines. The last of the Chaghans, George Tzula, was taken prisoner; some of the Chazars took refuge in an island of the Caspian, Siaheouye; others retired to the Caucasus; while many were sent as prisoners of war to Kiev, where a Chazar community had long existed. Many intermingled in the Crimea with the local Jews; the Krimtschaki are probably their descendants, perhaps some of the Subbotniki also. Some went to Hungary, but the great mass of the people remained in their native country. Many members of the Chazarian royal family emigrated to Spain. Until the thirteenth century the Crimea was known to European travelers as 'Gazaria,' the Italian form of 'Chazaria.'...As the Exile was assumed to last seventy years, in accordance with Jeremiah, this left 420 years from the Return (537 B.C.) to the destruction of the Temple (70 A.D.) a discrepancy of 187 years. This is got rid of in part by making the Persian domination last 34 instead of 204 years (537‑333 B.C.). This was done in order to make the interval between the Exodus and the era of contracts exactly 1,000 year. Owing to these discrepancies, great confusion exists in the annals of the Jewish chronicler, who have generally tried to combine the dates recorded by their predecessors with those of more recent events, using the era of creation almost exclusively; and it is dangerous to trust to their lists unless checked by contemporary annals." (In the subjoined chronological table the dates of the most prominent events of Jewish history have been derived from Henrietta Szold's "Tables of Jewish History" in the index volume (pp. 104 et seq.) of the American edition of Graets" "History of the Jews.”)
For events of lesser importance the sources are, in almost every case, the local annalists as utilized by the historians of the Jews in the respective countries. Particular attention has been given to the successive stages of legislation, while only selections have been made from the many cases of autos da f., blood accusations, expulsions, host‑tragedies, and acts of emancipation, for all of which complete lists are given in separate articles under the respective headings.
In contradistinction to the usual custom, but few literary events have been influenced in the table, only those works which have affected the public opinion of the non‑Jewish world having been regarded as of more direct historic importance. The ruling principle has been to confine the list to strictly historic events; i.e., to incidents affecting either directly or indirectly the relations of the Jews to the states in whose territories have dwelt. Incidents affecting merely the internal concerns of the Jewish communities have not, as a rule, been included.
Chronological Chart of History
1991‑1786: B.C. 12th Dynasty. The Patriarchs.
1776‑1280: Hebrews in Egypt.
1570‑1310: 18th Dynasty.
1400‑1350: Tell el‑Amara Period.
1310‑1200: 19th Dynasty.
1309‑1290: Seti I.
1290‑1224: Ramses II.
1240: Conquest of Canaan under Joshua.
1200‑1125: Philistines settle in Palestine.
1200‑1020: The Judges.
1050: Fall of Shiloh. Samuel.
965 ‑ 928: Solomon. Rezon.
935 ‑ 914: Shishak.
935 ‑ ???: 22nd Dynasty.
928 ‑ 911: Rehoboam (Judah).
918 ‑ 917: Shishak invades Palestine.
911 ‑ 908: Abijah (Judah).
908 ‑ 867: Asa (Judah).
907 ‑ 906: Nadab (Israel).
906 ‑ 883: Baasha (Israel) Ben‑Hadad I.
883 ‑ 882: Elah (Israel).
882: Zimri (Israel).
882 ‑ 871: Omri (Israel) Ben‑Hadad II.
867 ‑ 846: Jehoshaphat (Judah).
853: Battle of Oarqar. Elijah.
871 ‑ 852: Ahab (Israel).
852 ‑ 852: Ahaziah (Israel).
851 ‑ 842: Jehu (Israel). Hazael.
846 ‑ 843: Jehoram (Judah).
843 ‑ 842: Ahaziah (Judah).
836 ‑ 798: Jehoash (Judah).
814 ‑ 800: Jehoahaz (Israel). Ben‑Hadad III.
800 ‑ 784: Jehoash (Israel). Amos.
798 ‑ 769: Amaziah (Judah).
784 ‑ 748: Jehoash (Israel). Hosea.
769 ‑ 733: Uzziah (Judah).
758 ‑ 743: Jotham (Judah) (regent).
748 ‑ 747: Zechariah (Israel). Rezin.
748 ‑ 747: Shallum (Israel).
758 ‑ 743: Ahaz (Judah) (regent).
747 ‑ 737: Menahem (Israel).
740 ‑ 700: Prophecies of Isaiah.
737 ‑ 735: Pekahiah (Israel).
735 ‑ 733: Pekah (Israel).
733 ‑ 727: Ahaz (Judah).
733 ‑ 724: Hoshea (Israel).
727 ‑ 698: Hezekiah (Judah).
722: Samaria captured by Shalmaneser V.
720: Sargon makes Samaria an Assyrian province. Mass deportation of Israelites.
701: Expedition of Sennacherib against Hezekiah.
698 ‑ 642: Manasseh (Judah).
663: Sack of Thebes.
641 ‑ 640: Amon (Judah).
639 ‑ 609: Josiah (Judah).
627 ‑ 585: Prophecies of Jeremiah.
612: Fall of Nineveh.
609: Jehoahaz (Judah). Battle of Megiddo.
608 ‑ 598: Jehoiakim (Judah).
605: Battle of Carchemish.
597: Jehoiachin (Judah). Expedition of Nebuchadnezzar against Judah, Jehoiachin deported to Babylonia.
595 ‑ 586: Zedekiah (Judah).
593 ‑ 571: Prophecies of Ezekiel.
586: Destruction of Jerusalem; mass deportation to Babylonia. Exile of Judeans in Babylonia.
585 ‑ ???: Murder of Gedaliah. 6th cent. Canonization of the Pentateuch (in Babylonian Exile).
539: Cyrus takes Babylonia.
538: First return under Sheshbazzar. Cyrus' edict.
525: Egypt conquered by Cambyses.
522: Zerubbabel governor.
520 ‑ 515: Temple rebuilt.
465 ‑ 424: Artaxerxes I.
460 ‑ 454: Rebellion of Inaros.
428 ‑ ???: Second return under Ezra.
445: Walls of Jerusalem reconstructed under Nehemiah; Ezra reads the Law.
423 ‑ 404: Darius II.
411: Destruction of the temple of the Jewish colony at Elephantine.
408: Bagohi governor.
404 ‑ 358: Artaxerxes II. Egypt regains freedom.
348: Artaxerxes III deports a number of Jews to Hyrcania. 4th cent. Canonization of the Prophets Section of the Bible.
343: Egypt reconquered by Persia.
333: Battle of Issus
332: Alexander the Great conquers Egypt and Palestine.
323 ‑ 285: Ptolemy I. Death of Alexander the Great.
312 ‑ 280: Seleucus I. Mid‑3rd cent. Pentateuch translated into Greek in Egypt (Septuagint).
301: Ptolemy I conquers Palestine.
285 ‑ 246: Ptolemy II, Philadelphus.
246 ‑ 221: Ptolemy III, Euergetes
223 ‑ 187: Antiochus III.
221 ‑ 203: Ptolemy IV, Philopator.
219 ‑ 217: Antiochus III conquers most of Palestine. Ptolemy IV defeats Antiochus III in the battle of Rafah and recovers Palestine.
203 ‑ 181: Ptolemy V, Epiphanes.
198: Battle of Panias (Banias): Palestine passes to the Silicates.
187 ‑ 175: Seleucus IV.
181 ‑ 146: Ptolemy VI, Philomelos.
175 ‑ 171: Jason high priest.
175 ‑ 164: Antiochus IV, Epiphanes. Aenaeus III deposed by Antiochus IV.
172: Jerusalem becomes a pholis (Entice).
171 ‑ 167: Magnolias high priest.
170: Book of Ben Sura written.
169: Antiochus IV plunders the Temple treasuries.
168: Antiochus IV invades Egypt, storms Jerusalem; gentiles settled on the Accra.
167: Antiochus IV outlaws the practice of Judaism; profanation of the Temple; the rebellion of the Hasmoneans begins.
166 ‑ 160: Judah Maccabee, leaders of the rebellion, victorious over several Syrian armies.
164 ‑ 163: Antiochus V. Judah Maccabee captures Jerusalem and reeducates the Temple.
162 ‑ 150: Alcimus high priest. Demetrius I.
161: Judah Maccabee defeats Nicanor and reconquers Jerusalem, treaty between Judah and Rome.
160: Judah Maccabee falls in battle against Bacchides, Jonathan assumes the leadership; guerilla warfare.
157: Treaty between Bacchides and Jonathan, withdrawal of Seleucid garrisons, Jonathan enters Jerusalem.
152 ‑ 145: Jonathan high priest. Alexander Balas.
145 ‑ 138: Demetrius II. Aenaeus IV builds temple in Leontopolis. Antiochus VI and Tryphon.
145 ‑ 116: Ptolemy VII, Physcon.
142: Jonathan treacherously murdered by Tryphon. Simeon assumes leadership; Demetrius II recognizes the independence of Judea; renewal of treaty with Rome.
141: Simeon captures the Accra.
140: Great Assembly in Jerusalem confirms Simeon as ethnarch, high priest, and commander in chief.
138 ‑ 129: Antiochus VII, Sidetes
134 ‑ 132: War with Antiochus Vii; Jerusalem besieged; treaty between John Hyrcanus and Antiochus VII.
134 ‑ 104: Simeon assassinated. John Hyrcanus. Latter second century First Book of Maccabees written. Treaty with Rome renewed.
129 ‑ 125: Demetrius II.
125 ‑ 96: Antiochus VIII.
116 ‑ 108: Ptolemy VIII, Lathyrus.
115 ‑ 95: Antiochus IX, Cyzicenus.
108 ‑ 88: Ptolemy IX, Alexander.
104 ‑ 103: Judah Aristobulus.
103 ‑ 76: Alexander Yannai
88 ‑ 80: Ptolemy VIII, Lathyrus.
76 ‑ 67: Salome Alexandria.
67 ‑ 63: Civil war between Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus.
63: Pharisees go to Pompey and asks help. Pompey decides in favor of Hyrcanus II. Temple Mount besieged and captured by Pompey.
63 ‑ 40: Hyrcanus II ethnarch and high priest. Judea loses its independence.
57 ‑ 55: Gabinus governor of Syria.
56 ‑ 55: Revolts of Alexander. Aristobulus and Aristobulus.
48: Hyrcanus II and Antipater help Caesar in Alexandria. Caesar confirms Jewish privileges.
44: Assassination of Caesar.
43: Second Triumvirate.
40: Parthian invasion.
40 ‑ 37: Antigonus II (Mattathias).
37 ‑ 4: Jerusalem captured by Herod. Herod Shemaiah and Avtalion.
31: Battle of Actium.
27 ‑ 14 A.D: Augustus. Temple rebuilt by Herod.
4 ‑ 6: Archelaus ethnarch.
4 ‑ 34: Herod Philip.
4 ‑ 39: Herod Antipas.
A Jewish Chronology From the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Year 1902
C.E. (A.D. The C.E. is used because of Jewish hatred of the Lord Jesus Christ!)
6‑41: Judea, Samaria, and Idumea formed into a Roman province (ludaea) under a praefectus beginning of 1st cent. Tiberius expels the Jews.
26‑36: Pontius Pilate praefectus.
30: Jesus crucified.
31: Jews allowed to return.
37‑41: Cahguta. Crisis caused by Caligula's insistence on being worshiped as a deity. Anti‑Jewish riots in Alexandria.
40: Legation of Jews of Egypt lead by Philip to Rome. Until 40 Philo writes in Alexandria.
41‑44: Agrippa I. Claudius issues edict of toleration.
54‑68: Nero. Accepted Jusaism.
66: Massacre of the Jews at Alexandria. Beginning of revolt against Rome.
67: Vespasian conquers Galilee the Zealots take over in Jerusalem.
70: Jerusalem besieged and conquered by Titus; the Temple destroyed. Destruction of Qumran community. Sanhedrin established at Jabneh by Johanan Birth of Zakkai.
72: Judea completely conquered; the 'Fiscus Judaicus' instituted by Vespasian.
73: Temple in Leotopolis closed. Fall of Masada.
79‑81: Titus. Josephus completes Jewish Wars.
93: Josephus completes Jewish Antiquities.
115: The Jews of babylonia, Palestine, Egypt, Cyprus, Cyrene, and Libya rise against Trajan.
116‑117: "War of Quietus"
118: The Jews of Palestine rise against Trajan and Hadrian; 'War of Lucius Quietus.'
132‑135: Bar Kokhba war. Fall of Bethar; Aelia Capitolina established; Akiva executed.
133: Rebellion of Bar Kokba against Hadrian; restoration of the Jewish state.
135: Fall of Bethar; end of Bar Kokba's rebellion;
135‑138: Persecutions of Hadrian.
138‑161: Antoninus Pius. 2nd cent. Canonization of the Ketuvim (Hagiographa).
140: Sanhedrin at Usha.
164: Revolution in Palestine against Antoninus Pius.
170: Sanhedrin at Bet She'arim.
200: Sanhedrin at Sepphoris.
210: Redaction of the Mishnah.
212: Jews (together with most of subject of the empire) become Roman citizens.
218‑222: Heliogabalus; Arrival of Rav.
222‑235: Alexander Severus.
235: Sanhedrin at Tiberias.
245: Dura‑Europos synagogue built.
253‑260: Valerian. Academy of Nehardea moves to Pumbedita.
286: Judah III., son of Judah II., patriarch, collects a tax from foreign communities.
306: Council of Elvira forbids Christians to eat with Jews or to intermarry with them.
306‑337: Constantine I.
313: Edict of Milan.
321: Jews in Cologne.
325: First Nicene Council separates the celebration of Easter from that of the Jewish Passover. Christian Church formulates its policy toward the Jews; the Jews must continue to exist for the sake of Christianity in seclusion and humiliation.
329: Constantius forbids, under penalty of death, marriage of a Jew with a Christian woman, and circumcision of slaves.
337‑361: Constantius II. Constantius II prohibits marriage between Jews and Christians and possession of Christian slaves by Jews.
351: Jews and Samaritans revolt against Gallus; destruction of Bet Sh'earim.
359: Permanent calendar committed to writing.
361: Restoration of the Temple at Jerusalem undertaken under Julian the Apostate.
362: Julian the Apostate abolishes the Jew tax.
363: Julian the Apostate allows Jews to start rebuilding the Temple.
400: Moses, The False Messiah of Crete.
415: Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria, Drives the Jews from Alexandria.
418: (March 10) Jews excluded from all public offices and dignities in the Roman empire.
425: Extinction of the patriarchate. Patriarchate abolished.
427: Yose b. Yose earliest liturgical poet known by name.
438: Theodosius II Novellae against the Jews and heretics.
455: Persecution of the Babylonian Jews under Yezdegerd III. Jews forbidden to keep the Sabbath.
465: The Council of Vannes (Gaul) prohibits the clergy from taking part in Jewish banquets.
470: Persecutions by the authorities; Huna b. Mar Zutra the exilarch and others Executed by the authorities.
471: Persecution of the Babylonian Jews under Firuz (Perozes); the exilarch Huna Maria and other suffer martyrdom.
476: End of Western Roman Empire.
481‑511: Clovis I king of the Franks.
495‑502: Revolt of Mar Zutra the exilarch.
499: Babylonian Talmud completed.
500: Abu‑Kariba, Kimyarite king, adopts Judaism, and converts his army and his people.
511: Mar‑Zutra II., prince of the Captivity (exilarch), establishes an independent Jewish state in Babylonia under the Persian king Kobad.
516: (May 14, 15) Uprising against Jews of Clermont; synagogue destroyed.
517: The Council of Epaon forbids Christians to take part in Jewish banquets.
518: Persecution of the Jews by Kobad, King of Persia.
520: Mar Zutra III head of Sanhedrin at Tiberias.
525: End of Jewish kingdom in southern Arabia. 6th‑7th cent. Yannai liturgical poet.
532: Justinian I, decrees that the testimony of Jews shall be valid only in Jewish cases.
537: Justinian Declares Jews incapable of holding any official dignity.
538: The Council of Orleans Forbids Jews to appear on the street at Eastertide.
553: Justinian Interferes in the conduct of Jewish Worship.
589: Reccared, Visigothic King of Spain, Completely isolates Jews from Christians. Beginning of the period of Geonim.
600: Eleazar Kallir liturgical poet.
612, 633, 638: Severe legal measures against the Jews in Spain.
612: Sisebut, Visigoth king, forces the Jews to accept baptism or to emigrate.
614‑617: Jewish rule established in Jerusalem under the Persians.
622: Muhammad's flight to Medina.
624: The Banu Kainuka's, a Jewish‑Arabic tribe, driven from Arabia by Mohammed.
624‑628: Jewish Tribes of Arabia Destroyed by Muhammad.
627: Emperor Heraclius Forbids Jews to enter Jerusalem, and in other ways harasses the Palestinian Jews.
628‑638: Dagobert I. Dagobert I Expels Jews from Frankish Kingdom.
629: Dagobert orders the Jews of the Frankish empire to accept baptism or to emigrate.
632: Death of Muhammad. Heraclius decrees forced baptism.
633: The Council of Toledo under Sisenand, Visigothic king, and Isidore of Seville, forces converts to Judaism back to Christianity.
638: Chintila enacts that only professing Catholics shall remain in Visigothic Spain; Jews emigrate. Jerusalem conquered by the Arabs.
640: Omar, the second calif, Banishes all Jews from Arabia; the 'Pact of Omar' imposes restrictions upon Jews in the whole Mohammedan World.
640‑642: Egypt conquered by the Arabs.
641: Bulan, khan (chaghan) of the Chazars, becomes a Jew.
658: Beginning of the Gaonate; Mar‑Issac, head of the Sura Academy, takes the title 'Gaon.'
694: (Nov.) All Jews in Spain and Gallic Provence declared slaves; children under seven forcibly baptized.
694‑711: Jewish Religion outlawed in Spain.
711: Spain conquered by the Arabs.
720: Omar II., Ommiad Calif of Damascus, reenacts the 'Pact of Omar.'
721: Appearance of the False Messiah Serenus in Syria causes many Spanish Jews to emigrate to Palestine.
740: Conversion of the Khazars.
760: Halakhot Pesukot (attributed to Yehudai b. Nahman).
761: The Karaite schism led by Anan ben David.
762‑767: Anan b. David lays the foundation of Karaism.
797: Isaac sent by Charlemagne on an embassy to Harun al‑Rashid.
814: "Capitula de Judefs" of Charlemagne and Ludwig decide that Jews should not have Church Utensils in Pledge.
825: Simeon Kayyara composes Halakhot Gedolot.
827: Eberard, "Magister Judaeorum" under Louis I. the Pious, king of the Franks, protects the Jews against Agobard, Bishop of Lyons.
845: The Council of Meaux, under Amolo, bishop of Lyons, enacts anti‑Jewish decrees, renewing those of Constantine & Theodosius II.
850: Al‑Mutawakkil orders the "Peoples of the Book" to wear yellow kerchiefs.
860: Amram b. Sheshna compiles order of prayers.
875: Nahshon b. Zadok researches on the Jewish calendar.
878: Ibrahim ibn Ahmad Orders Jews of Sicily to Wear A Badge.
953: Josippon written.
982: (July 13) Kalonymus saves life of Otto II, after battle of Cotrone.
987: Iggeret Rav Sheira Gaon. Rise of the Capetian dynasty.
998: Beginning of 11th cent. end of Khazar Kingdom.
1007: Persecution at Rouen by Robert The Devil.
1008: Persecutions of Al-Hakim.
1012: (Nov.) Jews Driven from Mayence by Emperor Henry II. Expulsion of Jews from Mainz.
1013: (Apr. 19) Massacre at Cordova by soldiers of Sulaiman ibn al‑Hakim.
1021: Al‑Hakim renews the "Pact of Omar" in Egypt.
1066: Banishment of the Jews from Granada. Jews settle in England. England conquered by William of Normandy.
1078: Pope Gregory VII. (Hildebrand) promulgates canonical law against Jews holding office in Christendom. Jerusalem conquered by the Seljuks.
1079: Jews Repulsed from Ireland.
1080: Bahya ibn Paquda writes Hovot ha‑Levavot.
1085: Pope Gregory VII. protests against Jews being placed by the King of Castile in authority over Christians.
1090: "Fuero" (decree) of Alfonson VI, appoints duel as means of settling litigation between Christian and Jew. (Feb. 19) Henry IV, grants to Judah ben Kalonymus and other Jews of Speyer protection to life and property.
1096‑99: First Crusade; Jews Massacred along the Rhine and elsewhere.
1099: The Jews of Jerusalem burned in a Synagogue by the Crusaders under Godfrey of Bouillon.
1101: The Arukh of Nathan b. Jehiel of Rome completed.
1103: (Jan. 6) The "Constitutio Pacis" of the imperial court at Mayence assures the Jews of the 'emperor's peace.
1108: Massacre at Toledo.
1117: Persecution at Rome; Appearance of a False Messiah at Cordova.
1120: Calixtus II, issues bull "Sicut Judaeis," the charter of the Roman Jews.
1124: Ladislaus I, of Bohemia decrees that no Christian shall serve Jews.
1144: Alleged Martyrdom of St. William of Norwich (first case of blood accusation; (Ritual Murder)).
1146: Second Crusade; Jews Massacred throughout France and Germany. Beginning of the Almohad Persecution in Northern Africa and Southern Spain; Jews flee, or pretend to accept Islam.
1150: Statutes of Aries appoint a special Jewish oath.
1156: Jews of Persia persecuted on account of Pseudo-Messiah, David Alroy.
1159‑73: Travels of Benjamin of Tudela.
1161: Abraham ibn Daud completes Sefer ha‑Kabbalah.
1168: Latins and Greeks, Jews and Saracens, granted right of being judged by their own laws in Sicily. Maimonides completes commentary on the Mishnah.
1171: Thirty-one Jews and Jewesses of Blots burned on the charge of having used Human Blood in the Passover. Destruction of the Blois community.
1172: Persecution of the Jews of Yemen. Messianic Excitement.
1174: Sultan Nureddin Mahmud removes all Jews of Syria and Egypt from public offices.
1178: Riot at Toledo, at which Fermosa, The Jewish Mistress of Alfonso VIII., Is Killed.
1179: The third Lateran Council passes decrees protecting the religious liberty of the Jews. (Aug.) Jews of Boppard and Neighborhood Slain because body of Christian woman is found on banks of Rhine. Jews Expelled from Bohemia.
1180: First Maimonidean controversy. Maimonides completes Mishneh Torah.
1182: (April) Philip Augustus of France banishes the Jews from his hereditary provinces and takes one‑third of their debts.
1187: Jerusalem captured by Saladin.
1189: Attack on the Jews of London at coronation of Richard I. Third Crusade.
1190: (May 17) Self‑immolation of 150 Jews at York to avoid baptism. Anti‑Jewish riots; Massacre at York. Maimonides completes Guide of the Perplexed.
1194: "Ordinances of the Jewry" passed in England for registering Jewish debts, thus preparing the way for the exchequer of Jews. Archae established.
1195‑96: Anti‑Jewish excesses at Speyer and Boppard.
1198: Jews permitted to return to France by Philip Augustus on payment of 15,000 livres in silver.
1198‑1216: Innocent III.
1200: Bishop Conrad of Mayence issues a formula for an oath in German for Jews of Erfurt.
1205: (July 15) Innocent III. writes to Archbishop of Sens and Bishop of Paris laying down the principle that Jews are bound to perpetual subjection because of the Crucifixion.
1209: Council of Avignon issues restrictive measures against the Jews. (July 22) French Jews attacked and plundered; 200 murdered.
1210: (Nov. 1) The Jews of England Imprisoned by King John. Extortions of John Lackland.
1210‑11: Many French and English rabbis emigrate to Palestine. Settlement of 300 French and English rabbis.
1212: The Jews of Toledo Killed by Crusaders under the Cistercian monk Arnold; first persecution of Jews in Castile.
1215: Magna Carta of England limits rights of the crown in Jewish debts to the principal. Fourth Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III. among many anti‑Jewish measures, decrees the Jew badge.
1221: Jews Killed at Erfurt.
1222: Golden Bull of Hungary refuses Jews the right to hold public office. Council of Oxford imposes restrictions on the English Jews.
1223: (Nov. 8) Rabbinical Synod of Mayence regulates the payment of the Jewish taxes.
1227: Council of Narbonne reenacts the anti‑Jewish decrees of the fourth Lateran Council.
1230: (Dec.) "Statutum de Judeis" in France by Louis IX prohibits Jews from making contracts or leaving their lords' lands.
1230‑32: Second Maimonidean controversy.
1234: (Dec. 10) Jews of Fulda find a murdered Christian; 261 Jews killed in Consequence.
1235: Blood Libel ((Ritual Murder)) at Fulda.
1236: Frederick II. takes Jews of Sicily under his protection as being his 'servi camerae' (first use of this term). Persecutions in West France. Frederick II Hohenstaufen introduces the concept of servi camerae. 12th‑13th cent. Hasidei Ashkenazi; Sefer Hasidim compiled. 12th‑14th cent. Tosafot (France and Germany).
1240: (June 25) Disputation before Louis IX. of France between Nichoias Donin and the Jews represented by Jehiel of Paris, Moses of Coucy, Talmudist and itinerant preachers and two others. Disputation of Paris.
1241: (May 24) Riot at Frankfort on account of a Jewish convert, Jewish Parliament summoned to Worcester, England. Tatars reach the frontiers of Silesia.
1242: Burning of Talmud at Paris.
1244: Archduke Frederick II. the Valiant, of Austria, grants privileges to the Jews ("Privilegium Fredericianum"). Twenty‑four wagon‑loads of Talmuds and other manuscripts (1200) burned at Paris. Jerusalem captured by the Khwarizms.
1246: James I. of Aragon, in the Ordenamiento of Huesa declares Jews to be "in commanda regis," Council of Bèziers forbids Jews to practice medicine.
1249: Innocent IV issues bull against Blood Libel.
1254: (Dec.) Louis IX. Expels Jews from France.
1255: (July 31) St. Hugh of Lincoln disappears, and The Jews are accused of Murdering him for Ritual purposes. Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) at Lincoln.
1259: Jahudan de Cavalleria becomes "bayle‑general" and treasurer of Aragon. Provincial council of Fritziar for province of Mayence repeats several of the canonical restrictions, including the badge (first time in Germany).
1261: Expulsion from Brabant, under will of Henry III. of all Jews except those of living by trade.
1263‑64: Disputation at Barcelona between Pablo Christiani and Nahmanides. Jews of London Sacked.
1264: Massacres at London, Canterbury, Winchester, and Cambridge by the barons in revolt against Henry VII. Charter of Boleslav V the Pious.
1265: (May 2) Persecution at Zunzig; 72 persons burned in synagogue.
1267: (May 12) Synod of Vienna, under Cardinal Guida, orders Jews to wear pointed hats.
1267‑70: Nahmanides in Palestine.
1270: (June 23) Persecution at Weissenburg. Death of Nahmanides.
1273: (Nov. 4) Jews of Lerida obtain permission to substitute oath by the Ten Commandments for the oath "more Judaici."
1274: (July 7) Gregory X. issues bull against Blood Accusation.
1275: Jews Expelled from Marlborough, Glouchester, Worcester, and Cambridge, at request of Queen‑mother.
1280: Alfonso X. orders all Jews of Leon and Chastle to be imprisoned till they pay 12,000 maravedis, and 12,000 for every day of delay in payment. English Jews forced to attend sermons of Dominicans.
1285: Blood Accusation at Munich. Destruction of the Munich Community.
1286: (June 28) Meir ben Baruch of Rothenburg (1220‑93), chief rabbi of Germany, imprisoned when about to emigrate. Sancho of Castile in Cortes of Palencia orders Jews to submit their cases to the ordinary alcaldes (abolition of legislative autonomy). (Nov. 30) Bull of Honorius IV. to archbishops of York and Canterbury against Talmud. Zohar in final form completed by Moses b. Shem Tov de Leon.
1287: (May 2) All Jews in England thrown into prison.
1288: Jews Burned at Troyes.
1290: (Nov. 1) Jews Banished from England.
1291: Acre captured by the Muslims; end of Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
1294: (Aug. 7) Bolko I. of Silesia grants Jews "Privilegium Fredericianum."
1295: (June 23) Boniface VIII. enters Rome and spurns the Torah presented to him by Jewish deputation.
1297: "Judenordnung" for Brandenburg.
1298: Persecution of the Jews in Germany instigated by Rindfleisch; Mordecai ben Hillel a martyr.
1298‑99: Rindfleisch persecutions.
1300‑06: Third Maimonidean controversy.
1301: Jews Plundered and Slain at Magdeburg.
1303: Ordinance of Philip the Fair enacts that all trials between Christians and Jews be decided by regular courts.
1306: First Expulsion of Jews from France under Philip the Fair.
1309‑78: "Avignonese captivity" of the popes.
1310: Asher b. Jehiel compiles Talmudic code.
1315: (July 28) Jews recalled to France by Louis X. for twelve years.
1320: The Pastoureaux persecutions in France ("gezerat ha‑ro'im").
1321: The leper persecution in France ("gezera£mezora'im"). (June 24) Second Expulsion of the Jews from France. Five thousand slain in Dauphine on Charge of Well-Poisoning.
1322: (Pentecost) Talmuds burned in Rome. Expulsion from the Kingdom of France.
1328: Riots in Navarre.
1329: Levi b. Gershom completes Sefer Milhamot Adonai.
1330: Alleged desecration of host at GÜatrow.
1334: (Oct. 9) Casimir III. the Great, of Poland, grants Jews "Privilegium Fredericianum."; extends the charter of 1264.
1337: (May) Armleder Massacres at Ensisheim, MÜhlhausen, Rufach, etc. Beginning of the Hundred Years' War. Before 1340, Jacob b. Asher completes Arba'ah Turim.
1342: Louis IX introduces poll tax (Opferpfenning).
1346: Blood Accusation at Munich.
1348: (Feb. 28) The Ordenamiento of Alcaza orders all usury to cease. (July 16) Karl IV. forbids Jews being summoned before the Vehmgericht. Black Death Massacres in Spain and France. Protective bulls of Clement VI.
1348‑49: Persecution of the Jews in Central Europe on Account of the Black Death. Pope Clement VI. issues two bulls protecting them. Immigration from Germany.
1350: Alfonso IV. of Portugal enforces the badge (first in the Peninsula).
1351: Cortes of Valladolid demands the abolition of the judicial autonomy of Spanish‑Jewish communities. Jews burned at Königsberg in Neumark.
1353: Jews invited back to Worms on account of their usefulness.
1354: Council of the communities of Aragon.
1356: Charles IV grants the Electors the privilege of taxing the Jews.
1359: Jews recalled to France.
1360: Samuel Abulafia dies under torture on the charge of peculation. Manessier de Vesoul obtains from King John a decree permitting Jews to dwell in France.
1364 and 1367: Casimir III extends the charter.
1365: Jews Expelled by Louis The Great from Hungary; many go to Wallachia.
1370: All Jews imprisoned and robbed in Austria.
1380: (Nov. 15) Riot at Paris; Many Jews plundered, several killed, most fled.
1381: A synod at Mayence regulates the rabbinical marriage laws.
1386: Beginning of the union between Poland and Lithuania.
1387: Jews Expelled from Basel.
1388: Witold of Lithuania grants charter to Jews of Brest‑Litovsk.
1389: (Apr. 18) The charge of insult to a priest carrying the sacrament leads to the massacre of the Jews in Prague.
1391: (June 6) Spanish horrors begin; Ferdinand Martinez incites the mob against the Jews of Seville; anti‑Jewish riots spread throughout Castile and Aragon. Massacres and conversion.
1394: (Nov. 3) Third and last Expulsion of the Jews from France, under Charles VI.
1399: Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) in Poznan.
1400: Persecution of the Jews of Prague at the instigation of the convert Pessach; Lipmann of MÜhihausen among the sufferers.
1403: (Oct. 25) Juan II. of Castile withdraws civil jurisdiction from Jews.
1405: Jews Expelled from Speyer.
1407: (Oct. 26) Jews attacked at Cracow.
1410: (Sept.) Meïr Alguades slain on charge of host‑desecration.
1411: Vincent Ferrer raises the populace against the Jews and passes oppressive legislation. Second general massacre of Jews in all the Spanish provinces.
1413: (Jan. 7) Religious disputation at Tortosa arranged by Pope Benedict XIII. between Geronimo de Santa F. and Vidal ben Benveniste ibn Labi; Joseph Albo.
1415: (May 11) Bull of Benedict XIII. against the Talmud and any Jewish book attacking Christianity. Burning of John Huss.
1419: Martin V against forced conversion.
1419‑36: Hussite Wars.
1420: Charges of host‑desecration lead to the Putting to Death of a number of Jews and to the Expulsion of the Remainder from Lower and Upper Austria. Expulsion from Lyons.
1421: Wiener Gesera; Expulsion from Austria.
1423: Jews Expelled from Cologne.
1424: Jews Expelled from Zurich.
1425: Joseph Albo completes Sefer ha‑Ikkarim.
1427: Papal edict prohibits transportation of Jews to Palestine in ships of Venice and Ancona.
1431: Burning of Joan of Arc.
1431‑49: Council of Basle.
1432: Rabbinical synod at Valladolid. Host‑tragedy at Segovia, a synod at Avila, under Abraham Benveniste Senior, provides for an educational system for Jewish Spain.
1434: The Council of Basel renews old and devises new canonical restrictions against Jews. Annihilation of the Jews of Majorea.
1435: Jews Expelled from Speyer. Massacre and conversion of The Jews of Majorca.
1438: Jews Expelled from Mayence.
1440: Jews Expelled from Augsburg.
1447: Casimir IV. of Poland grants special privileges to Jews.
1450: Ludwig X. of Bavaria throws all the Jews in forty towns into prison and confiscates their property.
1451: Nichoias de Cusa enforces the wearing of the Jew badge in Germany.
1452‑53: John of Capistrano Incites Persecutions and Expulsions.
1453: Constantinople captured by the Turks; end of the Hundred Years' War. Onward, Jews favored as a valuable trading and artisan element in the Ottoman Empire.
1454: (May 2) Forty‑one Jews burned at Breslau, and Jews Expelled from BrüN and Olmü, through Capistrano. Privileges revoked; riots in Cracow.
1458: Jews Expelled from Erfurt.
1460: (March 5) The states of Austria demand that no Jew be permitted to dwell there. Jews Expelled from Savoy.
1464: (Apr. 12) Jews plundered and murdered by soldiers in Cracow.
1467: Eighteen Jews Burned at Nuremberg.
1468: Jews Expelled from Neisse by the gilds. Blood Accusation brought against Jews of Sepulveda.
1469: Jews plundered and slain at Posen.
1470: Jews Expelled from Bishopric of Mayence.
1473: Marranos of Valladolid and Cordoba Massacred. Expulsion from Mains.
1474: Marranos of Segovia Massacred.
1475: Bernardinus of Feltre preaches against the Jews in Italy. The Jews charged with the murder of Simon of Trent for ritual purposes. Riots in padua and elsewhere in Italy and Sicily. Jews expelled from several towns. Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) of Trent. Beginning of Hebrew printing (Rashi printed in Reggio di Calabria).
1476: Blood Accusation in Regensburg through the convert Wolfram.
1477: Jews plundered at Colmar and burned at Passau; The rest expelled through Bishop.
1478: Jews Expelled from Diocese of Bamberg on account of Simon of Trent affair.
1479: Castile and Aragon united.
1480: Inquisition established in Spain.
1481: The inquisition against the Maranos established in Seville and at other places in Castile.
1482: Inquisition established in Aragon; The Jew Thomas de Torquemada, chief inquisitor.
1483: Torquemada appointed inquisitor general. Expulsion from Warsaw.
1484: Jews Expelled from Eries.
1486: (Feb. 12) Auto de f. at Toledo at which 740 were absolved. (Dec. 10) Another auto at same place; 900 Jews "reconciled."
1488: (Jan. 25) First auto at Barcelona. (May 24 and July 30) Autos da f. at Toledo: at former, 21 Jews burned, 400 punished; and latter, 76 burned.
1490: (Dec.) Jews Expelled from Geneva.
1490‑91: La Guardia Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder).
1492: (Aug. 2) Expulsion of the Jews from Spain. Expulsion from Castile and Aragon. Conquest of Granada; discovery of America. Onward, the sultans open the gates of the Ottoman Empire for the refugees from Spain.
1492‑93: Expulsion from Sicily.
1494: Jews plundered in Naples. Blood accusation at Tyrnau.
1495: Jews Expelled from Florence, but readmitted after a few months on account of their utility; Jews Expelled from Lithuania.
1496: Expulsion of Jews from Styria. Manoel of Portugal orders the Jews to accept baptism of leave the country.
1497: Onward, refugees from Portugal welcomed by the sultans.
1498: The exiles settled in Navarre banished. Jews Expelled from Nuremberg and Ulm.
1501: (July) Fifty-four Jews burned at Seville.
1502: Appearance of the Pseudo-Messiah Asher Lämmlein. Dialcghi di Amore by Judah Abrabanel.
1503: Pfefferkorn denounces Reuchlin. (March 22) Jews permitted to return to Lithuania. (Dec. 27) Judaizing followers of Zechariah of Kiev burned at Moscow.
1504: Sefer ha‑Yuhasin by Abraham Zacuto.
1505: Jews Expelled from Orange. All slain at Budweis on a child‑murder accusation.
1506: Massacre of Marranos in Lisgon.
1508: Burning of Jewish books at Frankfort. Thirty-eight Jews burned in Berlin for host‑desecration and child‑murder (Grätz, ix. 94).
1510: Burning of Jewish books at Frankfort. Thirty-eight Jews burned in Berlin for host‑desecration and Child‑Murder (Grätz, ix.94). Expulsion from Brandenburg.
1514: Abraham Judaeus Bohemus appointed tax collector of the Jews of Poland.
1515‑16: Jacob ibn Habib's Ein Ya'akov published.
1516: (March) Venice sets apart a special quarter for a ghetto (first use of the term). Palestine conquered by the Turks.
1517: Martin Luther publishes his 95 theses.
1519: Expulsion from Regensburg.
1520‑23: First complete editions of the Talmuds printed.
1524: The Jews of Cairo threatened with destruction by Ahmad Shaitan, viceroy of Egypt. Jews return to Genoa.
1524‑25: Mikra Gedolot edition of the Bible.
1526: Battle of Mohacs; Turks rout Hungarians.
1529: (May 21) Thirty Jews Burned at Pösing on Blood Accusation. Solomon Molko (Diogo Pires, 1501‑32 Begins His Messianic Agitation).
1530: (Aug. 12) Josel of Rosheim obtains extension of Alsatian privileges from Charles V.
1531: Clement VII. issues a bull establishing the Portuguese Inquisition for Maranos.
1532: Solomon Molcho Burned at Mantua.
1534‑36: Sigismund I absolves Jews from wearing the badge. Calvin publishes Institution Chretienne.
1538: Jacob Berab renews semikhah in Safed.
1541: Jews Expelled from Naples. Expulsion from Prague and crown cities.
1542: Jews Expelled from Bohemia because of fires in Prague and other towns. Pseudo‑Messiah (David Reuveni?) burned at Evora.
1543: Luther publishes his attack on the Jews.
1545‑63: Council of Trent.
1548: (July 10) Eighteen hundred Maranos released from the prisons of the Inquisition in Portugal.
1549: Obadiah of Bertinoro's commentary on the Mishnah published.
1550: (April 2) Jews Banished from Genoa.
1551: Jews Expelled from Bavaria and Württenberg. Community leaders given wide juridical and administrative powers.
1554: (June 21) Rabbinical synod at Ferrars. Censorship of He cre books introduced. Solomon ibn Verga's Shevet Yehudah published.
1555: Paul IV. issues the bull "Cum Nimis Absurdum." that Jews be confined to ghettos. Jews Expelled from the Palatinate. Peace of Augsburg. Joseph Caro's Beit Yosef published.
1556: Twenty-four Jews of Ancona Hanged and Burned by order of Paul IV. Burning of Marranos in Ancona.
1558‑60: The Zohar printed.
1564: Joseph Caro's Shulhan Arukh published.
1566: Joseph Nasi created duke of Naxos.
1567: Don Joseph Nassi appointed ruler of Naxos and eleven other islands of the Grecian archipelago. (June 15) Jews Expelled from Genoese Territory.
1568: Isaac Luria Levi (1534‑72), cabalist, Pretends to be the Messiah, son of Joseph.
1569: (Feb. 26) Bull of Pius V. "Hebraeorum Gens." Expels Jews from Papal States except Rome, Bologna, and Ancona.
1569‑72: Isaac Luria in Safed. Moses Isserles' Mappah published.
1570: Solomon Ashkenaze sent as an envoy to Venice by Sultan Selim II.
1572: Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.
1573: (Jan. 28) The Jew Lippold executed at Berlin; All Jews Expelled from Brandenburg.
1576: Stephen Bathori allows the Jews of Poland to carry on trade without restrictions. Stephen Bathory issues decrees against Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder).
1580: First extant takkanah of the Council of Four Lands.
1581: The Netherlands proclaim independence from Spain.
1582: Jews Expelled from Silesia.
1584: Gregory XIII orders compulsory sermons to Jews.
1586: The Jews of Poland establish the Council of Four Lands; Mordecal Jafe probably its first president.
1588: Destruction of the Spanish Armada.
1590: Marranos settle in Amsterdam.
1592: (Aug. 17) Papal edict forbids Jews to admit Christians into synagogues, etc. David Gans publishes Zemah David.
1593: Clement VIII. Expels the Jews from all the Papal States except Rome and Ancona. The first Marrano settlement in Holland made at Amsterdam under Jacob Tirado.
1596: Persecution of The Persian Jews by Shah Abbas the Great.
1597: Shalshelet ha‑Kabbalah by Gedaliah b. Joseph ibn Yahia published. Expulsion from Milan.
1598: Bet Jacob synagogue consecrated at Amsterdam. Edict of Nantes.
1603: Takkanot of the Synod at Frankfort.
1612: Portuguese Jews granted right of residence in Hamburg.
1612‑21: Hiddushei Halakhot of Samuel Edels published.
1613: First Romanov Czar.
1614: (Sept. 2) Vincent Fettmilch's attack upon the Jews of Frankfort. Fettmitch's attack upon the Jews of Frankfort.
1615: Jews of Worms Banished.
1616: Jews return to Frankfort and Worms.
1617: "Neue Stättigkeit" for Frankfort makes right of domicil for Jews perpetual. Yom Tov Lipmann Heller completes Tosefot Yom Tov.
1618: Beginning of Thirty Years' War.
1620: Mayflower arrives at Plymouth Rock; Battle of the White Mountain.
1623: Separate council for Lithuania established (Poland‑Lithuania).
1624: Ghetto established at Ferrara. Excommunication of Uriel da Costa.
1629: (June 26) Lippman Heller forced to leave his post as rabbi in Prague.
1632: (April 20) Proselyte Nicolas Antoine burned at Geneva. (July 4) Auto da f. at Madrid.
1639‑40: Dutch West India Company grants Jews of Guiana full religious liberty.
1642: Six hundred Jews of Amsterdam with Isaac Aboab as hakam settle at Pernambuco.
1646: The Jews in Brazil side with the Dutch in their war with the Portuguese.
1648: The beginning of the Cossack persecutions of the Jews in Poland under Chmielnicki. Treaty of Westphalia.
1648‑49: Chmielnicki Massacres (Poland‑Lithuania).
1649‑60: The Commonwealth in England. Expulsion from Hamburg.
1650‑52: Manasseh Ben Israel publishes Hope of Israel. Two leagues along the coast of Curacao granted to David Nassi for a Jewish colony.
1654: (July 8) Twenty‑four Jews land at New Amsterdam from Brazil. Portuguese recapture Brazil. Jews arrive in New Amsterdam (New York) and found congregation; refugees from Brazil found communities in West Indies.
1655: (Oct.) Menasseh ben Israel goes to London to obtain from Cromwell the readmission of Jews into England.
1655‑56: Massacres during Wars of Poland against Sweden and Russia (Poland‑Lithuania).
1656: Readmission of Jews to England. Baruch Spinoza excommunicated.
1657: (Feb. 4) Resettlement Day; Oliver Cromwell grants Carvajal right of residence for Jews in England.
1658: Congregation founded at Newport (America).
1659: (Feb. 26) Jews Expelled from all the Papal States except Rome and Ancona.
1660: Jews Expelled from Kiev by Alexis.
1664: Riot in Lemberg (Lvov) (Poland‑Lithuania).
1665: Shabbethai Zebi (1626‑1676) publicly accepted as the Messiah at Smyrna; fervor spreads throughout the Jewish world. (Ottoman Empire).
1666: Great Fire of London. Shabbetai converts to Islam. (Ottoman Empire).
1667: (Feb. 14) Jews run races at the Roman carnival for the last time.
1670: Jews Banished from Vienna and Lower Austria by Emperor Leopold I. Synod of Lithuanian rabbis and deputies settle spheres of jurisdiction in relation to central kahals. Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) in Mets.
1671: Frederick William, the Great Elector, grants a privilege for twenty years to fifty families driven from Austria. Jews permitted to settle in the Mark of Brandenburg.
1677: Death of Spinoza in The Netherlands.
1678: Appearance of the pseudo‑Messiah Mordecai Moshiah of Eisenstadt.
1680: (June 30) Auto da f. at Madrid. Riots in Brest‑Litovsk (Poland‑Lithuania).
1682: (May 10) Auto da f. at Lisbon. Riots in Cracow (Poland‑Lithuania).
1683: Siege of Vienna by Turks.
1685: Jews given religious freedom in England.
1686: Jews the victims of the Imperialist soldierly at the recapture of Buda from Turks.
1687: Jews of Poznan Attacked (Poland‑Lithuania).
1689‑1725: Peter the Great Czar of Russia.
1690: Ninety Jews from Curaco settle at Newport. R.I.
1695: Jews forbidden to enter Sweden by Charles IX. Jews settle in Charleston, S.C.
1700: The house of Oppenheimer in Vienna attacked by a mob. Eisenmenger attempts to publish his "entdecktes Judenthum." Judah Hasid and his group arrive in Jerusalem in Palestine.
1701: Bevis Marks Synagogue built in England.
1703: Jonas Aaron settles in Philadelphia. Death of Samuel Oppenheimer in Austria.
1710: The "Judenordnung" of Hamburg determines the social condition of the Jews of that city.
1711: Eisenmenger's Endecktes Judenthum published.
1712: First public synagogue in Berlin. Jews of Sandomierz expelled after Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) (Poland‑Lithuania).
1716: (July 24‑25) Serious uprising against the Jews at storming of Posen.
1723: Residence of Portuguese Jews legalized by a letter patent in France. General Council of Jews of Piedmont in Italy.
1726: Familiants Laws of Austria.
1727: (April 26) Jews Expelled from Russia and the Ukraine by Catharine. (Nov. 15) Act passed by General Assembly of New York permitting Jews to omit "on the faith of a Christian" from oath of abjuration.
1730: First public synagogue in New York (America).
1732: (Sept. 2) 'Editto sopra gil Ebrei' of Clement III. renews all restrictions against Jews of Rome.
1733: (July) Forty Jews from Lisbon arrive at Savannah, Ga. (America)
1734‑36: Attacks by the Haidamacks (Poland‑Lithuania).
1738: (Feb. 4) Joseph Süss Oppenheimer executed at Vienna Germany.
1740: (Feb. 3) Charles the Burgon, King of Naples and of the two Sicilies, invites the Jews back for fifty years. (July 11) Jews Expelled from Little Russia by Czarina Anne. Act passed by English Parliament naturalizing Jews settled in the American colonies.
1742: (Dec. 2) Jews Expelled from Great Russia by Czarina Elizabeth. Hayyim Attar and his group arrive in Jerusalem in Palestine. Congregation founded at Philadelphia (America).
1743: Moses Hayyim Luzzatto publishes La‑Yesharim Tehillah.
1744: (Dec. 18) Expulsion of Jews from Bohemia and Moravia.
1747: Bull of Benedict XIV. decides that a Jewish child baptized even against canonical law, must be brought up under Christian influences.
1748: Jews permitted to remain in Bohemia on payment of a "Judensteuer" of 216,000 florins. Prague Jews allowed to return.
1749: Congregation founded at Charleston (America).
1750: (April 17) Frederick the Great issues a "generaiprivilegium" for Prussian Jews. Severe legislation against the Jews in Prussia.
1751: Beginning of Eybeschuetz emden controversy.
1753: Act passed by England Parliament permitting Jews to be naturalized. "No Jews, no wooden shoes" riots in England.
1754: Act granting naturalization to English Jews repealed.
1755: First work of Moses Mendelssohn published.
1756: Blood Accusation in Jampol, Poland.
1756‑63: Seven Years' War.
1757: Jacob Frank becomes leaders of the Shabbethaians. Bishop of Kamenitz‑Podolsk orders Talmuds to be burned. Disputation with the Frankists at Kamenets‑Podolski (Poland‑Lithuania).
1759: Disputation with the Frankists at Lemberg (Lvov). (Poland‑Lithuania).
1760: Board of Deputies of British Jews established in England. Death of Israel b. Eliezer Ba'al Shem Tov, formation of Hassid sect.
1761: Persecution of Jews in Yemen. Cardinal Ganganelli's memorandum against the Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) in Italy.
1762: Isaac de Pinto's Apologie pour la Nation Juive in answer to Voltaire's defamation of Judaism.
1764: Maria Theresa's Judenordnung (Austria‑Hungary). Council of Four Lands abrogated.
1767: (June 20) Cossacks slay thousands of Jews at Homel.
1768: Haidamack massacres (Poland‑Lithuania).
1769: Mendelssohn‑Lavater controversy in Germany.
1772: Jews settle in Stockholm, Kariskrona, and Gothenburg, by favor of Gustavus III. First partition of Poland. First herem on the Hasidim; Jews of eastern Poland under Russian rule (Russia).
1776: (Oct. 17) Senatorial decree of Russia grants freedom of settlement and other rights to baptized Jews. American Declaration of Independence.
1777: Menahem Mendel of Vitebsk and his group of Hasidim settle in Galilee in Palestine.
1778: Deaths of Rousseau and Voltaire.
1780: Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye's Toledot Ya'akov Yosef published.
1780‑83: Publication of Mendelssohn's Biur.
1781: Joseph II. of Austria abolishes the Jewish poll‑tax, and grants civil liberties to the Jews. C.W. von Gohm's Ueber die buergerliche Verbesscrung der Juden Christian plea for Jewish emancipation. Second herem on the Hasidim (Poland‑Lithuania).
1782: Joseph II. issues his Toleration Edict. Joseph II's Toleranzpatent; Naphtali Herz Wessely's Divrei Shalom ve‑Emert.
1783: Jews eligible for municipal councils in Russia. Mendelssohn publishes Jerusalem; Ha‑Me'assef founded.
1784: Body tax abolished in France.
1786: Death of Moses Mendelssohn in Germany.
1787: Frederick William II. removes the "Leibzoll" in Prussia.
1789: Beginning of the French Revolution. Sur la Regeneration Physique, Morale et Politique des Juifs by Abbe Gregoire in France. U.S. Constitution; George Washington first president of U.S.
1790: The French National Assembly grants citizenship to the Sephardic Jews of Bordeaux in France. New constitution for Jews of Silesia; a few receive general privileges, etc.
1791: The French National Assembly grants full civil rights to the Jews of France. Pale of Settlement established in Russia.
1792: "Judenamt" opened in Vienna.
1793: Second partition of Poland. Attack on the ghetto of Rome in Italy.
1793‑97: First Coalition against France.
1794: Berek Joselewicz colonel under Kosciuszko.
1795: Third partition of Poland.
1796: Jews of Holland declared by the National Assembly to be full citizens of the Batavian Republic.
1797: (Aug. 1) Two Jews, Bromet and De Lemon, elected members of the second National Assembly of Holland. Peace of Campo Formio. Tanya (likkutei Amarim) of Shneur Zalman of Lyady published.
1797‑99: Temporary emancipation brought by French revolutionary army in Italy.
1799: Napoleon becomes First Consul. Napoleon's campaign in Palestine.
1801: "Leibzoll" removed in Nassau. Peace of Luneville.
1803: Israel Jacobson and Wolff Breidenbach agitate the ablution of the poll‑tax for Jews in Germany. Louisiana Purchase (America).
1804: (Dec. 9) "Enactment concerning the Jews" passed by Alexander I. of Russia. Napoleon crowned emperor.
1805: Battles of Traflgar and Austerlitz.
1806: End of Holy Roman Empire.
1806‑07: Assembly of Jewish Notables in France.
1807: The Great Sanhedrin convened by Napoleon; Jeseph David Sinzheim president. Treaty of Tilsit. French Sanhedrin in France.
1808: (Jan. 27) Jerome Napoleon issues decree giving full civil rights to Jews of Westphalia. (Dec. 11) Napoleon at Madrid issues decree dividing the French empire into Jewish consistories. Emancipation in Westphalia consistory in Kassel in Germany.
1808‑10: Disciples of Elijah Gaon settle in Palestine.
1809: Law of Baden forms Jews into special religious community will all privileges.
1811: The Jews of Hamburg and Frankfort Germany emancipated. Jews of Vienna allowed to build a synagogue.
1812: The Jews of Prussia emancipated. Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. Emancipation in Prussia. Death of Meyer Amshel Rothschild in Germany.
1813: (Feb. 18) The Jews of Mecklenburg emancipated. Bavarian Jewry edict (Germany). Battle of Leipzig. Bavarian Jewry edict in Germany.
1814‑15: Congress of Venna.
1815: (June 8) "Bundesakte" passed at the Congress of Vienna decrees maintenance of status quo in the political condition of the Jews. Congress of Vienna permits the abolition of emancipation laws in the German states.
1818: First Reform Temple in Hamburg consecrated and opened in Germany. "Infamous Decree" abolished in France.
1819: The beginning of the "Hep, hep!" riots and persecutions in Germany. Formation of the Society for the Culture and Science of the Jews, by Zunz, Gans, and Moser. Verein fuer Kultur und Wissenschaft des Judentums founded.
1820: Jews admitted again at Lisbon. Isaac Marcus Jost begins to publish his Geschichte der Israeliten.
1821: Greek War of Independence begins. Isaac Bernays opposes the Reform Temple in Germany.
1823: Monroe Doctrine.
1824: Rabbinical seminary established at Metz in France. Expulsion from the villages of Russia. Reformed Society of Israelites in Charleston, S.C.; Isaac Lesser arrives in U.S.
1825: Jews Expelled from St. Petersburg through influence of gilds. M.M. Noah Ararat project (America).
1826: Jews obtain full civic rights in the state of Maryland, U.S.A. Decree issued in Russia enrolling Jews for military service. Maryland "Jew Bill" removes political disabilities. Jews settle in New Orleans.
1826‑35: Velizh Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder).
1827: Battle of Navarino Bay. Cantonist legislation introduced.
1828: Wuerttembeg Jewry law in Germany. Removal of disabilities of Maryland Jews.
1829: Emancipation of Catholics in England. Instituto Rabbinico opened at Padua, Italy.
1830: July revolution in France; Uprising in Poland.
1831: Louis Philippe orders salaries of rabbis to be paid by the state. Independence of Belgium recognized. Judaism given equal status with other religions. Palestine taken by Muhammad Ali.
1832: Leopold Zunz publishes his Die gotterdienstlichen Vortraege.
1833: (Oct. 29) Jews of Kur‑Hessen granted full emancipation. Turkey recognizes independence of Egypt. Emancipation in Hesse‑Kassel. Beginning of parliamentary debates on the emancipation of the Jews of England.
1835: (April 13) General Jewish regulations issued in Russia Edict of Nicholas I. founding agricultural colonies in Russia. David Salomons sheriff of London, England. Oppressive constitution for the Jews.
1836: Law refusing Jews the right to bear Christian names renewed in Prussia. Death of Nathan Mayer Rothschild in England.
1837: Moses Montefiore knighted in England. Disastrous earthquake in Safed and Tiberias. Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums founded in Berlin, Germany. Jews settle in Cleveland.
1839: Sultan 'Abd al‑Majid grants citizenship to Turkish Jews. Turkey invades Syria. Entire community of Meshed (Persia) forced to convert to Islam (Asia).
1840: (Feb. 5) Damascus Blood Accusation. (Nov. 6) Firman issued by sultan against blood accusation. Damascus Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder); restoration of Turkish rule in Palestine.
1841: Jews settle in Chicago. Jewish Chronicle founded in London.
1842: First English Reform synagogue opened in London, England. Bruno Bauer's Judenfrage (Germany). Compulsory military service for the Jews of Russia.
1843: B'nai B'rith founded in America.
1844: (May 25) Louis Philippe issues regulations for the internal organization of French Jews. (June) Rabbinical conference at Brunswick. Autonomy of the kahal abolished government supervised schools for the Jews founded (Russia & Poland).
1845: (April) Ukase issued ordering Russian and Polish Jews to adopt ordinary costume. Jews admitted to municipal offices in England. Rabbinical conference at Frankfort; Reform Society formed in Berlin, Germany.
1846: U.S. War with Mexico. Abolition of "Jewish Oath." (France). Rabbinical conference in Breslau, Germany. Montefiore visits Russia. I.M. Wise arrives in America.
1847: Lionel de Rothschild elected to parliament but refuses to take the Christian oath (England). Anti‑Jewish riots in Prussia. Jews settle in Washington, D.C.
1848: Emancipation Year; most of the countries of central Europe grant full civic and political rights to Jews ‑ in the majority of cases, repealed the next year. Riots in Presburg. Year of Revolutions. Liberal constitution of Piedmont, Italy. Adophe Cremieux minister of Justice. Anti‑Jewish riots. Influx of Jews from Germany (America).
1849: (July 3) Baron Lionel de Rothschild, previously returned as M.P. for city of London, not allowed to take seat. Jews settle in San Francisco and Los Angeles (America).
1852: (Sept. 3) Violent Anti-Jewish riots at Stockholm. Conformation of "Status Quo" in Holy Places in Palestine.
1853: Publication of Philippson's Bible completed; Ahavat Ziyyon by Abraham Mapu. Saratov Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) (Russia & Poland).
1854: Breslau Jewish Theological Seminary opened in Germany. First YMHA founded (America).
1854‑56: Crimean War.
1855: David Salomons lord mayor London, England. Cleveland Conference.
1856: (Feb. 18) "Hatti‑Humayun" issued, granting full civic rights to Turkish Jews Treaty of Paris. Jews' College founded in England. Cantonist legislation abrogated (Russia & Poland). Ha‑Maggid, first Hebrew weekly, founded in Lyck.
1858: (June 24) Edgar Mortara in Ancona forcibly taken from his family by Bishop of bologna on plea that he had been baptized when an infant by a Roman Catholic servant. The oath "on the true faith of a Christian" abolished in England; Jewish disabilities removed. Lionel de Rothschild takes his seat in parliament after amendment of parliamentary oath (England). Mortara case in Italy.
1859: Independence of Rumania. Rabbinical seminary transferred to Paris, France. Merchants of the first class permitted to live outside the Pale.
1860: Alliance Israèlite Universelle founded in France. Sicily and Naples occupied by Garibaldi. Jews allowed to own real estate in Austria.
1861: Jews with academic diplomas permitted to live outside the Pale (Russia & Poland). Proclamation of the Kingdom of Italy.
1861‑65: U.S. Civil War.
1862: Moses Hess publishes Rom und Jerusalem (Zionism). Grant's General Order No. 11; first Jewish military chaplain.
1863: (July) Emancipation of Swiss Jews. Society for the Promotion of Culture among the Jews of Russia founded.
1863‑64: Polish revolution.
1864: Jews admitted to the bar (Russia & Poland).
1865: Jewish craftsmen permitted to live outside the Pale (Russia).
1866: Rumanian constitution, clause 7, makes all Rumanian Jews "aliens." Austro‑Prussian War.
1867‑68: Constitution abolishes Jewish disabilities; Jews permitted to return to Spain. The law of the North German Federation of July 3 decrees that no state shall retain restrictions on the ground of religious belief.
1868‑69: General Congress of Hungarian Jews.
1868‑85: Ha‑Shahar published in Vienna.
1869‑70: Philadelphia Conference. (March) Thirteen hundred and sixty Jews Expelled from districts of Falciu and Vaslui, Rumania. Mikveh Israel founded (Palestine). United Synagogue founded in England. Adolphe Cremieux minister of justice; Jews of Algeria granted French citizenship (France). Ghetto of Rome abolished end of Jewish disabilities in Italy. Unification of Italy.
1871: Pogrom in Odessa (Russia & Poland). Unification of Germany. Anglo‑Jewish Association founded (England). Constitution abolishes Jewish disabilities (Germany). A Rohling publishes his anti‑Semitic Der Talmudjude (Austria‑Hungary).
1872: Hochschule fuer die Wissenschaft des Judentums opened at Berlin, Germany. Israelitische Ailiance founded in Vienna (Austria‑ Hungary).
1871‑72: Attacks on Jews in Rumania.
1873: Union of American Hebrew Congregations established. Rabbinical Seminary opened in Berlin, Germany.
1874‑76: Publication of George Eliot's Daniel Deronda (England).
1875: Hebrew Union college opened in Cincinnati.
1876: (July 28) E. Lasker procures the passing of the "Austrittgesetz," permitting Jews to change their congregation. Heinrich Graetz completes Geschichte der Juden; Goldfaden established Yiddish Theater in Rumania. Orthodox Jews permitted to found independent congregation in Prussia (Germany).
1877‑78: Rabbinical seminary in Budapest opened (Austria‑Hungary). (July 13) The Berlin Congress inserts clause 44, that distinction of religion shall not be a bar to civil and political rights in Rumania. Petah Tikvah founded; Congress of Berlin. Beginning of the political anti‑Semitic movement in Berlin.
1879‑80: Citizenship granted to a number of Jews as individuals; Kutais Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) (Russia & Poland). Anti‑Semitic articles by H. von Treitschke (Germany).
1880: (Nov. 20‑22) Debate in Prussian Diet on Kantorowicz incident.
1881: Atrocities against Jews in South Russia. (April 25) Anti‑Semitic league in Germany presents petition with 255,000 signatures to Prince Bismarck. (April 27) Riot at Argenau. Ben‑Yehuda arrives in Palestine. Beginning of mass immigration from Eastern Europe (America). Czar Alexander II assassinated. Death of Benjamin Disraeli (England). Anti‑Semitic petition (Germany).
1881‑82. Pogroms sweeps southern Russia; beginning of mass emigration (Russia & Poland). (April 7) Disappearance of Esther Solymosi causes a trial on Blood Accusation at Tisza‑Esziar. (May 3) "May Laws" issued by General Ignatief confining the Jews in the Pale of Settlement to the towns. "May Laws" (Russia & Poland). Beginning of First Aliyah (Bilu); Rishon le‑Zion founded (Palestine). Leon Pinsker publishes Autoemanzipation; Bilu organized in Russia (Zionism). Gompers a founder and president of A.F. of L.; first Yiddish play performed in N.Y. British occupation of Egypt. Tiszaesziar Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder); Kadimah society founded at Vienna (Austria‑Hungary).
1883: Beginning of Baron Edmond de Rothschild's help to Jewish settlements (Palestine).
1884: (March 7) Rumanian law prohibiting hawking puts 5,000 Jewish families out of employment. (July 9) Lord Rothschild takes his seat as first Jewish peer in the British House of Lords. Gederah founded (Palestine). Kattowitz conference of Hibbat Zion (Zionism).
1885‑86: Pittsburg Conference of American Rabbis establishes a platform for Reform Judaism. Pittsburgh Platform (America). Nathaniel de Rothschild raised to peerage (England). Expulsion of Russian refugees (Germany). Drumont publishes "La France Juive." Jewish Theological Seminary opened in New York (America). E‑A. Drumont publishes his anti‑Semitic La France Juive (France).
1887: (Feb. 28) Rumanian law excluding Jews from public service and from tobacco trade and from employment in retail trade. Small percentage of Jews admitted to high schools and universities (Russia & Poland). Druzgenik Conference of the Hovevei Zion (Zionism).
1888: Jewish Publication Society of America established; United Hebrew Trades founded (America). Suez Canal Convention.
1889: (May 12) Rumanian law limiting number of Jewish factory hands to one‑third. Vilna Conference; Benei Moshe founded by Ahad Ha‑Am (Zionism). Central Conference of American Rabbis established; Rabbi Jacob Joseph arrives as "Chief Rabbi" of New York City.
1890: (Dec. 10) Guildhall meeting against persecution of Russian Jews by May Laws. Rehovot and Haderah founded (Palestine). Odessa Conference (Zionism).
1890‑91: Large number of immigrants from Russia (Palestine). (June 29) Blood Accusation at Xanten. Expulsion from Moscow; Immigration to Argentina with help of Baron Maurice de Hirsch. Jewish Colonization Association (ICA) incorporated (England). Xanten Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder); Thirteen anti‑Semitic members enter Austrian Reichsrat.
1892: Jewish Colonization Association founded by Baron de Hirsch.
1893:(Jan. 14) Rumanian law prohibiting Jews from being employed in public medical department. Fifteen anti‑Semites
elected to the Reichstag; Central‑Verein Deutscher Staatsbuerger Juedischen Glaubens founded (Germany).
1894: Dreyfus Affair. Dreyfus' trial (France).
1895: Capt. Alfred Dreyfus condemned and degraded as a spy and deported to Devil's Isle, Cayenne. Anti‑Semitic League organized (Rumania).
1896‑97: Herzl publishes Der Judenstaat (Zionism). Jews settle in Miami (America). Cairo Genizah discovered. (Aug. 29‑31) First Zionist Congress at Basel, Herzl president (Zionist). Bund founded (Russia & Poland). Federation of American Zionists founded; Jewish Daily Forward begins publication.
1898: (Oct.) Eleven thousand two hundred Jewish children refused admission to public schools in Rumania. 2nd Zionist Congress (Zionism). Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations founded in America. Emile Zola's J'accuse (France).
1899: (March 31) Rumanian law excluding Jews from agricultural and professional schools. (Sept. 2) Dreyfus condemned a second time, but "pardoned" on Sept. 19. 3rd Zionist Congress; Jewish Colonial Trust founded (Zionism). Dreyfus retried and pardoned in France. H.S. Chamberlain's anti‑Semitic book (Germany). Hilsner Case (Austria‑Hungary).
1899‑1902: Boer War.
1900: (Aug. 13‑16) Fourth Zionist Congress at London. (Sept. 8) Israeisky, accused of (Ritual Murder) at Konitz, acquitted. 4th Zionist Congress (Zionism). Death of I.M. Wise; I.L.G.W.U. founded (America). Konitz Blood Libel; (Ritual Murder) (Germany).
1901: (Dec.) Rumanian law prohibiting Jews from holding saloons or stores in rural districts. 5th Zionist Congress; Jewish National Fund established (Zionism). S. Schechter goes to New York (America). Hilfsverein der Deutschen Juden founded (Germany).
1902: (March) Rumanian law prohibiting employment of Jewish working men. Mizrachi founded (Zionism). Jewish Religious Union founded (England). (The Jewish Encyclopedia, Chazars, & Chronology, pp. 1‑75; Encyclopedia Judicia (1971))
1903: Pogrom in Kishinev (Russia & Poland). 6th Zionist Congress Uganda project (Zionism).
1904: Vaad ha‑Lashon organized; Habimah Theater founded; Jewish Telegraphic agency founded. Beginning of Second Aliyah (Palestine). Verband der deutschen Juden founded (Germany).
1904‑05: Russo‑Japanese War.
1905: Pogroms mass emigration (Russia & Poland). Joseph Vitkin's Kol Kore; Ha‑Poel Ha‑Zair founded (Palestine). 7th Zionist Congress rejects Uganda project; Wolffsohn president (Zionism). Abortive revolution in Russia; separation of Church and State in France. Aliens Act; Herbert Samuel first Jewish cabinet minister in England.
1906: Pogroms; Po'alei Zion founded (Russia & Poland). Hebrew high school established in Jaffa; Bezalel founded in Palestine. Helsingfors program (Zionism). American Jewish Committee established. Jewish Encyclopedia completed. Dreyfus rehabilitated in France.
1907: 8th Zionist Congress (Zionism).
1908: Young Turk revolution.
1909: Deganyah founded; Ha‑Shomer organized; Tel Aviv founded in Palestine.
1909‑10: Polish boycott against Jews.
1910: Expulsion from Kiev.
1910‑11: L. Luzzatti prime minister in Italy.
1911-13: Beilis trial (Russia & Poland). 10th Zionist Congress; Warburg president (Zionism).
1912: Agudat Israel founded (Russia & Poland).
1913: U.S. ‑ Russian Treaty of 1832 abrogated because Russia does not recognize rights of American Jews under it; United Synagogue founded; Anti‑Defamation League founded. Yevreskaya Entsiklopedia completed.
1914: American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee established; Brandeis assumes Zionist leadership.
1914‑18: World War I.
1915: Refugees from Palestine form Zion Mule Corps (Egypt). Menorah Journal, first (known) Jewish literary organ; Leo Frank lynched.
1916‑17: L. Brandeis appointed to Supreme Court (America). Anti‑Jewish laws abrogated; The British capture Jerusalem. American Jewish Congress election. JPS version of the Bible. Balfour Declaration (England). U.S. enters the War; Russian Revolutions.
1918: Zionist Commission appointed (Palestine).
1919: Pogroms in Ukraine and Poland; abolishment of community organization and Jewish institutions in Russia (Russia & Poland). Canadian Jewish Congress founded; American Jewish delegation at Versailles. Peace of Versailles. Comite des Delegations Juives (France). pogroms in Hungary (Austria‑Hungary).
1919‑23: Third Aliyah (Palestine).
1920: British Mandate over Palestine; Tel Hai; Arabs riot in Jerusalem (Palestine). Keren Ha‑Yesod established (Zionism). Henry Ford begins exposing Jews in the Dearborn Independent. Histadrut founded; the Haganah founded (Palestine). Polish Russian War. Britain granted Palestine mandate (England).
1920‑25: Sir Herbert Samuel High Commissioner (Palestine).
1921: Arabs riot in Jaffa (Palestine). 12th Zionist Congress; Weizmann president. Brandeis‑Weismann split divides American Zionism. U.S. Immigration Act 3% quota by 1910 Census.
1922: Churchill White Paper. Advent of Fascism in Italy. Assassination of Walter Rathenau (Germany). (Encyclopedia Judicia (1971))
The Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 10, (1971) relates the following about the Khazars (Chazars): "KHAZARS, a national group of general Turkic type, independent and sovereign in Eastern Europe between the seventh and tenth centuries A.D. During part of this time the leading Khazars professed Judaism. The name is frequently pronounced with an a‑vowel, as in the Greek Xazapot and Arabic Khazar (Hazar), but there are traces of a different pronunciation in Hebrew (Kuzari, pl. Kuzarim). Greek (Xorztpoi), and Chinese (K'o‑sa). The name has been explained as having derived from Turkish gazmak, or from quz ('side of mountain exposed to the north'). The latter etymology would account for the o/u‑vowel in some forms of the name, for which no satisfactory explanation has been given.
The Origin of the Khazars. The Khazars, a Turkic stock, originally nomadic, reached the Volga‑Caucasus region from farther east at some time not easily determinable. They may have belonged to the empire of the Huns (fifth century A.D.) as the Akatzirs, mentioned by Priscus. This name is said to be equivalent to Aq‑Khazar, i.e., White Khazars, as opposed to the Qara‑Khazar or Black Khazars mentioned by al‑Istakhri. The Khazars probably belonged to the West Turkish Empire (from 552 A.D.), and they may have marched with Sinjibu (Istami), the first Khaqan of the West Turks, against the Sassanid (Persian) fortress of Sul or Darband.
In the time of Procopius (sixth century) the region immediately north of the Caucasus was held by the Sabirs, who are referred to by Jordances as one of the two great branches of the Huns. Mas'udi (tenth century A.D.) says that the Khazars are called in Turkish, Sabir.
In 627 'the Turks from the East whom they call Khazars' under their chief Ziebel passed the Caspian Gates (Darband) and joined Heraclius at the siege of Tiflis. In view of what is known of a dual kingship among the Khazars, it would be natural to assume that Ziebel, described by Theophanes as 'second in rank to the khaqan,' was the subordinate Khazar king or beg.
However, there are grounds for thinking that Ziebel stands for yabgu, a Turkish title ‑ in the parallel Armenian account he is called Jebu Khaqan and that he is T'ung‑ye‑hu, He‑hu Khagan, the paramount ruler of the West Turks, who is represented as second in rank to 'the King of the North, the lord of the whole world,' i.e., the supreme khaqan of the Turks. In the narratives of Theophanes and Moses of Kalankatuk respectively, the Khazars are also called Turks and Huns.
From 681 A.D. we hear much in the latter author of the Huns of Varach'an (Warathan), north of Darband, who evidently formed part of a Khazar confederation or empire. Their prince Alp Hutver was often in attendance on the Khazar khaqan and was converted to Christianity by an Albanian bishop.
It will be seen that the question of the precise racial affinities of the Khazars is not readily solved. There appears to be insufficient evidence to warrant the conclusion of K. Czegledy that the Khazars were of Sabir origin and distinct from the Caucasian Huns and West Turks, since it is not known how far these ethnic names mean the same thing.
Consolidation of the Khazar State. According to Theophanes, the ruler of the Bulgars in the region of the Kuban River (West Caucasus) died 650 A.D. leaving five sons of whom only the eldest brother remained in his inheritance, while the others moved further west, as far as the Danube. On this, the Khazars, described as a 'great nation...from the interior of Berzilia in the First Sarmatia,' emerged and took possession of the territory as far as the Black Sea. The change of position was completed by 679, when one of the brothers crossed the Danube and conquered present‑day Bulgaria. Earlier than this, in 576 A.D. a West Turkish force had been present at the siege of Bosporus (Kerch) in the Crimea (Menander Protector, ed. Bonn, 404), but hitherto there is no mention of the Khazars as such so far to the west. The advance of the Khazars to the Black Sea and Crimea area appears to be mentioned also in the Reply of Joseph, where a great Khazar victory over the W‑n‑nt‑r is referred to. A people north of the Khazars called W‑n‑nd‑r is mentioned in the Hudud al‑lam.
Both names are best explained as corresponding to Onogundur, an old name in Greek sources for the Bulgars. The advent of the Khazars on the Black Sea was clearly of great consequence for the future, for they now came within the sphere of Greek political and cultural influence. By 700 A.D. for earlier there were Khazar officials in Bosporus and Phanagoria. Henceforth the Crimea, as well as the Volga and the Caucasus, came to be specially associated with the Khazars, and a further way westward was opened for them toward both Kiev and the Slav lands via the Dnieper.
Arabs and Khazars had already been in conflict on the line of the Caucasus first Arab‑Khazar war, 642‑652 A.D. Bab al‑Abwab at the eastern end of the range was occupied by the Arabs in 22 (643) A.H. In the same year the caliph Omar sent instructions to advance northward. Though the Arabs attacked Balanjar repeatedly, they were unable to take it.
The defeat and death of the Arab general at the close of the first phase of Arab‑Khazar relations. According to Muvudi, the Khazar capital was at this time moved from Samandar to Atil, but he says elsewhere that Balanjar was the former capital.
Further Relations with Byzantium and the Arabs. After the exile of Justinian II to the Crimea in 695, the Khazars on several occasions played an important, even determining, part in Byzantine politics. Toward 704 the Khaqan helped the emperor at a crucial moment and gave him his sister Theodora in marriage. Justinian returned to Constantinople to reign a second time. His successor Bardanes (711‑13) was likewise indebted to the khaqan.
In 732 the emperor Leo the Isurian married his son, the future Constantine V, to a Khazar princess called in the sources Irene. The child of this marriage was Leo IV, the Khazar (775‑80). It is to be understood that Irene and Theodora above are baptismal, i.e., not Khazar, names.
The second Arab‑Khazar war began in 722 or earlier, and ended in 737 with the defeat of the Khazars by Marwan b. Muhammad (later Marwan II). The Khazar khaqan is said at this time to have professed Islam.
If so, we hear no more about it. Later the Khaqan was a Jew, as we know from the Arabic geographers Ibn Rustah (290/903), Istakhri (320/932), Ibn Hauqal (367/977), etc., and it is implied in the Reply of Joseph that the Beginnings of Khazar Judaism dated as far back as 112/730, when the Khazars defeated the Arabs south of the Caucasus, and from the spoils consecrated a tabernacle on the Mosaic mode.
The conversion of the leading Khazars to Judaism perhaps took place toward 740 A.D. It seems at all events certain that the Khazars successfully resisted the Arabs for several decades, and that they were only reduced with difficulty and at a time when the internal situation of the caliphate prevented the Arabs from exploiting their victory: Marwan was called away to become the last Umayyad Caliph (744) and to struggle against ever‑growing opposition, until his death in 750 at the hands of Abbasid soldiers in Egypt.
The dynastic crisis probably saved Khazaria. At the same time the situation had wider implications, for if Marwan had been able to hold the Khazar territory permanently, the history of Eastern Europe might have been very different. The Khazar Double Kingship. This was a phenomenon found among other Turkic peoples, e.g., the Qara‑Khanids, and not unknown elsewhere; compare the double kingship at Sparta in antiquity, and the Shogun and Mikado of medieval Japan. How far back the institution goes among the Khazars cannot be exactly determined.
Ya'qubi (ninth century) speaks of the Khazar khaqan and his representative (khaltfa) apparently in the sixth century. Arabic accounts, in Tabari, ibn al‑Athir, etc., of the Arab‑Khazar wars afford no precise evidence of the dual kingship, yet the Arabic geographers regularly mention it. The account of al‑Istakhri, written 320/932, is as follows: 'As to their politics and system of government, their chief is called khaqan of the Khazars. He is greater than the king of the Khazars (elsewhere called by al‑Istakhri the bak or bak, i.e., beg), except that the king of the Khazars appoints him. When they wish to appoint this khaqan, they bring him and throttle him with a piece of silk, till, when his breath is nearly cut off, they say to him, 'How long do you wish to reign?' and he says, 'So‑and‑so many years.' If he dies short of them, well and good. If not, he is killed when he reaches that year. The khaqanate is valid among them only in a house of notables. He possesses no right of command nor of veto, but he is honored, and people prostrate themselves when they enter his presence...
The khaqanate is in a group of notables who possess neither sovereignty nor riches. When the chief place comes to one of them, they appoint him, and do not consider his condition. I have been informed by a reliable person that he had seen a young man selling bread in one of the sugs. People said that when their khaqan died, there was none more deserving of the khaqanate than he, except that he was a Muslim, and the khaqanate is not conferred on any but a Jew.'
A remarkable parallel to the inauguration ceremony described by Istakhri is found in a Chinese source on the Turks in the sixth century A.D. the Chou Shu. Recently the theory of A. Alfoldi that the double kingship among nomadic peoples corresponds to leadership of the two wings of the horde has won wide acceptance, but does not apply particularly well to the Khazars.
Mas'udi had already suspected that the Khazar khaqan represented a dynasty which had been superseded has suggested that the khaqan was the representative at the Khazar capital, Atil, of the West Turks, whom he thinks of as in control of Khazaria. This is not likely to have been the situation except for a very short time, since the Khazar capital was not transferred to Atil before the time of the first Arab‑Khazar war (642‑652) and the destruction of the West Turkish power took place in 652‑657.
Yet the Khazar khaqan may in fact have represented the West Turk ruling dynasty. This seems to be the view of the tenth‑century Persian work, Hudud al‑'Alam, according to which the khaqan of the Khazars was 'of the descendants of Ansa,' apparently corresponding to Asna, or Achena, well‑known as the ruling family among the Turks. Do‑sa (different from K'o‑sa above), the name in Chinese of a sub‑tribe of the Uigurs, is often taken as the equivalent of Khazars. We know that the destruction of the West Turks was brought about by a coalition of which the Uigurs formed part. It may therefore be that the convulsions which attended the breakup of the West Turkish Empire brought forward this section of the Uigurs, so that, while the khaqan represented the old ruling family, the Khazar beg, i.e., the effective king, was their representative.
Date of Khazar Conversion to Judaism. This has already been referred to above (see Bulan and below Khazar Correspondence). The date of 740 is suggested by converging considerations, namely, the circumstances of the reported conversion to Islam in 737 and the dating given by Judah Halevi in the Kuzari (Cosri).
The absence of distinct references to the Judaism of the Khazars in the biographies of St. Abo of Tiflis, who was in Khazaria 780 A.D. and of Constantine (Cyril), who was there 860, should not be pressed as proof that the conversion to Judaism took place only later. Mas'udi states positively that the king of the Khazars became a Jew in the caliphate of Harun al‑Rashid (786‑809 A.D.).
This may well refer to the reformation 800 under Obadiah of which the Reply of Joseph speaks. S.P. Tolstov has sought to explain the Khazar conversion to Judaism as a result of the conquest of Khwarizm (Khorezm) by the Arab general Muslim ibn Qutayba in 712.
The Khazar Empire. The extent of the territory ruled by the Khazars has been variously estimated. Thus B.A. Ribakov makes Khazaria a small territory on the lower courses of the Volga and Don, to include Sarkil and the Khazar capital (assigning separate localities to Atil, Khamlij, and al‑Bayda', usually taken to be the same place). This is based principally on the data in the world map of Idrisi, which offers a somewhat misleading picture of Khazaria. On the other hand, S.P. Tolstov envisages a Khazaria united with Khwarizm under one ruler to form a single state, a view for which the evidence is slight.
It must be allowed, however, that at one time Khazar rule extended westward a long way beyond the Crimea‑Caucasus‑Volga region which for the Greek and Arabic sources is Khazaria. The Russian Primary Chronicle ((1953), 58‑59; Chronicle of Nestor, Povest vremennykh let) reports that at an unspecified date the Polians south of the Middle Dnieper paid tribute to the Khazars of a sword per hearth, and that in 859 A.D. the Polians, Severians, and Viatichians paid them a white squirrel skin per hearth. Later these payments in kind ceased to be made, being evidently replaced by money payments; e.g., the Radimichians paid the Khazars a shilling or dirham apiece until 885 A.D. according to the Chronicle (61), and the Viatichians until 964, the same per plowshare. All these peoples were exposed to attack by any strong forces coming up the valleys of the Don and Donets from the Khazar territory. Kiev itself was occupied by the Khazars for some period before 862, but presumably was not built by or for them, unlike Sarkel or Sarkil on the Don, which on the application of the khaqan and beg to Emperor Theophilus was constructed by Byzantine workmen in 833 A.D. All of these territories were to be taken from the Khazars, some already in the ninth century, by the advancing Russians.
East of the Volga, in the direction of Khwarizm, the situation is obscure. Al‑Istakhri tells of caravans passing between Khwarizm and Khazaria, mentioning specifically, Slav, Khazar, and Turkish slaves and all kinds of furs among the principal merchandise of Khwarizm. On the other hand, he says that Khwarizm has the nomad Turks (Ghuzz) on its northern and western frontier, not the Khazars. According to Tolstov, a 'royal road' led from Khorezm to the Volga, traces of which may be seen from the air, and he finds in it an indication of the emergence of a great Khorezmian‑Khazar state in the tenth and beginning of the 11th century. The Extent of Khazar Judaism. While the Khazars were generally known to their neighbors as Jews, they seem to have had little or no contact with the central Jewish organization in Iraq, and they tend to be mentioned less by Rabbanite than by Karaite authors.
This is not to say that the Khazars were Karaites, a view which has not lacked defenders, at least since the time of A. Firkovich. Yet such contemporary or nearly contemporary documents as we possess offer no evidence of the Karaism of the Khazars. On the other hand, it would seem that the lack of interest in the Khazars on the part of the Jewish authorities, as reflected in the literary works at our disposal, was due at least partly to their imperfect adherence to Judaism. This is illustrated notably in their retention of a number of pagan (shamanist) customs, dating back to their Turkic past, which are duly noted by the Arabic geographers. We may here consider the position of H. Baratz that in the oldest Russian writings of a legal character there are Hebrew, mostly biblical‑Talmudic, elements, and that these go back to Khazar times. Thus the fact that early Russian codes, including the Zakon sudni liudem ('Law for the Judging of the People'), contain traces of Mosaic and Talmudic legislation, is due not to contact with the Catholic West, as has also been maintained, but to the influence of the Jewish Khazars. This view has been characterized by a Russian academician (I.V. Yagich) as 'a scarlet thread for everyone to walk by.' Yet the chances of Khazar influence on Russian codes, in the form of the introduction of Mosaic and Talmudic elements, clearly become less if it is demonstrable, as seem to be the case, that Khazar Judaism was never very strong.
The Downfall of Khazaria. The Reply of Joseph mentions that the Khazars guarded the mouth of the Volga before 961 A.D. and prevented the Russians from reaching the Caspian. On several occasions, notably 913 and again in 943, the Russians made raids down the Volga, passing through Atil.
Later apparently in 965, Khazaria was the object of a great Russian attack, which was aimed at the Khazar capital and reached as far as Samandar, as we know from Ibn Hawqal. From this disaster the Khazars appear to have recovered only partially. Again at this time we hear of a Khazar khaqan adopting Islam. His motive is said to have been to secure the help of the people of Khwarizm.
After 965 the Khazars are still mentioned occasionally, but scarcely for long as an independent people. We cannot use the Cairo Genizah document published by J. Mann concerning a messianic movement supposedly in Khazaria in the time of al‑Afdal, the great Fatimid vizier who ruled 1094/1121, as proof of continued Khazar existence until this time, since it has been shown that the movement in question took place in Kurdistan.
Furthermore, Oleg, the same who, according to the Russian Chronicle, established himself in Tmutorokan in 1083, is called in a seal of the 11th‑12th century 'archon of all Khazaria.' Whatever is precisely indicated here by 'Khazaria' ‑ e.g. the Khazar country in the Crimea ‑ such a claim could not have been made prior to 965. We must therefore see the Khazar state as having subsisted until the second half of the tenth century, or the 11th century at most. By the 12th century the Qipchaqs or Cumans (identified also with the Polvtsi) appeared in the steppes once ruled by the Khazars. At the time of the Mongol invasions in the 13th century, it was they, not the Khazars, who were in possession.
The Khazar Correspondence. This name is usually given to what appears as an interchange of letters in Hebrew between Hisdai ibn Shaprut, a well‑known personality of Muslim Spain in the tenth century, and Joseph, king of the Khazars. M.I. Artamonov includes the Cambridge Document as well as the Letter of Hisdai and the Reply of Joseph in the Khazar Correspondence, but this would seem to be contrary to general usage. The Reply is available in a Long Version and a Short Version. The Correspondence involves serious critical difficulties, and its authenticity has been much debated.
The Letter of Hisdai begins with a plyut containing an acrostic which gives his own name and that of Menabem b. Saruq. the latter presumably acting as Hisdai's secretary and being the author of the plyut. The prose part, after compliments, refers to the geographical situation of al‑Andalus and Khazaria and describes the natural wealth of al‑Andalus and Hisdai's own position there.
It seems that his interest has been aroused by his having heard repeatedly that the Khazars are Jews. The Letter mentions attempts made by Hisdai to get in touch with the Khazar king. He was finally successful through the instrumentality of two Jews, Mar Saul and Mar Joseph, who accompanied an embassy which arrived at Cordoba from the 'king of the G‑b‑lim, who are the Saqlab.' The Letter of Hisdai was conveyed to the East by their means, i.e., overland, and eventually was put into the hands of the Khazar king, according to the Reply, by a certain Jacob or Isaac b. Eliezer, a Central European Jew.
The tone of the Letter of Hisdai is mostly one of enquiry, and it invites an answer to questions which range over a variety of topics: Is there a Jewish kingdom anywhere on earth? How did the Jews come to Khazaria? In what way did the conversion of the Khazars take place? Where does the king live? To what tribe does he belong? What is his method of procession to his place of worship? Does war abrogate the Sabbath? Has the Khazar king any information about the possible end of the world? Hisdai mentions that 'Abd al‑Rahman III al‑Nasir is the reigning king of al‑Andalus.
This gives 961 as the terminus ad quem for the Letter, with 953‑55 as a possible terminus a quo, for in those years Cordoba was visited by John of Gorz, as envoy of the German emperor Otto I, who may be the 'king of the G‑b‑lim, who are the Saqlab' already referred to. The Reply of Joseph begins by referring to the principal contents of the Letter and recapitulates a number of its questions. It then relates the early history of the Khazars, and proceeds to deal at length with the conversion to Judaism under Bulan. The conversion is initiated by a dream of Bulan, which he communicates to a certain general among them, apparently the beg. From the spoils of a Khazar attack on Ardabil, south of the Caucasus, for which we have the synchronism 730 in the Arabic sources, a tabernacle on the biblical model is set up.
A religious debate between representatives of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is held, after which Bulan and the principal Khazars accept the religion of Israel. Under a later king, Obadiah, there was a reform of religion. Synagogues and schools were built, and the Khazars became familiar with Torah, Mishnah, Talmud, and the liturgy, i.e., rabbinic Judaism was introduced. Joseph then traces his descent from Obadiah and gives a description of his country and capital. He refers to Hisdai's question concerning the end of the age in a somewhat noncommittal fashion, and finally expresses his desire that Hisdai may come to Khazaria, which, if a notice in a map of Ibn Hawqal can be trusted, he actually did. The correspondence has been available since the appearance of the work Kol Mevasser of Isaac Akrish in or after 1577, and more generally since the two letters were published by the younger Buxtorf in his edition of the book Cosri (Kuzdri) of Judah Halevi in 1660.
It is not known what manuscript source was used by Isaac Akrish; Buxtorf depended on Kol Mevasser. The only known manuscript of the Correspondence as a whole, containing the Letter of Hisdai and the Reply of Joseph, is in the library of Christ Church, Oxford. This manuscript is very similar to the printed text, which, it has been suggested, is a transcript. There appear to be no special grounds for this opinion, though the manuscript, which is undated, has no claims to great antiquity. Nothing is sure about its provenance, but it is thought to have belonged originally to the celebrated Dr. Fell (1625‑1686).
A longer version of the Reply of Joseph was published by A. Harkavy in 1874, from a manuscript of the Second Firkovich Collection in the Leningrad Public Library. The Long Version bears no indication of any alterations or additions, and is supposed to date from the 13th century. Harkavy, in spite of his very critical attitude to Firkovich, regarded it as the undoubted original of the Short Version.
It appears impossible to suppose that the Khazar Correspondence is a fabrication of the 16th century in view of a reference to it, with the citation of part of the Reply of Joseph, agreeing in general with the Long Version, in the Sefer ha‑Lttim of Judah b. Barzillai al‑Bargeloni, dated between 1090 and 1105, and a similar reference in the Sefer ha‑Kabbalah of Abraham ibn Daud in the 12th century.
It cannot be admitted that these works were interpolated in the 16th century or later, to support the authenticity. Nor does it appear at all plausible that the letters forming the Khazar Correspondence were forgeries of the tenth century, composed with a view to informing the Jews about the Khazars. It is demonstrable that the literary style of the Letter of Hisdai differs from that of the Reply of Joseph in a marked manner.
The classical Hebrew construction of vav conversive with the imperfect to express the past tense is freely used in the Letter of Hisdai, actually 48 times as against 14 times when the past tense is rendered by simple vav with the perfect. In the Reply (L.V.), on the other hand, vav conversive with the imperfect occurs not more than once or twice, while the past is expressed by the perfect, occurs in a number of passages where the wording is different from the Long Version. There is a new proportion of vav conversive with the imperfect to simple vav with the perfect: 37 to 50. It may therefore be affirmed that there is a separate authorship for the Letter and the Reply, and assumed that the Long Version of the Reply, or something very like it, has been worked over by a third hand to produce the Short Version.
There are grounds for thinking that the Reply originally was written in a non‑Arabic‑speaking environment. Most people would agree with Kokovtsov's cautious statement that as basis for both versions there is the same original text, in general better preserved in the Long Version. B.A. Ribakov supposed that an authentic letter of King Joseph was worked over in Tmutorokan toward the end of the 11th century ('about 1083'), which resulted in the Long Version, and that some time afterward the text of the Long Version was modified by Jews of Barcelona to produce the Short Version of the Reply.
Khazar Jews After the Fall of the Kingdom. The artifacts of the Khazars appear to be scant. A number of sites have been excavated, and though details of the archaeological activity in Russia are difficult to obtain the Russians hold a monopoly on digs in ancient Khazaria. It appears that there have not been any sensational discoveries to date. No royal burial sites have been unearthed hardly surprising since, according to Ibn Fadlan, the Khaqans were buried under a stream, and no inscriptions, public or private.
Prior to 1914 archaeological excavations were conducted in successive years, especially at Verkhnii Soltov on the Donets. Since then, scholars have been divided on whether or not Saltov is a Khazar site. Additional work has been done at Bulghar and at the neighboring town of Suwar, which was mentioned in al‑Istakhri. A tenth‑century two‑stories palace, in which many coins were found, was discovered at the latter site, but this, the only building of a public character which has come to light, might possibly be Bulgar rather than Khazar.
Belaya (Bela) Vezha, the ancient Sarkii, near the village of Tsimlyanskaya on the left bank of the lower Dan, has been the site which has attracted the most interest in recent years. Though not the Khazar capital, as had been erroneously attested, it was an important settlement. Nothing specifically Jewish has been found there. Nevertheless, discoveries analogous to the culture of Saltov and Mayatskoe Gorodishche, both at least presumed Khazar sites, were unearthed, as well as ceramics engraved with markings of the type found in the Don inscriptions. No traces of the fortress constructed by the Greeks for the Khazars have been found. In spite of the negligible information of an archaeological nature, the presence of Jewish groups and the impact of Jewish ideas in Eastern Europe are considerable during the Middle Ages. Groups have been mentioned as migrating to Central Europe from the East or have been referred to as Khazars, thus making it impossible to overlook the possibility that they originated from within the former Khazar Empire. Even though the 12th‑century traveler Benjamin of Tudela did not mention Khazaria as such he did refer to Khazars in Constantinople and Alexandria. Aside from the Kabars (Khazars) who migrated earlier to Hungary, the Hungarian duke Taksony (tenth century) is said to have invited the Khazars to settle in his lands.
In about 1117 Khazars appear to have come to Vladimir Monomakh, Prince of Kiev, after fleeing from the Cumans, building a town they named Bela Vezha (near Chernigov). If this assumption is correct, these Khazars previously lived in Bela Vezha (Sarkil) and then settled near Chernigov. Prior to this time Jews who were possibly Khazars were introduced by Svyatopolk into Kiev.
The Khalisioi in the 12th century, who were mentioned as fighting against Manuel I Comnenus, retained, according to John Cinnamus, 'The Mosaic laws but Not in Their Pure Form.' As late as 1309 a council of the Hungarian clergy (at Pressburg) forbade Catholics to marry those people who were at that time described as Khazars; papal confirmation of this decision was given in 1346. Both the Mountain Jews and the Karachais seem to be connected with the Khazars of the Caucasus region. It is also possible that there were Khazar Jews in the Crimea, which was known to the Italians in the late Middle Ages and perhaps still later as Gazaria. The Turkish‑speaking Karaites of the Crimea, Poland, and elsewhere have affirmed a connection with the Khazars, which is perhaps confirmed by evidence from folklore and anthropology as well as language. There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence attesting to the continued presence in Europe of descendants of the Khazars. The story of the conversion of the Khazar king to Judaism formed the basis for Judah Halevi's famous philosophical dialogue, Kuzari." (Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 10 (1971))
The Dictionary of the Middle Ages states: "RUSSIA, NOMADIC INVASIONS OF. The Caspian‑Black Sea steppelands have long attracted the pastoral nomads, both Iranian and Altaic (Turko‑Mongolian), of central Asia. This interaction of the nomads with the Finno‑Ugrian and eastern Slavic populations is one of the constant factors in the evolution of these peoples.
Altaic nomads, primarily Turkic, were brought to the western Eurasian steppes with the migrations of peoples associated with the formation and expansion of the Hunnic state (fourth century A.D.). A decade after the Hunnic collapse in 454, new Turkic tribes, the Oghurs, Onogurs, and related peoples, entered the region and, joining with Hunnic remnants, gave rise to the Bulgars and other confederations. In the mid sixth century, the Avars, coming from inner Asia, briefly dominated the western steppes, only to be replaced by their mortal enemies, the Turks. The latteralmuated an empire stretching from the borders of China to the Black Sea.
An offshoot and successor state of the Turks in this territory was the Khazar Kaganate (650‑965). Rulled, apparently, by a dynasty of Turkic origin, the Khazars continued the pattern of cooperation with Byzantium established by their Turkic predecessors. This alliance, initially directed against Sasanian Iran, continued with the appearance of the Arabs in the Caucasus. Arabo‑Khazar warfare began in 652 and lasted, with brief interludes, for almost a century. Following the victory of the Umayyad general Marwan in 737, the north Caucasus became the border between the two empires.
In the late eighth to early ninth centuries, the Khazar ruling strata and elements of the leading clans and tribes converted to Judaism. The conversion, never fully elucidated in the surviving sources and still the subject of much speculation, provided a necessary autonomy in relations with Byzantium and the caliphate. Islam, Christianity, and paganism, however, continued to flourish alongside of Judaism.
Atil, the Khazar capital on the lower Volga, became a major commercial center with a large, polyglot population. Khazar government closely followed the usages of its Turk progenitor. A particular development, known to other Turkic states, was the transformation of the Kagan into a religio‑sacral figurehead while actual direction of the state was placed in the hands of a deputy (called variously the shad, yilig, or beg).
Khazaria served as Byzantium's first line of defense against nomadic incursions. In the ninth century, however, its power was weakened by foreign invaders (Hungarians and Pechenegs) and internal strife (the Kabar revolt). By the tenth century, the Khazars were no longer able to contain the steppe pressures. Byzantine policy, which now sought to turn 'barbarian' against 'barbarian,' only exacerbated the situation. In 965, Svyatoslav of Kiev, responding to Khazar attempts to curb Russians raiding via Khazaria into the Caspian Islamic lands, and delivered the fatal blow. A now greatly reduced Khazaria lingered on as a Khwarizmian protectorate. More importantly, the barrier to westward steppe incursions had been removed, thus contributing to those events that culminated in the Byzantine disaster at Manazkert.
The Hungarians and the Pechenegs were the nomads disturbing Khazaria in the ninth century. The Hungarian tribal union, consisting of Ugrian and Oghur Turkic elements, had been pushed westward from their Uralo‑Bashkir homeland by repeated assaults from the Pechenegs. The latter, a Turkic tribal union formerly located in the Kang area, were in conflict with the Oghuz Turks, who had entered central Asia about 775.
When Khazaria weakened, the Pechenegs, under Oghuz pressure, migrated from the Volga‑Ural Mesopotamia and entered the Pontic steppes in the early tenth century. Here, they were used by Byzantium to check the Rus, (for instance, in the ambush and killing of Svyatoslav in 972). The ongoing Pecheneg‑ Rus struggle, frequently little more than localized raiding, prompted Svyatoslav's son Vladimir I (980‑1015) to create a series of fortifications on his southern frontiers to contain the nomads.
In 1036, however, the Pechenegs made a serious attempt on Kiev. Decisively defeated by Yaroslav (1036‑1054) and still faced with Oghur pressure, they now migrated toward the Byzantine Balkan holdings. Subsequently, in 1091, masses of them were slaughtered there by joint Byzantine‑Cuman forces. The Oghuz, involved in central Asian political turbulence and themselves under great internal pressures in part reflected in the Seljuk movement, were also caught up in the migration of yet another mass of Turkic tribesmen from the east (the Cuman‑Qun migration, 1017‑1018). While many Oghuz entered Iran under Seljuk leadership, others appeared in the Pontic steppes after 965 (they aided Svyatoslav in his Khazar campaign).
More followed by the mid eleventh century, when the full impact Cuman movements was felt. The Torki (Oghuz‑Rus) appear in considerable numbers in 1054‑1055, just ahead of the Cuman advance. They were then defeated by the Rus and again suffered defeat in 1060. Like the Pechenegs, they migrated to the Byzantine borders (1064‑1065). Those remaining in the steppe were joined with remnants of the Pechenegs and other nomads to form, ultimately the Chernye Klobuki (Russian: Black Hoods), the Turkic border guards of the Kievan princes.
The dominant steppe people from the mid eleventh century until the Mongol conquest was the Cuman/Kipchak tribal union, whose immediate antecedents are still much in dispute. The Cuman steppe (Russian: Pole Polovetskoe; Persian: Dasht‑iQipchaq) extended from the Danube to kazakhtan. Although they periodically raided Byzantine lands, supported the Asenids in the creation of the Second Bulgarian Empire, and helped Georgia to withstand the Seljuks, they most frequently enmeshed themselves in the domestic squabbles of their closest neighbors, the Rus. Warfare here, however, complicated by a variety of marital and military alliances, tended to be on a small scale and never assumed the aspect of a life‑and‑death struggle. Rus political fragmentation was almost matched in Cumania. The efforts of Konchak khan and his son Yurii to unite the Cuman sub-confederations in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries were undone by the Mongol conquest in 1237. The Mongols reorganized the Cumans (now called Tatars), but the latter quickly Turkicized the resultant Golden Horde.
Some Cumans fled to Hungary, where they settled in regions that now bear their name. Others were sold on the steppe as military slaves in the Islamic world, where they seized power from the Ayyubids (Egypt/Syria) and formed their own state in 1250, that of the Mamluks." (Dictionary of the Middle Ages, Vol. 10)
The Conversion of the Khazars to Judaism: "'The religion of the Hebrews,' writes Bury, 'had exercised a profound influence on the creed of Islam, and it (has been falsely said) been a basis for Christianity; it had won scattered proselytes; but the conversion of the Khazars to be undiluted religion of Jehovah is unique in history.' (Bury, p. 401)
What was the motivation of this unique event? It is not easy to get under the skin of a Khazar prince ‑ covered, as it was, by a coat of mail. But if we reason in terms of power‑politics, which obeys essentially the same rules throughout the ages, a fairly plausible analogy offers itself.
At the beginning of the eighth century the world was polarized between the two super‑powers representing Christianity and Islam. Their ideological doctrines were welded to power‑politics pursued by the classical methods of propaganda, subversion and military conquest. The Khazar Empire represented a Third Force, which had proved equal to either of them, both as an adversary and an ally. But it could only maintain its independence by accepting neither Christianity nor Islam ‑ for either choice would have automatically subordinated it to the authority of the Roman Emperor or the Caliph of Baghdad.
There had been no lack of efforts by either court to convert the Khazars to Christianity or Islam, but all they resulted in was the exchange of diplomatic courtesies, dynastic inter‑marriages and shifting military alliances based on mutual self‑interest. Relying on its military strength, the Khazar kingdom, with its hinterland of vassal tribes, was determined to preserve its position as the Third Force, leader of the uncommitted nations of the steppes.
At the same time, their intimate contacts with Cyzantium and the Caliphate had taught the Khazars that their primitive shamanism was not only barbaric and outdated compared to the great monotheistic creeds, but also unable to confer on the leaders the spiritual and legal authority which the rulers of the two theocratic world powers, the Caliph and the Emperor, enjoyed. Yet the conversion to either creed would have meant submission, the end of independence, and thus would have defeated its purpose. What could have been more logical than to embrace a third creed, which was uncommitted towards either of the two, yet represented the venerable foundation of both?
The apparent logic of the decision is of course due to the deceptive clarity of hindsight. In reality, the conversion to Judaism required an act of genius. Yet both the Arab and Hebrew sources on the history of the conversion, however varied in detail, point to a line of reasoning as indicated above.
To quote Bury once more: 'There can be no question hat the ruler was actuated by political motives in adopting Judaism. To embrace Mohammadanism would have made him the spiritual dependent of the Caliphs, who attempted to press their faith on the Khazars, and in Christianity lay the danger of his becoming an ecclesiastical vassal of the Roman Empire. Judaism was a reputable religion with sacred books which both Christian and Mohammadan respected; it elevated him above the heathen barbarians, and secured him against the interference of Caliph or Emperor. But he did not adopt, along with circumcision, the intolerance of the Jewish cult. He allowed the mass of his people to abide in their heathendom and worship their idols.'
Though the Khazar court's conversion was no doubt politically motivated, it would still be absurd to imagine that they embraced overnight, blindly, a religion whose tenets were unknown to them. In fact, however, they had been well acquainted with Jews and their religious observances for at least a century before bibliography written 987, A.D., Informs us that in his time the Khazars used the Hebrew alphabet. It served the dual purpose of scholarly discourse in Hebrew (analogous to the use of medieval Latin in the West) and as a written alphabet for the various languages spoken in Khazaria (analogous to the use of the Latin alphabet for the various vernaculars in Western Europe).
From Khazaria the Hebrew script seemed to have spread into neighboring countries. Thus Chwolson reports that 'inscriptions in a non‑Semitic language (or possibly in two different non‑Semitic languages) using Hebrew characters were found on two gravestones from Phanagoria and Parthenit in the Crimea; they have not been deciphered yet.' (These inscriptions are a category apart from the forgeries of Frikovitch, notorious among historians) (The Crimea was, as we have seen, intermittently under Khazar rule; but it also had an old‑established Jewish community, and the inscriptions may even pre‑date the conversion). Some Hebrew letters (shin and tsadei) also found their way into the Cyrillic alphabet, and furthermore, many Polish silver coins have been found, dating from the twelfth or thirteenth century, which bear Polish inscriptions in Hebrew lettering (e.g., Leszek krol Polski ‑ Leszek King of Poland), side by side with coins inscribed in the Latin alphabet. Poliak comments: 'These coins are the final evidence for the spreading of the Hebrew script from Khazaria to the neighboring Slavonic countries. The use of these coins was not related to any question of religion. They were minted because many of the Polish people were more used to this type of script than to the Roman script, not considering it as specifically Jewish.'
Thus while the conversion was no doubt inspired by opportunistic motives ‑ conceived as a cunning political manouvre ‑ it brought in its wake cultural developments which could hardly have been foreseen by those who started it. The Hebrew alphabet was the beginning; three centuries later the decline of the Khazar state is marked by repeated outbreaks of a messianic Zionism, with pseudo‑Messiahs like David El‑Roi (hero of a novel by Disraeli) leading quixotic crusades for the re‑conquest of Jerusalem.
After the defeat by the Arabs in 737, the Kagan's forced adoption of Islam had been a formality almost instantly revoked, which apparently left no impression on his people. In contrast to this, the voluntary conversion to Judaism was to produce deep and lasting effects. The circumstances of the conversion are obscured by legend, but the principal Arab and Hebrew accounts of it have some basic features in common.
Al‑Masudi's account of the Jewish rule in Khazaria, quoted earlier on, ends with a reference to a previous work of his, in which he gave a description of those circumstances. That previous work of Masudi's is lost; but there exist two accounts which are based on the lost book. The first, by Dimaski (written in 1327), reiterates that at the time of Harun al Rashid, the Byzantine Emperor forced the Jews to emigrate; these emigrants came to the Khazar country where they found 'an intelligent but uneducated race to whom they offered their religion. The natives found it better than their own and accepted it.'
The second, much more detailed account is in al‑bakri's Book of Kingdoms and Roads (eleventh century): 'The reason for the conversion to Judaism of the King of the Khazars, who had previously been a pagan, is as follows. He had adopted Christianity (No other source, as far as I know, mentions this. It may be a substitution more palatable to Muslim readers for the Kagan's short‑lived adoption of Islam prior to Judaism ‑ Author) Then he recognized its falsehood and discussed this matter, which greatly worried him, with one of his high officials. The latter said to him: O king, those in possession of sacred scriptures fall into three groups. Summon them and ask them to state their case, then follow the one who is in possession of the truth.
So he sent to the Christians for a bishop. Now there was with the King a Jew, skilled in argument, who engaged him in disputation. He asked the Bishop: 'What do you say of Moses, the son of Amran, and the Torah which was revealed to him?' The Bishop replied: 'Moses is a prophet and the Torah speaks the truth.' Then the Jew said to the King: 'He has already admitted the truth of my creed. Ask him now what he believes in.' So the King asked him and he replied: 'I say that Jesus the Messiah is the son of Mary, he is the Word, and he has revealed the mysteries in the name of God.' Then said the Jew to the King of the Khazars: 'He preaches a doctrine which I know not, while he accepts my propositions.' But the Bishop was not strong in producing evidence. Then the King asked for a Muslim, and they sent him a scholarly, clever man who was good at arguments. But the Jew hired someone who poisoned him on the journey, and he died. And the Jew succeeded in winning the King for his faith, so that he embraced Judaism.'
The Arab historians certainly had a gift for sugaring the pill. Had the Muslim scholar been able to participate in the debate he would have fallen into the same trap as the Bishop, for both accepted the truth of the Old Testament, whereas the upholders of the New Testament and of the Koran were each outvoted two to one. The King's approval of this reasoning is symbolic: he is only willing to accept doctrines which are shared by all three ‑ their common denominator ‑ and refuses to commit himself to any of the rival claims which go beyond that. It is once more the principle of the uncommitted world, applied to theology. The story also implies, as Bury has pointed out, that Jewish influence at the Khazar court must already have been strong before the formal conversion, for the Bishop and the Muslim scholar have to be 'sent for,' whereas the Jew is already 'with him' (the King).
We now turn from the principal Arab source on the conversion ‑ Masudi and his compilers ‑ to the principal Jewish source. This is the so‑called 'Khazar Correspondence': an exchange of letters, in Hebrew, between Hasdai Ibn Shaprut, the Jewish chief minister of the Caliph of Cordoba, and Joseph, King of the Khazars, or, rather between their respective scribes. The authenticity of the correspondence has been the subject of controversy but is now generally accepted with due allowance made for the vagaries of later copyists.
The Khazar Correspondence
The exchange of letters between the Spanish statesman Hasdai ibn Shaprut and King Joseph of Khazaria has for a long time fascinated historians. It is true that, as Dunlop wrote, 'the importance of the Khazar Correspondence can be exaggerated. By this time it is possible to reconstruct Khazar history in some detail without recourse to the letters of Hasdai and Joseph.' Nevertheless, the reader may be interested in a brief outline of what is known of the history of these documents.
Hasdai's Letter was apparently written between 954 and 961, fro the embassy from Eastern Europe that he mentions is believed to have visited Cordoba in 954, and Caliph Abd‑al‑Rahman, whom he mentions as his sovereign, ruled till 961. That the Letter was actually penned by Hasdai's secretary, Menahem ben‑Sharuk, whose name appears in the acrostic after Hasdai's, has been established by Landau, through comparison with Menachem's other surviving work. Thus the authenticity of Hasdai's Letter is no longer in dispute, while the evidence concerning Joseph's Reply is necessarily more indirect and complex.
The earliest known mentions of the Correspondence date from the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Around the year 1100 Rabbi Jehuda ben Barzillai of Barcelona wrote in Hebrew his 'Book of the Festivals' ‑ Sefer ha‑Ittim ‑ which contains a long reference, including direct quotations, to Joseph's Reply to Hasdai. The passage in question in Barzillai's work starts as follows; 'We have seen among some other manuscripts the copy of a letter which King Joseph, son of Aaron, the Khazar priest wrote to R. Hasdai bar Isaac. (Hasdai's name in Hebrew was bar Isaac bar Shaprut, The R (for Rabbi) is a courtesy title). We do not know if the letter is genuine or not, and if it is a fact that the Khazars, who are Turks, became proselytes. It is not definite whether all that is written in the letter is fact and truth or not. There may be falsehoods written in it, or people may have added to it, or there may be error on the part of the scribe...The reason why we need to write in this our book things which seem to be exaggerated is that we have found in the letter of this king Joseph to R. Hasdai that R. Hasdai had asked him of what family he was, the condition of the king, how his fathers had been gathered under the wings of the Presence (i.e., become converted to Judaism) and how great were his kingdom and dominion. He replied to him on every head, writing all the particulars in the letter.'
Barzillai goes on to quote or paraphrase further passages from Joseph's Reply, thus leaving no doubt that the Reply was already in existence as early as A.D. 1100. A particularly convincing touch is added by the Rabbi's scholarly skepticism. Living in provincial Barcelona, he evidently knew little or nothing about the Khazars.
About the time when Rabbi Barzillai wrote, the Arab chronicler, Ibn Hawkal, also heard some rumors about Hasdai's involvement with the Khazars. There survives an enigmatic note, which Ibn Hawkal jotted down on a manuscript map, dated A. D. 479 ‑ A.D. 1086. It says: 'Hasdai ibn‑Ishaq (Arab version of Hasdai's name) thinks that this great long mountain (the Caucasus) is connected with the mountains of Armenia and traverses the country of the Greeks, extending to Khazaran and the mountains of Armenia. He was well informed about these parts because he visited them and met their principal kings and leading men.'
It seems most unlikely that Hasdai actually visited Khazaria; but we remember that he offered to do so in his Letter, and that Joseph enthusiastically welcomed the prospect in the Reply; perhaps the industrious Hawkal heard some gossip about the Correspondence and extrapolated from there, a practice not unfamiliar among the chroniclers of the time.
Some fifty years later (A.D. 1140) jehudah Halevi wrote his philosophical tract 'The Khazars' (Kuzri). As already said, it contains little factual information, but his account of the Khazar conversion to Judaism agrees in broad outlines with that given by Joseph in the Reply. Halevi does not explicitly refer to the Correspondence, but his book is mainly concerned with theology, disregarding any historical or factual references. He had probably read a transcript of the Correspondence as the less erudite Barzillai had before him, but the evidence is inconclusive.
It is entirely conclusive, however, in the case of Abraham ben Daud whose popular Sefer ha‑Kabbalah, written in 1161, contains the following passage: 'You will find congregations of Israel spread abroad from the town of Mala at the extremity of the Maghrib, as far as Tahart at its commencement, the extremity of Africa, in all Africa, Egypt, the country of the Sabaeans, Arabia, Babylonia, Elam, Persia, Dedan, the country of the Girgashites which is called Jurjan, Tabaristan, as far as Daylam and the river Itil where live the Khazar peoples who become proselytes. Their king Joseph sent a letter to R. Hasdai, the Prince bar Isaac ben‑Shaprut and informed him that he and all his people followed the Rabbanite faith. We have seen in Toledo some of their descendants, pupils of the wise, and they told us that the remnant of them followed the Rabbanite faith.'
The first printed version of the Khazar Correspondence is contained in a Hebrew pamphlet, Kol Mebasser, 'Voice of the Messenger of Good News.' (Two copies of the pamphlet belonging to two different editions are preserved in the Bodleian Library) It was published in Constantinople in or around 1577 by Isaac Abraham Akrish. In his preface Akrish relates that during his travels in Egypt fifteen years earlier he had heard rumors of an independent Jewish kingdom (these rumors probably referred to the Falashas of Abyssinia); and that subsequently he obtained 'a letter which was sent to the king of the Khazars, and the king's reply.' He then decided to publish this correspondence in order to raise the spirits of his fellow Jews. Whether or not he thought that Khazaria still existed is not clear. At any rate the preface is followed by the text of the two letters, without further comment.
But the Correspondence did not remain buried in Akrish's obscure little pamphlet. Some sixty years after its publication, a copy of it was sent by a friend to Johannes Buxtorf the Younger, a Calvinist scholar of great erudition. Buxtorf was an expert Hebraist, who published a great amount of studies in biblical exegesis and rabbinical literature. When he read Akrish's pamphlet, he was at first as skeptical regarding the authenticity of the Correspondence as Rabbi Barzillai had been five hundred years before him. But in 1660 buxtorf finally printed the text of both letters in Hebrew and in a Latin translation as an addendum to Jehudah Halevi's book on the Khazars. It was perhaps an obvious, but not a happy idea, for the inclusion, within the same covers, of Halevi's legendary tale hardly predisposed historians to take the Correspondence seriously. It was only in the nineteenth century that their attitude changed, when more became known, from independent sources, about the Khazars.
The only manuscript version which contains both Hasdai's Letter and Joseph's Reply, is in the library of Christ Church in Oxford. According to Dunlop and the Russian expert, Kokovtsov, the manuscript 'presents a remarkably close similarity to the printed text' and 'served directly or indirectly as a source of the printed text.' It probably dates from the sixteenth century and is believed to have been in the possession of the Dean of Christ Church, John Fell (whom Thomas Brown immortalized with his 'I do not love thee, Dr. Fell...').
Another manuscript containing Joseph's Reply but not Hasdai's Letter is preserved in the Leningrad Public Library. It is considerably longer than the printed text of Akrish and the Christ Church manuscript; accordingly it is generally know as the Long Version, as distinct from the Akrish‑Christ Church 'Short Version,' which appears to be an abbreviation of it. The Long Version is also considerably older; it probably dates from the thirteenth century, the Short Version from the sixteenth. The Soviet historian Rabakov has plausibly suggested that the Long Version, or an even older text, had been edited and compressed by medieval Spanish copyists to produce the Short Version of Joseph's Reply.
At this point we encounter a red herring across the ancient track. The Long Version is part of the so‑called 'Firkowich Collection' of Hebrew manuscripts and epitaphs in the Leningrad Public Library. It probably came from the Cairo Geniza, where a major part of the manuscripts in the Collection originated. Abraham Firkowich was a colorful nineteenth‑century scholar who would deserve an Appendix all to himself. He was a great authority in his field, but he was also a Karaite zealot who wished to prove to the Tsarist government that the karaites were different from orthodox Jews and should not be discriminated against by Christians. With this laudable purpose in mind, he doctored some of his authentic old manuscripts and epitaphs, by interpolating or adding a few words to give them a Karaite slant.
Thus the Long Version, having passed through the hands of Firkowich, was greeted with a certain mistrust when it was found, after his death, in a bundle of other manuscripts in his collection by the Russian historian Harkavy. Harkavy had no illusions about Firkowich's reliability, for he himself had previously denounced some of Firkowich's spurious interpolations. Yet Harkavy had no doubts regarding the antiquity of the manuscript; he published it in the original Hebrew in 1879 and also in Russian and German translations, accepting it as an early version of Joseph's letter, from which the Short Version was derived. harkavy's colleague (and rival) Chwolson concurred that the whole document was written by the same hand and that it contained no additions of any kind. Lastly, in 1932, the Russian Academy published Paul Kokovtsov's authoritative book, The Hebrew‑Khazar Correspondence in the Tenth Century, including facsimiles of the Long Version of the Reply in the Leningrad Library, the Short Version in Christ Church and in Akrish's pamphlet. After a critical analysis of the three texts, he came to the conclusion that both the Long and the Short Versions are based on the same original text, which is in general, though not always, more faithfully preserved in the Long Version.
Kokovtsov's critical survey, and particularly his publication of the manuscript facsimiles, virtually settled the controversy, which, anyway, affected only the Long Version, but not Hasdai's letter and the Short Version of the Reply.
Yet a voice of dissent was raised from an unexpected quarter. In 1941 Poliak advanced the theory that the Khazar Correspondence was, not exactly a forgery, but a fictional work written in the tenth century with the purpose of spreading information about, or making propaganda for, the Jewish kingdom. (It could not have been written later than the eleventh century, for, as we have seen, Rabbi Barzillai read the Correspondence about 1100, and Ibn Daud quoted from it in 1161). But this theory, plausible at first glace, was effectively demolished by Landau and Dunlop. Landau was able to prove that Hasdai's Letter was indeed written by his secretary Menahem ben‑Sharuk. And Dunlop pointed out that in the Letter Hasdai asks a number of questions about Khazaria which Joseph fails to answer, which is certainly not the way to write an information pamphlet: 'There is no answer forthcoming on the part of Joseph to enquiries as to his method of procession to his place of worship, and as to whether war abrogates the Sabbath...
There is a marked absence of correspondence between questions of the Letter and answers given in the Reply. This should probably be regarded as an indication that the documents are what they purport to be and not a literary invention.' (History of the Russian Jews, Dunlop, p. 143)
Dunlop goes on to ask a pertinent question: 'Why the Letter of Hasdai at all, which, though considerably longer than the Reply of Joseph, has very little indeed about the Khazars, if the purpose of writing it and the Reply was, as Poliak supposes, simply to give a popular account of Khazaria? If the Letter is an introduction to the information about the Khazars in the Reply, it is certainly a very curious one, full of facts about Spain and the Umayyads which have nothing to do with Khazaria.'
Dunlop then clinches the argument by a linguistic test which proves conclusively that the Letter and the Reply were written by different people. The proof concerns one of the marked characteristics of Hebrew grammar, the use of the so‑called 'waw‑conversive,' to define tense. I shall not attempt to explain this intricate grammatical quirk, and shall instead simply quote Dunlop's tabulation of the different methods used in the Letter and in the Long Version to designate past action:
Waw ConversiveSimple Waw
with Imperfect with Perfect
Hasdai's Letter 48 14
Reply (Long Version) 1 95
In the Short Version of the Reply, the first method (Hasdai's) is used thirty‑seven times, the second fifty times. But the Short Version uses the first method mostly in passages where the wording differs from the Long Version. Dunlop suggests that this is due to later Spanish editors paraphrasing the Long Version. He also points out that Hasdai's Letter, written in Moorish Spain, contains many Arabisms (for instance, al‑khazar for the Khazars), whereas the Reply has none. Lastly, concerning the general tenor of the Correspondence, he says: '...
Nothing decisive appears to have been alleged against the factual contents of the Reply of Joseph in its more original form, the Long Version. The stylistic difference supports its authenticity. It is what might be expected in documents emanating from widely separated parts of the Jewish world, where also the level of culture was by no means the same. It is perhaps allowable here to record the impression, for what it is worth, that in general the language of the Reply is less artificial, more naive, than that of the Letter.'
To sum up, it is difficult to understand why past historians were so reluctant to believe that the Khazar Kagan was capable of dictating a letter, though it was known that he corresponded with the Byzantine Emperor (we remember the seals of three solidi); or that pious Jews in Spain and Egypt should have diligently copied and preserved a message from the only Jewish king since biblical times.
The exchange of letter apparently took place after 954 and before 961, that is roughly at the time when Masudi wrote. To appreciate its significance a word must be said about the personality of Hasdai Ibn Shaprut ‑ perhaps the most brilliant figure in the 'Golden Age' (900‑1200) of the Jews in Spain.
In 1929, Abd‑al‑Rahmah III, a member of the Omayad dynasty, succeeded in unifying the Moorish possessions in the southern and central parts of the Iberian peninsula under his rule, and founded the Western Caliphate. His capital, Cordoba, became the glory of Arab Spain, and a focal center of European culture ‑ with a library of 400,000 cataloged volumes.
Hasdai, born 910 in Cordoba into a distinguished Jewish family, first attracted the Caliph's attention as a medical practitioner with some remarkable cures to his credit. Abd‑al‑Rahman appointed him his court physician, and trusted his judgment so completely that Hasdai was called upon, first, to put the state finances in order, then to act as Foreign Minister and diplomatic trouble‑shooter in the new Caliphate's complex dealings with Byzantium, the German Emperor Otto, with Castile, Navarra, Arragon and other Christian kingdoms in the north of Spain. Hasdai was a true uomo universale centuries before the Renaissance who, in between affairs of state, still found the time to translate medical books into Arabic, to correspond with the learned rabbis of Baghdad and to act as a Maecenas for Hebrew grammarians and poets.
He obviously was an enlightened, yet a devoted Jew, who used his diplomatic contacts to gather information about the Jewish communities dispersed in various parts of the world, and to intervene on their behalf whenever possible. He was particularly concerned about the persecution of Jews in the Byzantine Empire under Romanus. Fortunately, he wielded considerable influence at the Byzantine court, which was vitally interested in procuring the benevolent neutrality of Cordoba during the Byzantine campaigns against the Muslims of the East. Hasdai, who was conducting the negotiations, used this opportunity to intercede on behalf of Byzantine Jewry, apparently with success.
According to his own account, Hasdai first heard of the existence of an independent Jewish kingdom from some merchant traders from Khurasan in Persia; but he doubted the truth of their story. Later he questioned the members of a Byzantine diplomatic mission to Cordoba, and they confirmed the merchants' account, contributing a considerable amount of factual detail about the Khazar kingdom, including the name, Joseph, of its present King. Thereupon Hasdai decided to send couriers with a letter to King Joseph.
The letter contains a list of questions about the Khazar state, its people, method of government, armed forces, and so on, including an inquiry to which of the twelve tribes Joseph belonged. This seems to indicate that Hasdai thought the Jewish Khazars to hail from Palestine, as the Spanish Jews did, and perhaps even to represent one of the Lost Tribes. Joseph, not being of Jewish descent, belonged, of course, To None of the Tribes(of Israel); in his Reply to Hasdai, he provides, as we shall see, a genealogy of a different kind, but his main concern is to give Hasdai a detailed, if legendary, account of the conversion, which took place two centuries earlier, and the circumstances that led to it.
Joseph's narrative starts with the eulogy of his ancestor, King Bulan, a great conqueror and a wise man who 'drove out the sorcerers and idolaters form his land.' Subsequently an angel appeared to King Bulan in his dreams, exhorting him to worship the only true God, and promising that in exchange He would 'bless and multiply Bulan's offspring, and deliver his enemies into his hands, and make his kingdom last to the end of the world.' This, of course, is inspired by the story of the Covenant in Genesis; and it implies that the Khazars too Claimed the Status of a Chosen Race, who made their own Covenant with the Lord, even though They(Khazars) were not descended from Abraham's Seed. But at this point Joseph's story takes an unexpected turn. King Bulan is quite willing to serve the Almighty, but he raises a difficulty: 'Thou knowest, my Lord, the secret thoughts of my heart and thou has searched my kidneys to confirm that my trust is in thee; but the people over which I rule have a pagan mind and I do not know whether they will believe me. If I have found favor and mercy in thine eyes, then I beseech thee to appear also to their Great Prince, to make him support me.
The Eternal One granted Bulan's request, he appeared to this Prince in a dream, and when he arose in the morning he came to the King and made it known to him...' There is nothing in Genesis, nor in the Arab accounts of the conversion, about a great prince whose consent has to be obtained. It is an unmistakable reference to the Khazar double kingship. The 'Great Prince,' apparently, is the Bek; but it is not impossible that the 'King' was the Bek, and the 'Prince' the Kagan. Moreover according to Arab and Armenian sources, the leader of the Khazar army which invaded Transcaucasia in 731 (i.e., a few years before the presumed date of the conversion) was called 'Bulkhan.'
Joseph's letter continues by relating how the angel appeared once more to the dreaming King and bade him to build a place of worship in which the Lord may dwell, for: 'the sky and the skies above the sky are not large enough to hold me.' King Bulan replies bashfully that he does not possess the gold and silver required for such an enterprise, 'although it is my duty and desire to carry it out.'
The angel reassures him: all Bulan has to do is to lead his armies into Dariela and Ardabil in Armenia, where a treasure of silver and a treasure of gold are awaiting him. This fits in with Bulan's or Bulkhan's raid preceding the conversion; and also with Arab sources according to which the Khazars at one time controlled silver and gold mines in the Caucasus.
Bulan does as the angel told him, returns victoriously with the loot, and builds 'a Holy Tabernacle equipped with a sacred coffer (the 'Ark of the Covenant'), a candelabrum, an altar and holy implements which have been preserved to this day and are still in my (King Joseph's) possession.'
Joseph's letter, written in the second half of the tenth century, more than two hundred years after the events it purports to describe, is obviously a mixture of fact and legend. His description of the scant furnishings of the place of worship, and the paucity of the preserved relics, is in marked contrast to the account he gives in other parts of the letter of the present prosperity of his country. The days of his ancestor Bulan appear to him as remote antiquity, when the poor but virtuous King did not even have the money to construct the Holy Tabernacle, which was, after all, only a tent.
However, Joseph's letter up to this point is merely the prelude to the real drama of the conversion, which he now proceeds to relate. Apparently Bulan's renunciation of idolatry in favor of the 'only true God' was only the first step, which still left the choice open between the three monotheistic creeds.
At least, this is what the continuation of Joseph's letter seems to imply: 'After these feats of arms (the invasion of Armenia), King Bulan's fame spread to all countries. The King of Edom (Byzantium) and the King of the Ishmaelim (the Muslims) heard the news and sent to him envoys with precious gifts and money and learned men to convert him to their beliefs; but the king was wise and sent for a Jew with much knowledge and acumen and put all three together to discuss their doctrines.'
So we have another Brains Trust, or round‑table conference, just as in Masudi, with the difference that the Muslim has not been poisoned beforehand. But the pattern of the argument is much the same. After long and futile discussions, the King adjourns the meeting for three days, during which the disputants are left to cool their heels in their respective tents; then he reverts to a stratagem. He convokes the disputants separately. He asks the Christian which of the other two religions is nearer the truth, and the Christian answers, 'the Jews.' He confronts the Muslim with the same question and gets the same reply. Neutralism has once more carried the day.
So much for the conversion. What else do we learn from the celebrated 'Khazar Correspondence?'
To take Hasdai's letter first: its starts with a Hebrew poem, in the then fashionable manner of the piyut, a rhapsodic verse form which contains hidden allusions or riddles, and frequently acrostics. The poem exalts the military victories of the addressee, King Joseph; at the same time, the initial letters of the lines form an acrostic which spells out the full name of Hasdai bar Isaac bar Ezra bar Shaprut, followed by the name of Menahem ben‑Sharuk. Now this Menahem was a celebrated Hebrew poet, lexicographer and grammarian, a secretary and protege of Hasdai's.
He was obviously given the task of drafting the epistle to King Joseph in his most ornate style, and he took the opportunity to immortalize himself by inserting his own name into the acrostic after that of his patron. Several other works of Menahem ben‑Sharuk are preserved, and there can be no doubt that Hasdai's letter is his handiwork.
After the poem, the compliments and diplomatic flourishes, the letter gives a glowing account of the prosperity of Moorish Spain, and the happy condition of the Jews under its Caliph Abd al Rahman, 'the like of which has never been known...And thus the derelict sheep were taken into care, the arms of their persecutors were paralyzed, and the yoke was discarded. The country we live in is called in Hebrew Sepharad, but the Ishmaelites who inhabit it call it al‑Andalus.'
Hasdai then proceeds to explain how he first heard about the existence of the Jewish kingdom from the merchants of Khurasan, then in more detail from the Byzantine envoys, and he reports what these envoys told him: 'I questioned them (the Byzantines) about it and they replied that it was true, and that the name of the kingdom is al‑Khazar. Between Constantinople and this country there is a journey of fifteen days by sea (this probably refers to the so‑called 'Khazarian route': from Constantinople across the Black Sea and up the Don, then across the Don‑Volga portage and down the Volga to Itil. (An alternative, shorter route was from Constantinople to the east coast of the Black sea)), but they said, by land there are many other people between us and them. The name of the ruling king is Joseph.
Ships come to us from their land, bringing fish, furs and all sorts of merchandise. They are in alliance with us, and honored by us. We exchange embassies and gifts. They are powerful and have a fortress for their outposts and troops which go out on forays from time to time (The fortress is evidently Sarkel on the Don. 'They are honored by us' fits in with the passage in Constantine Born‑in‑the‑Purple about the special gold seal used in letters to the Kagan. Constantine was the Byzantine Emperor at the time of the Embassy to Spain).'
This bit of information offered by Hasdai to the Khazar King about the King's own country is obviously intended to draw a detailed reply from Joseph. It was good psychology: Hasdai must have known that criticism of erroneous statements flows easier from the pen than an original exposition.
Next, Hasdai relates his earlier efforts to get in touch with Joseph. First he had sent a messenger, a certain Isaac bar Nathan, with instructions to proceed to the Khazar court. But Isaac got only as far as Constantinople, where he was courteously treated, but prevented from continuing the journey. (Understandably so: given the Empire's ambivalent attitude towards the Jewish kingdom, it was certainly not in Constantine's interest to facilitate an alliance between Khazaria and the Cordoba Caliphate with its Jewish Chief Minister). So Hasdai's messenger returned to Spain, mission unaccomplished. But soon another opportunity offered itself: the arrival at Cordoba of an embassy from Eastern Europe. Among its members were two Jews, Mar Saul and Mar Joseph, who offered to deliver Hasdai's letter to King Joseph. (According to Joseph's reply to Hasdai, it was actually delivered by a third person, one Isaac ben‑Eliezer). Having thus described in detail how his letter came to be written, and his efforts to have it delivered. Hasdai proceeds to ask a series of direct questions which reflect his avidity for more information about every aspect of the Khazar land, from its geography to its rites in observing the Sabbath. The concluding passage in Hasdai's letter strikes a note quite different from that of its opening paragraphs: 'I feel the urge to know the truth, whether there is really a place on this earth where harassed Israel can rule itself, where it is subject to nobody.
If I were to know that this is indeed the case, I would not hesitate to forsake all honors, to resign my high office, to abandon my family, and to travel over mountains and plains, over land and water, until I arrived at the place where my Lord, the (Jewish) King rules...And I also have one more request: to be informed whether you have any knowledge of (the possible date) of the Final Miracle (the coming of the Messiah) which, wandering from country to country, we are awaiting. Dishonored and humiliated in our dispersion, we have to listen in silence to those who say: 'every nation has its own land and you alone possess not even a shadow of a country on this earth.'
The beginning of the letter praises the happy lot of the Jews in Spain; the end breathes the bitterness of the exile, Zionist fervor and Messianic hope. But these opposite attitudes have always co‑existed in the divided heart of Jews throughout their history. The contradiction in Hasdai's letter gives it an added touch of authenticity. How far his implied offer to enter into the service of the Khazar King is to be taken seriously in another question, which we cannot answer. Perhaps he could not either.
King Joseph's reply is less accomplished and moving than Hasdai's letter. No wonder, as Cassel remarks: 'Scholarship and culture reigned not among the Jews of the Volga, but on the rivers of Spain.' The highlight of the Reply is the story of the conversion, already quoted. No doubt Joseph too employed a scribe for penning it, probably a scholarly refugee from Byzantium. Nevertheless, the Reply sounds like a voice out of the Old Testament compared to the polished cadences of the tenth‑century modern statesman.
It starts with a fanfare of greetings, then reiterates the main contents of Hasdai's letter, proudly emphasizing that the Khazar kingdom gives the lie to those who say that 'the Scepter of Judah has forever fallen from the Jews' hands' and 'that there is no place on earth for a kingdom of their own.' This is followed by a rather cryptic remark to the effect that 'already our fathers have exchanged friendly letters which are preserved in our archives and are known to our elders.' (This may refer to a ninth‑century Jewish traveller, Eldad ha‑Dani, whose fantastic tales, much read in the Middle Ages, include mentions of Khazaria which, he says, is inhabited by three of the lost tribes of Israel, and collects tributes from twenty‑eight neighboring kingdoms. Eldad visited Spain around 880 and may or may not have visited the Khazar country. Hasdai briefly mentions him in his letter to Joseph, as if to ask what to make of him).
Joseph then proceeds to provide a genealogy of his people. Though a fierce Jewish nationalist, proud of wielding the 'Scepter of Judah,' He cannot, and does not, Claim for Them(the Khazars) Semitic DEscent; He traces their (Khazars) Ancestry not to Shem, but to Noah's Third Son, Japheth; or more precisely to Japheth's Grandson, Togarma, the Ancestor of all Turkish Tribes. 'We have found in the family registers of our fathers,' Joseph asserts boldly, 'that Togarma had ten sons, and the names of their offspring are as follows: Uigur, Dursu, Avars, Huns, Basilii, Tarniakh, Khazars, Zagora, Bulgars, Sabir. We (Khazars) are the Sons of Khazar, The Seventh...'
The identity of some of these tribes, with names spelt in the Hebrew script is rather dubious, but that hardly matters; the characteristic feature in this genealogical exercise is the amalgamation of Genesis with Turkish tribal tradition. it also throws a sidelight on the frequent description of the Khazars as the people of Magog. Magog, according to Genesis X, 2‑3 was the much maligned uncle of Togarma.
After the genealogy, Joseph mentions briefly some military conquests by his ancestors which carried them as far as the Danube; then follows at great length the story of Bulan's conversion. 'From this day onwards,' Joseph continues, 'the Lord gave him strength and aided him; he had himself and his followers circumcised and sent for Jewish sages who taught him the Law and explained the Commandments.' There follow more boasts about military victories, conquered nations, etc., and then a significant passage: 'After these events, one of his (Bulan's) grandsons became King; his name was Obadiah, he was a brave and venerated man who reformed the Rule, fortified the Law according to tradition and usage, built synagogues and schools, assembled a multitude of Israel's sages, gave them lavish gifts of gold and silver, and made them interpret the twenty‑four (sacred) books, the Mishna (Precepts) and the Talmud, and the order in which the liturgies are to be said.'
This indicates that, about a couple of generations after Bulan, a religious revival or reformation took place (possibly accompanied by a coup d'etat on the lines envisaged by Artamonov). It seems indeed that the Judization of the Khazars proceeded in several steps. We remember that King Bulan drove out 'the sorcerers and idolaters' before the angel appeared to him; and that he made his Covenant with the 'true God' before deciding whether He was the Jewish, Christian of Muslim God. It seems highly probable that the conversion of King Bulan and his followers was another intermediary step, that they embraced a primitive or rudimentary form of Judaism, based on the Bible alone, excluding the Talmud, all rabbinical literature, and the observances derived from it.
In this respect they resembled the Karaites, a fundamentalist sect which originated in the eighth century in Persia and spread among the Jews all over the world, particularly in 'Little Khazaria,' i.e., the Crimea. Dunlop and some other authorities surmised that between Bulan and Obadiah (i.e., roughly between 740 and 800) some form of Karaism prevailed in the country, and that orthodox 'Rabbinic' Judaism was only introduced in the course of Obadiah's religious reform. The point is of some importance because Karaism apparently survive in Khazaria to the end, and villages of Turkish‑speaking Karaite Jews, obviously of Khazar origin, still existed in modern times.
Thus the Judaization of the Khazars was a gradual process which, triggered off by political expediency, slowly penetrated into the deeper strata of their minds and eventually produced the Messianism of their period of decline. Their religious commitment survived the collapse of their state, and persisted in the Khazar‑Jewish settlements of Russia and Poland.
After mentioning Obadiah's religious reforms, Joseph gives a list of his successors: 'Hiskia his son, and his son Manasseh, and Chanukah the brother of Obadiah, and Isaac his son, Manasseh his son, Nissi his son, Menahem his son, Beniamin his son, Aaron his son, and I am Joseph, son of Aaron the Blessed, and we were all sons of Kings, and no stranger was allowed to occupy the throne of our fathers.'
Next, Joseph attempts to answer Hasdai's questions about the size and topography of his country. But he does not seem to have a competent person at his court who could match the skill of the Arab geographers, and his obscure references to other countries and nations add little to what we know from Ibn Hawkal, Masudi and the other Persian and Arabic sources. He claims to collect tribute from thirty‑seven nations, which seems a rather tall proposition; yet Dunlop points out that nine of these appear to be tribes living in the Khazar heartland, and the remaining twenty‑eight agree quite well with Ibn Fadlan's mention of twenty‑five wives, each the daughter of a vassal king (and also with Eldad ha‑Dani's dubious tales). We must further bear in mind the multitude of Slavonic tribes along the upper reaches of the Dnieper and as far as Moscow, which, as we shall see, paid tribute to the Khazars.
However that may be, there is no reference in Joseph's letter to a royal harem, only a mention of a single queen and her maids and eunuchs'. These are said to live in one of the three boroughs of Joseph's capital, Itil: 'in the second live Israelites, Ishmaelis, Christians and other nations who speak other languages; the third, which is an island, I inhabit myself, with the princes, bondsmen and all the servants that belong to me (this division of Itil into three parts is also mentioned, as we have seen, in some of the Arab sources)...We live in the town through the whole of winter, but in the month of Nisan (March‑April) we set out and everyone goes to labor in his field and his garden; every clan has his hereditary estate, for which they head with joy and jubilation; no voice of an intruder can be heard there, no enemy is to be seen. The country does not have much rain, but there are many rivers with a multitude of big fish, and many sources, and it is generally fertile and fat in its fields and vineyards, gardens and orchards which are irrigated by the rivers and bear rich fruit...and with God's help I live in peace.'
The next passage is devoted to the date of the coming of the Messiah: 'We have our eyes on the sages of Jerusalem and Babylon, and although we live far away from Zion, we have nevertheless heard that the calculations are erroneous owing to the great profusion of sins, and we know nothing, only the Eternal knows how to keep the count. We have nothing to hold on only the prophecies of Daniel, and may the Eternal speed up our Deliverance...'
The concluding paragraph of Joseph's letter is a reply to Hasdai's apparent offer to enter into the service of the Khazar king: 'Thou hast mentioned in thy letter a desire to see my face. I too wish and long to be behold thy gracious face and the splendor of thy magnificence, wisdom and greatness; I wish that thy words will come true, that I should know the happiness to hold thee in my embrace and to see they dear, friendly and agreeable face; thou wouldst be to me as a father, and I to thee as a son; all my people would kiss thy lips; we would come and go according to thy wishes and thy wise counsel.'
There is a passage in Joseph's letter which deals with topical politics, and is rather obscure: 'With the help of the Almighty I guard the mouth of the river (the Volga) and do not permit the Rus who come in their ships to invade the land of the Arabs...I fight heavy wars with them (the Rus) for if I allowed it they would devastate the lands of Ishmael even to Baghdad.'
Joseph here appears to pose as the defender of the Baghdad Caliphate against the Norman‑Rus raiders. This might seem a little tactless in view of the bitter hostility between the Omayad Caliphate of Cordoba (which Hasdai is serving) and the Abassid Caliphs of Baghdad. On the other hand, the vagaries of Byzantine policy towards the Khazars made it expedient for Joseph to appear in the role of the defender of Islam, regardless of the schism between the two Caliphates. At least he could hope that Hasdai, the experienced diplomat, would take the hint.
The meeting between the two correspondents, if ever seriously intended, never took place. No further letters, if any were exchanged, have been preserved. The factual content of the 'Khazar Correspondence' is meager, and adds little to what was already known from other sources. Its fascination lies in the bizarre, fragmentary vistas that it conveys, like an erratic search‑light focussing on disjointed regions in the dense fog that covers the period.
Among other Hebrew sources, there is the 'Cambridge Document' (so‑called after its present location in the Cambridge University Library). It was discovered at the end of the last century, together with other priceless documents in the 'Cairo Geniza,' the store‑room of an ancient synagogue, by the Cambridge scholar, Solomon Schechter. The document is in a bad state; it is a letter (or copy of a letter) consisting of about a hundred lines in Hebrew; the beginning and the end are missing, so that it is impossible to know who wrote it and to whom it was addressed. King Joseph is mentioned in it as a contemporary and referred to as 'my Lord,' Khazaria is called 'our land'; so the most plausible inference is that the letter was written by a Khazar Jew of King Joseph's court in Joseph's lifetime, i.e., that it is roughly contemporaneous with the 'Khazar Correspondence.'
Some authorities have further suggested that it was addressed to Hasdai ibn Shaprut, and handed in Constantinople to Hasdai's unsuccessful envoy, Isaac bar Nathan, who brought it back to Cordoba (whence it found its way to Cairo when the Jews were expelled from Spain). At any rate, internal evidence indicates that the document originated not later than in the eleventh century, and more likely in Joseph's lifetime, in the tenth.
It contains another legendary account of the conversion, but its main significance is political. The writer speaks of an attack on Khazaria by the Alans, acting under Byzantine instigation, under Joseph's father, Aaron the Blessed. No other Greek or Arab source seems to mention this campaign. But there is a significant passage in constantine Porphyrogenitus's De Adminisdrado Imperio, written in 947‑50, which lends some credibility to the unknown letter‑writer's statements: 'Concerning Khazaria, how war is to be made upon them and by whom. As the Ghuzz are able to make war on the Khazars, being near them, so likewise the ruler of Alania, because the Nine climates of Khazaria (the fertile region north of the Caucasus) are close to Alania, and the Alan can, if he wishes, raid them and cause great damage and distress to the Khazars from that quarter.'
Now, according to Joseph's Letter, the ruler of the Alans paid tribute to him, and whether in fact he did or not, his feelings toward the Kagan were probably much the same as the Bulgar King's. The passage in Constantine, revealing his efforts to incite the Alans to war against the Khazars, ironically reminds one of Ibn Fadlan's mission with a parallel purpose. Evidently, the days of the Byzantine‑Khazar rapprochement were long past in Joseph's time.
About a century after the Khazar Correspondence and the presumed date of the Cambridge Document, Jehuda Halevi wrote his once celebrated book, Kuzari, the Khazars. Halevi (1085‑1141) is generally considered the greatest Hebrew poet of Spain; the book, however, was written in Arabic and translated later into Hebrew; its sub‑title is 'The Book of Proof and Argument in Defense of the Despised Faith.'
Halevi was a Zionist who died on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem; the Kuzari, written a year before his death, is a philosophical tract propounding the view that the Jewish nation is the sole mediator between God and the rest of mankind. At the end of history, all other nations will be converted to Judaism; and the conversion of the Khazars appears as a symbol or token of that ultimate event.
In spite of its title, the tract has little to say about the Khazar country itself, which serves mainly as a backdrop for yet another legendary account of the conversion, the King, the angel, the Jewish scholar, etc., and for the philosophical and theological dialogues between the King and the protagonists of the three religions. However, there are a few factual references, which indicate that Halevi had either read the correspondence between Hasdai and Joseph or had other sources of information about the Khazar country. Thus we are informed that after the appearance of the angel the King of the Khazars 'revealed the secret of his dream to the General of his army,' and 'the General' also looms large later on, another obvious reference to the dual rule of Kagan and Bek. Halevi also mentions the 'histories' and 'books of the Khazars' which reminds one of Joseph speaking of 'our archives,' where documents of state are kept. Lastly, Halevi twice, in different places of the book, gives the date of the conversion as having taken place '400 years ago' and 'in the year 4500' (according to the Jewish calendar).
This points to A.D. 740, which is the most likely date. All in all, it is a poor harvest as far as factual statements are concerned, from a book that enjoyed immense popularity among the Jews of the Middle Ages. But the medieval mind was less attracted by fact than by fable, and the Jews were more interested in the date of the coming of the Messiah than in geographical data. The Arab geographers and chroniclers had a similarly cavalier attitude to distances, dates and the frontiers between fact and fancy.
This also applies to the famed German‑Jewish traveller, Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon, who visited Eastern Europe and western Asia between 1170 and 1185. His travelogue, Sibub Ha'olam, 'Journey around the World,' was apparently written by a pupil, based on his notes or on dictation.
It relates how shocked the good Rabbi was by the primitive observances of the Khazar Jews north of the Crimea, which he attributed to their adherence to the Karaite heresy: 'And the Rabbi Petachia asked them: 'Why do you not believe in the words of the sages (i.e., the Tdists)?' They replied: 'Because our fathers did not teach them to us.' On the eve of the Sabbath they cut all the bread which they eat on the Sabbath. They eat it in the dark, and sit the whole day on one spot. Their prayers consist only of the psalms (Spending the Sabbath in the dark was a well‑known Karaite custom).'
So incensed was the Rabbi that, when he subsequently crossed the Khazar heartland, all he had to say was that it took him eight days, during which 'he heard the wailing of women and the barking of dogs.' He does mention, however, that while he was in Baghdad, he had seen envoys from the Khazar kingdom looking for needy Jewish scholars from Mesopotamia and even from Egypt, 'to teach their children Torah and Talmud.'
While few Jewish travellers from the West undertook the hazardous journey to the Volga, they recorded encounters with Khazar Jews at all principal centers of the civilized world. Rabbi Petachia met them in Baghdad; Benjamin of Tudela, another famous traveller of the twelfth century, visited Khazar notables in Constantinople and Alexandria; Ibraham ben Daud, a contemporary of Judah Halevi's, reports that he had seen in Toledo 'some of their descendants, pupils of the wise.' Tradition has it that these were Khazar princes, one is tempted to think of Indian princelings sent to Cambridge to study.
Yet there is a curious ambivalence in the attitude toward the Khazars of the leaders of orthodox Jewry in the East, centered on the Talmudic Academy in Baghdad. The Gaon (Hebrew for 'excellency') who stood at the head of the Academy was the spiritual leader of the Jewish settlements dispersed all over the Near and Middle East, while the Exilarch, or 'Prince of Captivity,' represented the secular power over these more or less autonomous communities.
Saadiah Gaon (882‑942), most famous among the spiritual excellencies, who left voluminous writings, repeatedly refers in them to the Khazars. He mentions a Mesopotamian Jew who went to Khazaria to settle there, as if this were an every day occurrence. He speaks obscurely of the Khazar court; elsewhere he explains that in the biblical expression 'Hiram of Tyre,' Hiram is not a proper name but a royal title, 'like Caliph for the Ruler of the Arabs, and Kagan for the King of the Khazars.'
Thus Khazaria was very much 'on the map,' in the literal and metaphorical sense, for the leaders of the ecclesiastical hierarchy of oriental Jewry; but at the same time the Khazars were regarded with certain misgivings, both on racial grounds and because of their suspected leanings toward the Karaite heresy.
One eleventh‑century Hebrew author, Japheth ibn‑Ali, himself a Karaite, explains the word mamzer, 'bastard,' by the example of the Khazars who became Jews without belonging to the Race. His contemporary, Jacob ben‑Reuben, reflects the opposite side of this ambivalent attitude by speaking of the Khazars as 'a single nation who do not bear the yoke of the exile, but are great warriors paying no tribute to the Gentiles.'
In summing up the Hebrew sources on the Khazars that have come down to us, one senses a mixed reaction of enthusiasm, skepticism and, above all, bewilderment. A warrior‑nation of Turkish Jews must have seemed to the rabbis as strange as a circumcised unicorn. During a thousand years of Dispersion, the Jews had forgotten what it was like to have a king and a country. The Messiah was more real to them than the Kagan.
As a postscript to the Arab and Hebrew sources relating to the conversion, it should be mentioned that the apparently earliest Christian source antedates them both. At some date earlier than 864, the Westphalian monk, Christian Druthmar of Aquitania, wrote a Latin treatise Expositio in Evangelium Mattei, in which he reports that 'there exist people under the sky in regions where no Christians can be found, whose name is God and Magog, and who are Huns; among them is one, called the Gazari, who are circumcised and observe Judaism in its entirety.'
This remark occurs a props of Matthew 24:14 ('And this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.') which has no apparent bearing on it, and no more is heard of the subject.
At about the same time when Druthmar wrote down what he knew from hearsay about the Jewish Khazars, a famed Christian missionary, sent by the Byzantine Emperor, attempted to convert them to Christianity. He was no less a figure than St. Cyril, 'Apostle of the Slavs,' alleged designer of the Cyrillic alphabet. He and his elder brother, St. Methodius, were entrusted with this and other proselytizing missions by the Emperor Michael III, on the advice of the Patriarch Photius (himself apparently of Khazar descent, for it is reported that the Emperor once called him in anger 'Khazar face.'). Cyril's proselytizing efforts seem to have been successful among the Slavonic people in Eastern Europe, but not among the Khazars. He travelled to their country via Cherson in the Crimea; in Cherson he is said to have spent six months learning Hebrew in preparation for his mission; he then took the 'Khazarian Way,' the Don‑Volga portage, to Itil, and from there travelled along the Caspian to meet the Kagan (it is not said where). The usual theological disputations followed, but they had little impact on the Khazar Jews. Even the adulatory Vita Constantine (Cyril's original name) says only that Cyril made a good impression on the Kagan, that a few people were baptized and two hundred Christian prisoners were released by the Kagan as a gesture of goodwill. it was the least he could do for the Emperor's envoy who had gone to so much trouble.
There is a curious sidelight thrown on the story by students of Slavonic philology. Cyril is credited by tradition not only with having devised the Cyrillic but also the Glagolytic alphabet. The latter, according to Baron, was 'used in Croatia to the seventeenth century. Its indebtedness to the Hebrew alphabet in at least eleven characters, representing in part the Slavonic sounds, has long been recognized.' The eleven characters are A,B,V,G,E,K,P,R.S,Sch, T. This seems to confirm what has been said earlier on about the influence of the Hebrew alphabet in spreading literacy among the neighbors of the Khazars." (The Thirteenth Tribe, by Arthur Koestler, pp. 58‑82)
With a close study of this presentation from the Jewish Encyclopedia, about the Khazars (Chazars), one can see that There was an infusion of the Edomite (Esau's) Blood Line into The Khazar (Chazar) Blood Line. Which would make them, not only descendents of Jappeth but also a mixed breed of Canaanite and Israelite mixture. Which would explain their fanatical hatred of Christ, True Israelites and Christians!
In addition, under the heading of "A brief History of the Terms for Jew" in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following: "Strictly Speaking it is Incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite A 'Jew' or to call a Contemporary Jew an Israelite or a 'Hebrew.'" (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3)