INTRODUCTION
"A THOUSAND YEARS before the establishment of the Modern State of Israel, there existed a Jewish kingdom in the eastern fringes of Europe, astride the Don and Volga rivers..." So begins a thesis by Jewish author Kevin Alan Brook. The kingdom of which he speaks appears at first consideration to be comprised of nearly as much disinformation, misinformation, "myth"information, and, curiously, NO-information as there is actual provable historical fact. Yet upon closer scrutiny this kingdom, known as Khazaria, or the Kingdom of the Khazars, is clearly revealed in a vast body of historical evidence, much of which has come to light only in the last three to five decades.
This mysterious kingdom, which has sculpted our modern
world to an astounding (and alarming) degree, once occupied an
immense land area of over a million square miles extending from
western Hungary/Austria eastward to the Aural Sea, north to the
Upper Volga, and its southern region extending to the Caucasus
Mountains between the Black and Caspian seas. It was at that time
literally the largest country on earth. It has only been in the
last several decades, however, that greater documented evidence
from ancient manuscripts has come to light and revealed the
astonishing historical truth of this ancient kingdom and its
connection to the origins of modern-day Israel.
Though little known to the West, and, for that matter, to
even those currently occupying its ancestral land, the Khazar
kingdom has been responsible for substantially shaping the history
and political landscape of Europe and specifically Western Asia,
but also to a remarkable degree the entirety of human events on
this planet.
Arthur Koestler, author of The Thirteenth Tribe,
easily the most expansive single work on the subject, states,
"The story of the Khazar
Empire, as it slowly emerges from the past, begins to look like the
most cruel hoax which history has ever
perpetrated." 1
This is the story of a kingdom of belligerent, warlike
Caucasian nomads, having no linked ancestry with anything Israelite
this side of Noah, yet adopting Talmudic Judaism and becoming the
dominant -- and virtually only -- current force in twenty-first
century international Jewry. During the course
of this work salient facts and issues will be presented without a
too-extensive reliance on tedious historical documentation.
However, considering the delicacy of the subject -- especially in
this modern age where any divergence from certain agendas for
"political correctness" can result in epithets of racism or
anti-Semitism -- and for the obvious sake of accuracy, reasonably
comprehensive documentation is necessary.
In this it will be shown that the cry of "anti-Semitism"
hurled against those who do oppose the international actions of
ones calling themselves Jews, would be much like an immigrated
Scotsman to America deciding to live on an Apache Indian
reservation, coming to dominate its politics and economics, and
then claiming that anyone disagreeing with his political and social
agenda is racist and anti-Apache in their beliefs.
What under different circumstances could prove to be a dry
treatise on Eastern European Jewish history is, if closely
examined, actually a narrative of events that have laid a
sequential pathway to, and beyond, the destruction of the New York
World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. This
historical time line has been fixed in its present course, which,
by all appearances and in a most unexpected manner, is culminating
in the fulfillment of the Islamic & Biblical prophecies of
Armageddon. But then, it has always been so with
prophecy. The most consistent aspect in the nature of prophetic
fulfillment is that it is consistently surprising. God has
invariably worked to complete His desires, prophetically, in ways
that have not been understood until revealed in retrospect -- in
the light of their actual happening.
An Historical
Perspective
Shortly after the death of Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon
Him) in AD
632, according to Columbia University Professor, D.
M. Dunlop, Arab armies began a campaign northward, sweeping
"through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before them
till they reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus. This
barrier once passed," Dunlop observes, "the road lay open to the
lands of eastern Europe." 2 Had the Caliphate
(the armies of the Muslim Caliph) surmounted that immense
geological deterrent unchallenged, the history of Europe and,
indeed, the rest of the Judeo-Christian world would have been
vastly different than it now is.
It was at the Caucasus, however, that the Arabs encountered
the Khazars, initiating a war that lasted over a century and
effectively prevented Europe from becoming Islamic. So powerful,
socially and militarily, were the Khazars that, as Kevin Alan Brook
relates in his work The Jews of Khazaria, "a 10th-century emperor
of the Byzantines [Roman Empire], Constantine Porphyrogenitus, sent
correspondence to the Khazars marked with a gold seal worth 3
solidi - more than the 2 solidi that always accompanied letters to
the Pope of Rome, the Prince of the Rus, and the Prince of the
Hungarians." 3
Rutgers University Professor Peter Golden, referred to by
Brook as "one of the principal authorities on the Khazars," wrote,
"Every schoolchild in the West has been told that if not for
Charles Martel and the battle of Poitiers there might be a mosque
where Notre Dame now stands. What few schoolchildren are aware of,"
Golden emphasizes, "is that if not for the Khazars...Eastern Europe
might well have become a province of Islam." 4
The Khazarian mounted forces, with a soldiery of
mainly Turkic and pagan origin, could at times and when accounted
for, show a disastrous fierceness and cruelty to the enemies of
Khazaria. They were also probably the most disciplined, as
well as tactically and strategically the most potent, martial power
at that time and in that region. Evidence that they were supremely
calculating in their approach to international matters lay in the
fact that, in contrast to their brutality, Khazar officials were
often consulted as diplomatic emissaries and mediators by all the
political powers surrounding Khazaria. The Khazars and their empire
were at that time both highly respected and greatly feared -- with
good reason. 5
At the peak of their empire it is believed that the Khazars
had a permanent standing army that could have numbered as many as
one hundred thousand and controlled or exacted tribute,
astonishingly, from thirty different nations and tribes inhabiting
the vast territories between the Caucasus, the Aral Sea, the Ural
Mountains and the Ukrainian steppes. 6 , 7 During their zenith,
Khazaria completely girded the lands of what are currently
Astrakhan, Kalmykia, Daghestan, Volgograd, Rostov, Ingushetia,
Kabardino-Balkarsk, North Ossetia, and Chechnya. "At its maximum
extent (in the ninth century)," says Brook, "Khazaria not
only encompassed the northern Caucasus and the Volga delta, but
also extended as far west as Kiev [Russia]."
8
Soviet archaeologist M. I. Artamonov states that, for a
century and a half, the Khazars were the supreme masters of the
southern half of Eastern Europe and presented a virtually
impenetrable bulwark, blocking the Ural-Caspian gateway from Asia
into Europe. During that entire period, they held back the
onslaught of the nomadic tribes from the East. 9
Until recently, a great part of the problem with the
historical obscurity of ancient Khazaria lay with the fact that the
geographical area of the country was part of the Soviet Union,
which insisted on interpreting archaeological data "within the
framework of Marxist historical materialism." 10 This Iron Curtain
version of historical revisionism caused the Soviets to interpret
that data in such a way as to present as fact that which was well
fabricated -- but wrong.
This peculiar and obscure race inhabiting that land were
described as blue-eyed and of very fair complexion. Commonly they
had long reddish hair and were reported as very large of stature
and fierce of countenance. 11 Other sources have added
observations that there were "Black Khazars" and
"White Khazars", noting that the latter were
"light-skinned and handsome, while the former were dark-skinned."
This has, however, been rather conclusively refuted by scholars who
have established that the distinction was not racial but social.
The "Black" or "Kara" Khazars constituted the lower strata or
caste, while the "White" or "Ak" Khazars were of the noble or royal
classes. This type of class distinction was fairly common in
Eastern Europe as evidenced by the more commonly known terms
"Black Russian" and "White
Russian", denoting not skin color but class.
12
In his book An Introduction to the History of the Turkic
Peoples, Peter Golden claims that the Chinese T'and-shu chronicle
describes the Khazars, generally, as "...tall, with red-hair,
ruddy-faced and blue-eyed. Black hair is considered a bad omen."
13
THE KHAZARS OF CONQUEST AND
WAR
Of the ferocity and warlike tendencies of the Khazars there
is little doubt and much historical evidence, all of it pointing to
a race of people so violent in their dealings with their fellow men
that they were feared and abhorred above all peoples in that region
of the world.
The Arab chronicler Ibn-Said al-Maghribi
writes, "they are to the north of the inhabited earth towards the
7th clime, having over their heads the constellation of the Plough.
Their land is cold and wet. Accordingly their complexions are
white, their eyes blue, their hair flowing and predominantly
reddish, their bodies large and their natures cold. Their general
aspect is wild." 14
The ninth-century monk Druthmar of
Aquitaine, in his commentary on Matthew 24:14 in Expositio
in Matthaeum Evangelistam, stated that the Gazari, or
Khazars, dwelt "in the lands of Gog and
Magog." 15 Legends and stories abound,
some of which are true according to the above quoted Aquitaine
monk, that center around Alexander the Great and his attempt to
enclose the Khazars and quarantine them, due to
their violent and barbaric nature, from the rest of the civilized
world. This endeavor apparently failed, Druthmar claimed, and they
escaped. Some legends even claim they were cannibals.
16
After the kingdom's conversion to Judaism, the term
"Red Jews" came into usage out of the superstition
of medieval Germans, who equated their red hair and beards and
their violent nature with deceit and dishonesty. It is also well
documented that they heavily taxed those passing through their
lands, for none dared refuse them. 17
According to Benjamin H. Freedman, himself a Jew and an
apparent long-time associate and confidant of presidents and
statesmen, in an address presented in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in
Washington, D.C., the Khazars were so belligerent and hostile that
they were eventually run out of Asia and scattered amongst the
nations of Eastern Europe. Heinrich von Neustadt, around 1300,
wrote of them as the "terrifying people of Gog and
Magog." 18
The territory of the Bulgars, themselves legendary for their
fierceness in battle, was conquered by the Khazars in AD 642. A
portion of them fled westward to the region of the Danube in the
Balkans and formed what is now modern-day Bulgaria. 19 Even in
modern times, Muslim history recalls the Khazar raids and the
terror of those inhabiting that land. To this day they call the
Caspian, Bahr-ul-Khazar -- "the Khazar Sea." 20
It is not difficult to determine some of the motivating
factors behind the legendary Khazar ferocity in war. "When the bek
[the Khazar head of the military and second in command only to the
Kagan himself] sends out a body of troops, they do not in any
circumstances retreat. If they are defeated, every one who returns
to him is killed....Sometimes he cuts every one of them in two and
crucifies them and sometimes he hangs them by the neck from trees."
21
Logically it seems that this would not likely happen more
than once, since reason would reveal to even the dullest soldier
that defeat was not an option. Such a practice would also have
provided a strong impetus to the legend of Khazar fierceness since,
when faced with the choice of winning in battle or facing a worse
death at home, the options -- and the rational responses to them --
become painfully distinct.
All of these facts, mingled with the semi-factual legends of
Alexander the Great and his attempts to wall up the Red Jews and
isolate them, has led to the numerous mythologies of the coming
escape, at the end of time, of Gog and Magog from the area enclosed
by the Caucasus Mountains. This, as the legends say, in order to
fulfill Bible prophecy in the final destruction of the world.
Indeed, even Islam has such legends in its mythology.
In a writing by the Imam Ibn
Kathir, he asserts that the prophet Mohammed
(Peace Be Upon Him) has claimed, "Every day, Gog
and Magog are trying to dig a way out through the barrier [the
Caucasus mountains]. When they begin to see sunlight through it,
the one who is in charge of them says, 'Go back; you can carry on
digging tomorrow,' and when they come back, the barrier is stronger
than it was before. This will continue until their time comes and
Allah wishes to send them forth." 22
As shall be shown, the Muslims to the south of the Khazarian
kingdom had good reason to attach such legends to their ferocious
northern neighbors.
However, no nation can long survive,no matter how strong, by
being exclusively belligerent, and the Khazars were not an
exception to this. As a vital addition to their brutality they were
possessed of a native, calculating wisdom in knowing, as the
gambler's creed says, "when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em". This
prescient political sense became evident in their diplomatic
encounters with the Romans. The Roman Emperor Heraclius, in
627, formed a military alliance with the Khazars for the purpose of
a final defeat of the Persians. Upon the first meeting of
the Khazar king, Ziebel, with the Roman Emperor, the Khazars
displayed, in full array, their skills at diplomatic flattery --
skills that would serve them well and would not disappear with
their kingdom. He "with his nobles dismounted from their horses,"
says Gibbon, "...and fell prostrate on the ground, to adore the
purple of the Caesar." So enamored was the Byzantine Emperor with
this display of obeisance that it eventually led to the offer,
along with many riches, of the Caesar's daughter Eudocia in
marriage. 23 That union never took place due to the death of Ziebel
while Eudocia was enroute to Khazaria. However, after the final
defeat of Islam's designs on the Northern Kingdom in AD 730, a
marriage between a Khazar princess and the heir to the Byzantine
Roman Empire resulted in an offspring who was to rule
Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. Thus the
"King of the North" had skilfully managed to place himself
on the throne of the Roman Empire. 24
After the defeat of the Persians a new triangle of power
emerged, consisting of the "Islamic Caliphate, Christian Byzantium
and the newly emerged Khazar Kingdom of the North. It fell to the
latter to bear the brunt of the Arab attack in its initial stages,
and to protect the plains of Eastern Europe from the invaders." 25
Because of their unique geographical location within the cusp
created by the Caspian and Black Seas on either side, and the
frightful stone barrier of the Caucasus Mountains along their
southern border, defending their land was made considerably easier.
This situation of geography was, according to historians, one of
the major factors in shaping the history of Eastern Europe, the
European continent, and ultimately the world.
The Khazars had, for years, been venturing forth southward,
in their marauding raids on the Muslim countries south of the
Caucasus. Now, in the early part of the seventh century, Islam came
northward through the same Kasbek Pass the Khazars had used, and
began a long war with the "Northern Kingdom." The major attempt of
the Muslim armies to take control of the Transcaucasus came in
622 while Prophet Mohammed (Peace be Upon
Him) was still leading Islam. They conquered "Persia,
Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and surrounded the Byzantine heartland
(present-day Turkey) in a deadly semi-circle, which extended from
the Mediterranean to the Caucasus and the southern shores of the
Caspian." This began a long series of incursions by both sides
(Khazaria and Islam) that lasted for another thirty years. These
wars eventually saw the Arabs defeated at every advance, finally
ending in 652 with the death of four thousand Arab
soldiers, including their commander, Abdal-Rahman
ibn-Rabiah, and the Arab armies in complete
disarray.
This inability to traverse the
Caucasus successfully, made it logistically impossible for the
Muslim armies to create an effective siege against the Roman
capital of Constantinople. "Had they been able to outflank the
capital across the Caucasus and round the Black Sea," says Arthur
Koestler, "the fate of the Roman Empire would probably have been
sealed." 26 It was this fortuitous situation, coupled
with the military barrier presented by the Khazars themselves, that
prevented Europe from coming under the crescent moon of Islam and
creating a very different history than that which has
been.
Following this expulsion of the Arabs from the Khazar
homeland, the kingdom began to war for territory rather than spoil,
"incorporating the conquered people into an empire with a stable
administration, ruled by the mighty Kagan [the title given the
Khazar king, sometimes spelled Khagan], who appointed his
provincial governors to administer and levy taxes in the conquered
territories. At the beginning of the eighth century their state was
sufficiently consolidated for the Khazars to take the offensive
against the Arabs" rather than merely defending themselves against
Muslim attacks. 27
There was a brief period of Muslim incursion into Khazaria
where the Caliph Marwin II, in a surprise,
two-pronged attack, drove the Khazars as far back in their own land
as the Volga region. His only terms for peace were that the Kagan
convert to the "True Faith" -- Islam -- with which the Khazar king
complied, but apparently only long enough for the Muslim Caliph to
withdraw back across the Caucasus. This incident preceded by only a
few years the Khazar monarch's conversion to Judaism. Most
historians agree as to the motivation behind the Caliph's
withdrawal. The Muslim ruler apparently realised that, unlike the
more civilised Persians, Armenians or Georgians, the barbaric
Khazars could not be kept under military rule at such a
distance.
As mentioned previously, most historical accounts credit
Charles Martel and his Francs for saving Europe from Islam. This
Anglicanized version of history does not, either by ignorance or
design, consider the fact that the Franco defence of Western Europe
would have been futile had not the Khazars stopped the Muslim
onslaught from the east.
The astounding historical result of all this is that the
Khazar kingdom was able, eventually, to set up and depose an
emperor from the throne of the greatest ruling power on earth at
that time, The Roman/Byzantine Empire. 28 This,
apparently, was only the beginning, though the records of
antiquity, until recently, have largely lost sight of this
historically obscure but immensely influential people.
An interesting side note to the legendary Khazarian ferocity
again reveals their budding nature as negotiators and consummate
politicians, a talent that only intensified under Talmudic Judaism.
In The Thirteenth Tribe, Koestler tells of the Byzantine Emperor,
Theodosius II, who was intent on securing the friendship of the
warrior race, "but the greedy Khazar chieftain, named Karidach,
considered the bribe offered to him inadequate, and sided with the
Huns. Attila defeated Karidach's rival chieftains, installed him as
the sole ruler of the Akatzirs [a name given the "White Khazars"],
and invited him to visit his court. Karidach thanked him profusely
for the invitation, and went on to say that 'it would be too hard
on a mortal man to look into the face of a god. For, as one cannot
stare into the sun's disc, even less could one look into the face
of the greatest god without suffering injury.' Attila must have
been pleased, for he confirmed Karidach in his rule."
The death of Atilla the Hun, however, precipitated the
collapse of the Hunnic empire and left an Eastern European
power-vacuum which the Khazars eventually filled. They then
proceeded to subjugate all other surrounding tribes to the extent
that, shortly after their defeat, those tribes went virtually
unmentioned in subsequent historical accounts. The Khazars had just
swallowed them up, historically speaking. The most difficult time
they encountered in their conquests was from the Bulgars, who were
"crushingly defeated" around AD 641, with a great many migrating
westward toward the Danube, and as previously mentioned, eventually
establishing what is now modern Bulgaria. 29
"A warrior-nation of Turkish Jews must have seemed to
the[western] rabbis as strange as a circumcized
unicorn." A. Koestler
According to Benjamin Freedman the Khazars' conversion to
Judaism was first precipitated by their monarch's abhorrence of the
moral climate into which his kingdom had descended. Freedman has
claimed, and other historians confirmed, that the "primitive" Khazars engaged in extremely
immoral forms of religious practices, among them phallic worship.
Animal sacrifices were also included in their
rites.
The Khazar religious structure
centered around a shamanism known as Tengri, which
incorporated the worship of spirits and the sky as well as
zoolatry, the worship of animals. Tengri was also the name of their
"immortal god who created the world," and the primary animal
sacrifices made to this deity were horses. 30
The actual mechanics of the Khazarian kingdom's turn to
Judaism was, most historians agree, rather well thought out -- from
a humanistic perspective at least -- rather than random and
capricious as some have believed.
According to George Vernadski, in his book A History of
Russia, in AD 860 a delegation of Khazars were sent to
Constantinople (now known as Istanbul), which was then what
remained of the ancient capitol of the old Roman Empire turned
Christian under the Emperor Constantine. Their message
was:
We have known God the Lord
of everything [referring here to Tengri] from time immemorial ...
and now the Jews are urging us to accept their religion and
customs, and the Arabs, on their part, draw us to their faith,
promising us peace and many gifts.
31
This appeal, in all its implications, was obviously made
for the purpose of drawing the Christian Roman Empire into the
debate with an eye perhaps toward a balanced argument amongst the
major monotheistic religions. Brook makes the
observation that "this statement reveals that the Jews were
actively seeking converts in Khazaria in 860." He also adds that
"in the year 860, [Christian] Saints Cyril and Methodius were sent
as missionaries to the Khazars by the Byzantine emperor Michael III
.... since the Khazars had requested that a Christian scholar come
to Khazaria to debate with the Jews and Muslims." 32
In as much as the world has seldom (or perhaps never)
witnessed any culture of people more adept at the art of religious
debate than rabbinical Jews, the Khazar's conversion to Talmudic
Judaism is not a surprising outcome, given that such a forum was to
be the determining factor in their choice, rather than purely
spiritual perceptions. The outcome was even further assured by the
fact that the Christian representatives in the debate came from a
church in the latter formative years of the Holy Roman Empire in
which, by that time, spiritual sensitivity had become somewhat rare
to nearly extinct.
It was at that period of time (about AD 740) that King Bulan of Khazaria
was reputed to have converted to Judaism. In the
debate amongst the Islamic mullah, the Christian priest and the
Jewish rabbi, each presented to the king the advantages and truths
of his own precepts of faith. This king, however, according to some
accounts of history, had his own logic for determining which he
should embrace. He asked each representative in turn, which of the
other two faiths he considered superior. The result was that the
Muslim indicated Judaism over Christianity, and the Christian
priest chose it over Islam. The king then concluded that Judaism,
being the foundation upon which both of the other monotheistic
religions were built, would be that which he and his subjects
should embrace. The Khazars, themselves being monotheistic, had
also apparently expressed reservations about the polytheistic
nature of the Trinity doctrine of the Christians. 33
So as not to exclude the Islamic account of these events, the
following is taken by D. M. Dunlop from al-Bakri's eleventh century
work the Book of Kingdoms and Roads:
"The reason for the
conversion of the king of the Khazars, who had previously been a
heathen, to Judaism was as follows. He had adopted Christianity.
Then he recognised the wrongness of his belief and began to speak
with one of his governors about the concern with which he was
filled. The other said to him, O king, the People of the Book form
three classes. Invite them and enquire of them , then follow
whichever is in possession of the truth. So he sent to the
Christians for a bishop. Now there was with him a Jew skilled in
debate, who disputed with the bishop, asking him, What do you say
about Moses, son of Amram, and the Torah which was revealed to him?
The other replied, Moses is a Prophet, and the Torah is true. Then
said the Jew to the king. He has admitted the truth of my creed.
Ask him now what he believes. So the king asked him and he replied,
I say that the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is the Word, and
that he has made known the mysteries in the name of God. Then the
Jew said to the king of the Khazars, He confesses a doctrine which
I know not, while he admits what I set forth. But the bishop was
not strong in bringing proofs. So he invited the Muslims, and they
sent him a learned and intelligent man who understood disputation.
But the Jew hired someone against him who poisoned him on the way,
so that he died. And the Jew was able to win the king for his
religion." 34
Koestler presents an interesting alternative to these views.
His position was that the king's conversion was essentially a
political decision. "At the beginning of the eighth century," he
writes, "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."
It may be observed here that it is quite evident modern
Christianity has well learned this same form of statecraft
(propaganda, subversion and military conquest) inasmuch as they
have torn a page directly from the first millennium history of the
church.
"The Khazar Empire represented a Third
Force," Koestler continues, "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."
35
Although they suffered no want of protracted efforts by
either Islam or Christianity to convert the Khazars to their
respective religions, it resulted in no more than an exchange of
political and dynastic courtesies (i.e., intermarriages and
shifting military alliances, etc.). It was clear that the Khazars
were determined to preserve their supremacy as a "Third Force" in
the world, and undisputed leader of the countries and tribal
nations of the Transcaucasus. They saw that the adoption of one of
the great monotheistic religions would confer upon their monarch
the benefit of both prelatic and judicial authority that their
system of shamanism could not, and that the rulers of the other two
powers clearly enjoyed. 36
J. B. Bury concurs: "There can be no question," he says,
"that the ruler was actuated by political motives in adopting
Judaism. To embrace Islam 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."
37
It would be illogical, however, to think that the Khazarian
rulers had embraced Judaism blindly without intimate knowledge of
what they were accepting. They had encountered the faith numerous
times throughout the preceding century from traders and refugees
fleeing persecution at the hands of the Romans, and, to a lesser
degree, Jewish flight from the Arab conquests of Asia
Minor.
Benjamin Freedman expresses differently the science behind
the process of choosing a national Khazarian religion. He claims
they were much more informal and random, and not nearly so
intellectual in their approach. It matters
little what the mechanics were of the conversion of the Khazar
kingdom to Judaism. It matters only that it happened, and that it
happened with a clanging historical ring that resounds to the
present age.
"The religion of the Hebrews," writes John Bury, "had
exercised a profound influence on the creed of Islam, and it had
been a basis for Christianity; it had won scattered proselytes; but
the conversion of the Khazars to the undiluted religion of Jehovah
is unique in history." 38
It is indeed a unique historical event, as Bury claims;
however it is also interesting that he should refer to their
conversion to Talmudic Judaism as "to the undiluted religion of
Jehovah." It is evident that present-day Ethiopian Jews would
disagree with Mr. Bury on this matter since they do not adhere to
the precepts of the Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash or any of the
extra-biblical writings that have arisen since the close of the Old
Testament canon. These Jews of
North Africa claim only Torah as their scriptural authority. And,
unlike their distant "brothers" of the Talmud, they practice their
religion quietly and with relatively no involvement in worldly
politics.
According to an ancient document entitled King Joseph's Reply
to Hasdai ibn Shaprut, Joseph (a later Khazarian king) stated that,
"From that time on the Almighty God helped him [King Bulan] and
strengthened him. He and his slaves circumcised themselves and he
sent for and brought wise men of Israel who interpreted the Torah
for him and arranged the precepts in order." 39
There appears to be as many historical accounts as to how
King Bulan was converted to Judaism as there are historians and
mystics to present them. Many of them involve visions of angels,
such as the tale by a Sephardic Jewish philosopher detailing a
dream in which an angel told the king that his "intentions are
desirable to the Creator" but the continued observance of shamanism
was not. 40 In the aforementioned document, King Joseph's Reply,
its author claims that in that same dream God promised King Bulan
that if he would abandon his pagan religion and worship the only
true God that 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".
It is believed by scholars that the dream was
designed to simulate the Covenant in Genesis and meant to imply
"that the Khazars too claimed the status of a Chosen Race, who made
their own Covenant with the Lord, even though they were not
descended from Abraham's seed." 41 [emphasis
supplied]
King Joseph corroborates this in his document as he claims to
have positively traced his family's ancestry back, not to Shem the
father of the "Shemites" or Semite peoples, but to another of
Noah's sons. "Though a fierce Jewish nationalist, proud of wielding
the 'sceptre ofJudah'," Koestler says, "he cannot, and does
not, claim for them Semitic descent; he traces their
ancestry...to...Noah's third son, Japheth; or more precisely to
Japheth's grandson, Togarma, the ancestor of all Turkish
tribes."
Koestler adds a footnote to King Joseph's
genealogical claims that is piercingly relevant to this study:
"It also throws a sidelight on the frequent description of
the Khazars as the people of Magog. Magog, according to Genesis
10:2-3 was the much maligned uncle of Togarma." Add to
this that two other of the sons of Japheth, the progenitor of the
Khazars, are Meshech and Tubal, central figures in biblical
prophecies of the end times.
King Joseph's Reply also revealed that the successor to King
Bulan, his son Obediah, "reorganized the kingdom and established
the [Jewish] religion properly and correctly," bringing in numerous
Jewish sages who "explained to him the twenty-four books [the
Torah], Mishnah, Talmud, and the order of
prayers." This entrenchment in the Jewish
religion outlasted the kingdom itself and was transplanted, whole
cloth, into the Eastern European settlements of Russia and Poland.
42
Whatever the religious machinery (and/or chicanery) that was
set in motion to accomplish the task, the consequence is
historically undeniable that the Khazarian king was indeed
converted to Talmudic Judaism. And the temporal
consequences of that conversion have rung down through history like
a warped and distorted bell, answering clearly to prophetic
declarations of the last days of earth's history. It is to
these SUPPOSED Jews
that the Bible in Revelation 3:9
states "Behold, I will make them of the Synagogue of Satan, which say
they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to
come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved
thee".
What is most fascinating, however, is that the scriptures clearly tell us that the evil leaders of this entity are not Jews! Yes, they say they are Jews, and the world recognizes them as Jews, even as "Israel," but they lie! Listen to what God's Word reveals:
"I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan." (Revelation 2:9) |
Mind-boggling, isn't it? These wicked, world power-brokers want
us to believe they are Jews; they boastfully lay claim to Israel as
their heritage. But, in reality, they are blasphemous liars. What
is going on here? The masters of the Synagogue of Satan
today possess extraordinary influence over the media.
Most people believe in the pro-Zionist propaganda that
gushes forth daily from Hollywood, New York, and Washington. It
therefore stands to reason that the average world citizen easily
falls for the Lie.
The Khazarian kingdom reached its peak of power and world
influence in the latter half of the eighth century. The death knell
of their empire was eventually seen in the dragon-headed ships of
the Vikings who were to cross and navigate all the major waterways
in their onslaughts. Even the legendary ferocity of the Khazars was
outdistanced by these Norsemen who "did not deign to trade until
they failed to vanquish; they preferred bloodstained, glorious gold
to a steady mercantile profit." 43 They were also called Rus, from
which descended, among others, the Russians.
Because historical Scandinavian literature did not begin
until after the time of the Vikings, little of actual fact is known
of them, with much of it apocryphal and contradictory and almost
none of it laudatory. Of their military powers, however, virtually
all accounts are in harmony. In his book, The Magyars in the Ninth
Century, C. A. Macartney quotes the Arab historian, Ibn
Rusta:
"These people are vigorous and courageous and when
they descend on open ground, none can escape from them without
being destroyed and their women taken possession of, and themselves
taken into slavery." 44
There was even coined a specific term for the Viking
ferocity: berserksgangr, from which is derived the English word
berserk.
"Such were the prospects," says Koestler, "which...faced the
Khazars." Even in light of their viciousness and
military prowess, these Norse Vikings focused their pillaging
assaults on the Byzantine Roman Empire, preferring to trade with
the Khazars rather than to tangle with them. Though eventually
outmatched in ferocity, the Khazars were still able, for a while,
to exact their ten percent taxes even from the Vikings on all of
their "cargo" (more correctly spelled plunder) that passed through
their land.
An interesting story emerges from this period of the Khazar
Empire that gives a clear vignette of the emerging cultural
schematic that was eventually to be scattered throughout the
world.
In 912 the Rus Vikings, with an armada of 500 ships, each
manned by 100 warriors, were set on invading and plundering the
Muslim lands south of the Khazars, with whom the Khazars had a
loose alliance of protection due to the thousands of loyal Muslims
in the Kagan's army. The Rus commander sent a letter to the Kagan
asking permission to pass through his territory, to which the
Khazar king acceded on condition of receiving half of the spoils
upon their return.
On the Viking's return from their bloody mission, and paying
the tribute required by the Khazars, the Muslims loyal to the
Khazarian monarch, who lived in the eastern part of his kingdom,
requested of the Kagan that they be permitted to fight the Vikings
in retaliation for what they had done to their brethren to the
south. The king granted them permission to do so, which resulted in
the complete eradication of the Rus force -- except for five
thousand who escaped and were subsequently killed by the Butas and
Bulgars to the north.
Here pictured is a classical perspective of what was to
become the Khazar/Jewish heritage in nearly all their dealings --
business, social or cultural: a king who becomes a willing though
passive confederate of marauding Rus/Vikings, claims half of the
loot they have taken in their bloody assault, licenses a
retributive attack against them by Muslims under his own command,
but then informs the Vikings of the imminent reprisal he himself
has authorised. 45
The weakening of the Khazar military influence had a very
wide and unexpected influence in that it greatly hastened the
extinction of the Byzantine Empire. They no longer had a powerful
force on their eastern borders to prevent the Vikings, Mongols and
others from invading an already weakened dominion. This, and
internal factions within Khazaria, was the prolog to the scattering
of the Khazar/Jewish seed throughout Russia and eastern Europe --
and eventually, as shall be shown, to the reshaping of world
history.
The swan song of the Khazar kingdom was not a precipitous
decline in a climactic or decisive series of battles, but rather a
gradual, evolutionary succumbing to superior forces over a
protracted period of time.
"In general, the reduced Khazar kingdom persevered," says S.
W. Baron. "It waged a more or less effective defense against all
foes until the middle of the thirteenth century, when it fell
victim to the great Mongol invasion set in motion by Jenghiz Khan.
Even then it resisted stubbornly until the surrender of all its
neighbours....But before and after the Mongol upheaval the Khazars
sent many offshoots into the unsubdued Slavonic lands, helping
ultimately to build up the great Jewish centres of eastern Europe."
46
"Here, then," remarks Arthur Koestler,
"we have the cradle of the numerically strongest and
culturally dominant part of modern Jewry."
The ancient Hebrew nation had started branching into the
Diaspora long before the destruction of Jerusalem. Ethnically, the
Semitic tribes on the waters of the Jordan and the Turko-Khazar
tribes on the Volga were of course 'miles apart', but they had at
least two important formative factors in common. Each lived at a
focal junction where the great trade routes connecting east and
west, north and south intersect; a circumstance which predisposed
them to become nations of traders, of enterprising travellers, or
'rootless cosmopolitans' -- as hostile propaganda has
unaffectionately labelled them. But at the same time their
exclusive religion fostered a tendency to keep to themselves and
stick together, to establish their own communities with their own
places of worship, schools, residential quarters and ghettoes
(originally self-imposed) in whatever town or country they settled.
This rare combination of wanderlust and ghetto-mentality,
reinforced by Messianic hopes and chosen-race pride, both ancient
Israelites and mediaeval Khazars shared -- even though the latter
traced their descent not to Shem [S[h]emites] but to Japheth."
[underscore supplied]
This more recent "Diaspora" resulted in a
strong, oftentimes politically overwhelming, Khazar/Jewish
influence in especially Hungary and Poland, but
also in the whole of Eastern Europe. Jews were found in positions
of power and political influence in virtually every major category
of life, business and society. There may have already been a small
population of what Koestler calls "real Jews" living in that
region, "but there can be little doubt that the majority of
modern Jewry originated in the migratory waves of ... Khazars who
play such a dominant part in early Hungarian
history".
The Khazar influx into the Hungary/Poland region was only a
small part of an overall "mass-migration" from their homeland to
Eastern and Central Europe. They were employed as
"mintmasters, administrators of the royal revenue, controllers of
the salt monopoly [at that time salt was a valuable commodity often
used in place of money. From this comes the saying "worth his
salt".] , taxcollectors and 'money-lenders' -- i.e.,
bankers."47
Western European Jews historically displayed such a talent
and acumen at trading and as userers (money lenders) that in
virtually any society and culture in which they found themselves,
they became the possessors of and controlling influence over large
portions of that nation's wealth. "In the 'dark ages' the commerce
of Western Europe," wrote Cecil Roth in the 1973 edition of The
Encyclopedia Britannica, "was largely in Jewish hands, not
excluding the slave trade, and...Jew and Merchant are used as
almost interchangeable terms."
"The floating wealth of the country," Roth
continued, "was soaked up by the Jews, who were
periodically made to disgorge into the exchequer [national or royal
treasury]" 48 It was evident that the ruling class
periodically became intimidated by the mass of their nation's
wealth accumulating to the hands of so small a minority -- and a
very clannish minority at that. This would logically give any
ruling authority cause for concern -- when a particular group
virtually controls the nation's economics while at the same time
appearing to have a tenuous allegiance to the country in which they
reside. Such a course of events evidently led to the creation of a
stereotyping blueprint for Jews and Jewish communities that has
been expressed -- and reacted to -- in various cultures for
centuries.
"The nucleus of modern Jewry," remarks Koestler, "thus
followed the old recipe: strike out for new horizons but stick
together." 49 This, as previously mentioned, was the course of
Western European Jews, but the similarity between them and the
Khazarian Jews is striking, especially in their unequalled aptitude
at things economical and political.
This mass of historical data "has lead several
historians to conjecture that a substantial part, and perhaps the
majority of eastern Jews -- and hence of world Jewry -- might be of
Khazar, and not of Semitic Origin."
The far-reaching implications of this hypothesis may explain
the great caution exercised by historians in approaching this
subject -- if they do not avoid it altogether. Thus in the 1973
edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica the article "Khazars" is
signed by Dunlop, but there is a separate section dealing with
"Khazar Jews after the Fall of the Kingdom", signed by the editors,
and written with the obvious intent to avoid upsetting believers in
the dogma of the Chosen Race. [underscore supplied] 50
Abraham N. Poliak, Tel Aviv University's post-war Professor
of Mediaeval Jewish History, wondered at "how far we can go in
regarding this [Khazar] Jewry as the nucleus of the large Jewish
settlement in Eastern Europe. The descendants of this settlement,"
Poliak declares, "those who stayed where they were, those who
emigrated to the United States and to other countries, and those
who went to Israel -- constitute now the large majority of world
Jewry. [emphasis supplied] 51 Some historians, such as Austrian
Hugo Kutschera, assert that Eastern European Jewry was not part,
but entirely of Khazarian origin. 52
Still further proof that the Jews of Eastern Europe had no
origins in the West is Yiddish, the language commonly used by the
Eastern Jews. Yiddish was, until the latter part of the twentieth
century, a dying language. It is an amalgamation of several
tongues, primarily Hebrew, and written with Hebrew characters, but
which includes much of mediaeval German and components of other
languages like Slavonic. The German elements incorporated into
Yiddish have been clearly shown to have originated in the east of
Germany where it joined the Slavonic regions of Eastern Europe.
Yiddish is a sort of linguistic "sponge" in that it readily absorbs
and incorporates whatever words or idiomatic expressions best suit
its purpose. It would therefore naturally have become a cultural
marker for whatever region in which it was spoken, absorbing the
telltale indicators of dialect like a tattoo. 53
Another respected Austrian historian, Matisyohu Meises,
questions, "Could it be that the generally accepted view, according
to which the German Jews once upon a time immigrated from France
across the Rhine, is misconceived?" Meises, who knew virtually
nothing about the Khazars, was perplexed at the fact that no
Yiddish linguistic roots whatever could be traced to Western
Europe. He also noted that, inexplicably, there was a large
geographical gap clearly delineating the Yiddish spoken by the
Eastern Khazar transplants from any spoken in Western Europe.
54
"The evidence," Mr. Koestler nicely summates, "...adds up to
a strong case in favour of those modern historians -- whether
Austrian, Israeli or Polish -- who, independently from each other,
have argued that the bulk of modern Jewry is not of Palestinian,
but of Caucasian origin. The mainstream of Jewish migrations did
not flow from the Mediterranean across France and Germany to the
east and then back again. The stream moved in a consistently
westerly direction, from the Caucasus through the Ukraine into
Poland and thence into Central Europe. When that unprecedented
mass-settlement in Poland came into being, there were simply not
enough Jews around in the west to account for it; while in the east
a whole nation was on the move to new frontiers." 55
With the overwhelming evidence that the modern Jewish
population is of Khazar origin, Koestler remarks that this would
clearly indicate that "their ancestors came not from the Jordan but
from the Volga, not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once
believed to be the cradle of the Aryan race; and that genetically
they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes
than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." This
conclusion would then logically render the epithet "anti-Semitism"
"void of meaning," Koestler says.
The latter conclusion is a position Palestinian Arabs
might well dispute with Mr. Koestler due to the fact that this
revelation ironically places the modern Jew, currently occupying
Palestine, in the unenviable position of, themselves, being
anti-Semitic -- an historical mockery of somewhat amazing
proportions. 56
But what, one may
ask, became of the greater part of the population of "real
Jews"?
Towards the close of the ninth century the Jewish settlements
of Germany, who were nearly all of Semitic origin, had been
virtually wiped out by the "mob-hysteria" that resulted from the
First Crusade in 1096. The Encyclopedia Britannica on the Crusades
vividly sets forth the mindset of the crusaders:
"He might butcher all, till he waded ankle-deep
in blood, and then at nightfall kneel, sobbing for very joy, at the
altar of the Sepulchre -- for was he not red from the winepress of
the Lord?" 57
The Jews who found themselves in that "winepress"
significantly assisted in their own demise. Like those of Massada
who committed mass suicide rather than surrender to the armies of
Rome, a great many of the Jews of the Rhineland and surrounding
countries, when presented with the choice of baptism into
"Christianity" or death at the hands of their captors, chose
neither, opting for the Massada solution.
Imitating on a grand scale Abraham's readiness to sacrifice
Isaac, fathers slaughtered their children and husbands their wives.
These acts of unspeakable horror and heroism were performed in the
ritualistic form of slaughter with sacrificial knives sharpened in
accordance with Jewish law. At times the leading sages of the
community, supervising the mass immolation, were the last to part
with life at their own hands. In the mass hysteria, sanctified by
the glow of religious martyrdom and compensated by the confident
expectation of heavenly rewards, nothing seemed to matter but to
end life before one fell into the hands of the implacable foes and
had to face the inescapable alternative of death at the enemy's
hand or conversion to Christianity. 58
Of the German cities of Worms and Spires, being somewhat
representative of the whole of Western European communities that
were devastated by the Crusades, Salo Baron writes, "the total
Jewish population of either community had hardly exceeded the
figures...given for the dead alone". 59
The most common historical concept, before the modern
revelation of the existence of Khazaria, was that the 1096 Crusade
literally "swept like a broom" virtually the entire German Jewish
population into Poland. This was an invention of apparent necessity
because those historians could account by no other means for the
inexplicably large population of Eastern European Jews. They
concluded this in the face of the total absence of any historical
account of a mass migration of Jews to eastern Germany and
certainly not Poland.
By the close of the 1300s much of Western Europe was, for all
practical purposes, completely empty of any perceivable Jewish
population. What the Crusades failed to accomplish in the
eradication of Western European Jewry the "Black Death" -- the
Bubonic Plagues of the bacilli Pasteurella pestis -- virtually
completed. Those Jews of that era suffered doubly; from the plague
itself and from the proliferation of superstitious rumours that
they were responsible for the disease by poisoning wells, just as
they were blamed earlier for "the ritual slaughter of Christian
children." This resulted in the burning alive of Jews in great
numbers over the whole of Europe. 60 Later some of the Sephardic
Jews of Spain immigrated northward, accounting for some of the
smaller Jewish populations of Western Europe.
"Because of the long and varied history of the Jews," says
the 2001 edition of World Book Encyclopedia, "it is difficult to
define a Jew. There is no such thing as a Jewish race. Jewish
identity is a mixture of religious, historical, and ethnic
factors." Thus, those who might have truly claimed to be of the
genealogy of Abraham and of true Semitic origin became extinct as a
discernible race, being replaced by the white Khazars of the
Transcaucasus, none of whose ancestors, as Benjamin Freedman
phrases it, have ever placed a foot in the land of Palestine. This
causes a serious problem with modern Christianity's infatuation
with the Jews and their "return to their Homeland," begging the
question: How can one return to a place where they have never
been?
THE KHAZAR ORIGIN OF THE ASHKENAZIM
Modern Jews are essentially divided into two major categories,
ethnically and culturally: Sephardim and
Ashkenazim.
The former are primarily of Spanish origin; the name Sephardim
being derived from Sepharad, the Hebrew word for Spain, and are
likely the closest to actual Semitic Jews that can be established.
They were expelled from Spain toward the beginning of the sixteenth
century and immigrated to the eastern Mediterranean and
Balkans.
As late as 1960s the Sephardic Jews numbered only about 500,000,
compared with the Ashkenazim of the same period estimated at
approximately twelve million. 61
In defining the origins of the Ashkenazim, Alan Brook states that
"The geographic location of the Ashkenaz, based on references in
the Torah, may be centered around southern Russia, Armenia, and
Asia Minor. The ashkaenoi (askae or askai) were the people also
known as Phrygians or Mysians (Meshech)." Some historians claim
that the name Ashkenaz applies exclusively to German Jews. However,
more recent evidence shows that they had immigrated from the
southern regions of Russia and western Asia and Asia Minor -- that
region clearly identified as the location and origin of the ancient
Khazars. The name originally indicated Iranians and was later given
as the name of the god of Meshech, Men Askaenos. "It should also be
pointed out," Brook adds, "that Ashkenaz did not become a definite
Jewish designation for Germany until the eleventh century."
62
"According to the explanation by the Talmud," writes Hugo Freiherr,
"Ashkenaz thus means a country near the Black Sea between Ararat
and the Caucasus, within the original region of the Khazar empire."
63 This, again, is precisely the geographic locality of the
Khazarian empire. The Talmudic observation is abetted by Scripture
which names Ashkenaz as descending not from Shem but from Japheth
through Gomer, and whose uncles were Magog and Tubal. (See Gen.
10:3)
Ashkenaz (alt. spelling: Ashchenaz) is mentioned in but one
scripture other than 1 Chronicles 6:1, which is only another
reference to the genealogy as descending from Japheth. In the book
of Jeremiah the prophet, God announces that Israel is to call upon
other nations as allies in bringing His judgments against Babylon.
Among those allies, who are not part of Israel or Judah, and
therefore could not be numbered as Jews, is Ashchenaz. (See Jer.
51:27)
UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, published a series of booklets entitled, The Race
Question in Modern Science, in which oneof the authors, Harry
Shapiro, states:
The wide range of variation between Jewish populations in their
physical characteristics and the diversity of the gene frequencies
of their blood groups render any unified racial classification for
them a contradiction in terms. For although modern racial theory
admits some degree of polymorphism or variation within a racial
group, it does not permit distinctly different groups, measured by
its own criteria of race, to be identified as one. To do so would
make the biological purposes of racial classification futile and
the whole procedure arbitrary and meaningless. ...despite the
evidence efforts continue to be made to somehow segregate the Jews
as a distinct racial entity. 64
Thus, attempting to claim the existence of a "race" of Jews
has been proven to be an anthropological impossibility.
Though their God consistently warned them against intermingling
themselves amongst non-Jewish races, their miscegenistic tendencies
are well documented, and has resulted in their complete erasure as
a distinct, genetic peoples.
Somewhere in the historical roots of the Ashkenazi Khazars there incubated a desire to possess a national Jewish homeland. That desire expressed itself in the form of a Messianic movement in twelfth century Khazaria that took on the texture of a "Jewish crusade" whose goal was the forcible subjugation of Palestine. A Khazar Jew named Solomon ben Duji instigated the movement and began an international correspondence with all the Jews of surrounding nations.
It seems that ben Duji was possessed of messianic delusions of his own in that he claimed that "the time had come in which God would gather Israel, His people from all lands to Jerusalem, the holy city, and that Solomon Ben Duji was Elijah, and his son the Messiah." 66
This desire for a Jewish homeland echoed down the centuries and found expression again. "It was among Ashkenazi Jews," says the Encyclopedia Americana, "that the idea of political Zionism emerged, leading ultimately to the establishment of the state of Israel....In the late 1960s, Ashkenazi Jews numbered some 11 million, about 84 percent of the world Jewish population." 67
At times Arthur Koestler, in his broad and extensive treatment of this subject, appears, as a Jew himself, to wrestle with the glaring contradiction that the Jews, who have no genetic or true ethnic identity, are entitled to land they have never, by any right of descent, owned or possessed, and whose ancestors have never occupied. Then, claiming to be the state of Israel, created by United Nations fiat, they arbitrarily removed that land from the possession of those who have legitimately owned and occupied it for thousands of years. Mr. Koestler claims that such right "is not based on the hypothetical origins of the Jewish people, nor on the mythological covenant of Abraham with God; it is based on international law -- i.e., on the United Nations' decision in 1947 to partition Palestine...[actually declared, May 14, 1948.]" 68
Thus he eliminates what would logically seem to be the most legitimate grounds (if there are any at all) for the establishment of Israel (possession by racial lineage), and bases his argument on the vaporous contention of what he calls "international law".
What the United Nations did in 1948 was arguably to make its first official act a violation of its own charter in the dispossession of over four million Palestinians for the purpose of creating a nation that had no ancestral or current right whatever to the land.
The apparent conflict in Koestler's mind becomes evident in an apparent contradiction as he concludes that the faith of Judaism "transformed the Jews of the Diaspora into a pseudo-nation without any of the attributes and privileges of nationhood, held together loosely by a system of traditional beliefs based on racial and historical premises which turn out to be illusory." 69 Succinctly stated, he maintains that the idea of a Jewish national identity is based on an illusion created by a history that does not exist.
It will be shown that the influx of what we now know to be Jews of Khazarian origin constituted the first "invasion" of Gog from the land of Magog, as prophesied in Biblical scripture. The fascinating aspect of it is that, as with virtually all other prophecies, those claiming theological pre-eminence in their knowledge of Scripture completely missed the fulfilment -- just as did the Jews at the first coming of the Messiah.
GOG, MAGOG AND THE ASHKENAZIM
It has long been the belief of twentieth (and now twenty-first)
century Christianity that near the end of this world's history as
outlined in the Bible, Gog from the land of Magog, defined by those
Christians as Russia -- the "King of the North" -- would invade the
Holy Land of present-day Israel.
World and local ministries of the conservative Christian persuasion
spend inordinate amounts of time in attempts to "decode" such
prophecies as found in Ezekiel 38 & 39, Daniel 11 and
Revelation 20, and virtually all of them have come to the above
stated conclusion. In most cases, belief in the invasion of Israel
by Russia and the defeat of anti-Christ in the subsequent war of
Armageddon is accompanied by the idea that there will be a
one-thousand year reign of peace after Christ returns to the
earth.
Representative of this almost universal belief are such as Grant
Jeffrey, Tim LaHaye (principle co-author of the Left Behind book
series), the Jack Van Impe ministries, etc.
Van Impe, a widely known radio and television evangelist, has
published volumes of literature on Biblical prophecy and much on
the matter of Gog and Magog.
"When Russia heads south to do battle," writes Van Impe in an
article entitled Armageddon: The End or the Beginning? "she will be
a mighty force as she comes against the Antichrist's army with
chariots, horsemen, and with many ships. This is the first military
wave," Van Impe continues, "of the three-pronged Armageddon
campaign mentioned in Daniel 11:40 when the king of the south
(Egypt and her Arab Federation) and the king of the north (Russia)
begin their pincer movement. Ezekiel 38:16 says, 'And thou shalt
come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land;
it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my
land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in
thee, O Gog, before their eyes.' Once Russia has made her move, the
Antichrist will be furious. He will enter the 'glorious land,'
Israel.
"Immediately," concludes Van Impe, "he situates himself in
Jerusalem."
In reference to former Russian President Boris Yeltzin and other
Russian leaders, Van Impe asks, "Could one of these above leaders
be the 'Gog' of Ezekiel 38:2?"
This scriptural perspective of Gog invading Israel from the north
at some future time is also largely held by Jewish theologians. For
example in an October, 1996 Jerusalem Post article entitled "All
a-Gog", columnist Moshe Kohn addresses the subject:
"The war to end all wars is to be launched against Eretz Yisrael by
'Gog of the land of Magog, chief prince of Meshech and Tuval' as
foretold in Ezekiel 38 and 39.
"We don't know what or who Magog, Meshech, Tuval and Gog are; we
only know that Gog and his allies are to come down on Eretz Yisrael
from the north. God will then destroy the invaders, and 'I will
restore the fortunes of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole House of
Israel ... and I will not hide my face from them any more.'
"The New Testament also mentions the Gog/Magog War, in Revelation
20, as the final battle between the rulers of Earth led by Satan
and the forces of God. In that version, this war may also be what
is known in Christian tradition as the Battle of Armageddon, a
place mentioned in Revelation 16:16." 70
How some historians view the origins of Gog and Magog
* Flavius Josephus claimed that "Magog founded those that
from him were named Magogites, but who are by the Greeks called
Scythians." 71
* Josephus lived and died a half-millenium before the
founding of the Khazar kingdom and therefore could not connect
those in the region of the Scythians with the Khazars. The Catholic
Encyclopedia observes that "Josephus and others identify Magog with
Scythia, but in antiquity this name was used to designate vaguely
any northern population." 72
* However Josephus does have an interesting comment on Tubal,
the brother of Magog and Meshech, which sounds as if it were
tailored specifically for their descendents, the Khazars: "Tubal
exceeded all men in strength, and was very expert and famous in
martial performances." 73
* Vasiliev in The Goths in the Crimea quotes from the Life by
Saint Abo of Tbilisi, who claimed that "the Khazars were savage
'sons of Magog' who had 'no religion whatever, although recognizing
the being of a sole god.'" 74
* References made by Rabbi Petakhiah in his travelogue Sibbuv
ha-Olam, concerning the conversion of King Bulan to Judaism, makes
mention that the kingdom was that of ancient Meshech.
75
* Much in harmony with Biblical prophetic terminology,
Koestler writes that the Persians and the Byzantines referred to
Khazaria as the "Kingdom of the North" with whom nearly all modern
theologians connect Gog and Magog. 76
* Ibn Fadlan, the noted Arab traveler of the 700's made the
comment in his journals that "the Khazars and their king are all
Jews. The Bulgars and their neighbors are subject to him. They
treat him with worshipful obedience. Some are of the opinion that
Gog and Magog are the Khazars.
* "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 Gog and Magog, and who are
Huns; among them is one, called the Gazari [Khazars] who are
circumcized and observe Judaism in its entirety." 77
* "After a century of warfare," Koestler notes, the Arab
chroniclers "obviously had no great sympathy for the Khazars. Nor
had the Georgian or Armenian scribes, whose countries, of a much
older culture, had been repeatedly devastated by Khazar horsemen. A
Georgian chronicle, echoing an ancient tradition, identifies them
with the hosts of Gog and Magog -- 'wild men with hideous faces and
the manners of wild beasts, eaters of blood'". 78
* The Talmud - Avodah Zara 3B states: "The war of Gog and
Magog [Russia] will be one of the key events to usher in the
Messianic Era." The Jerusalem Targum claims that, "At the end of
days, Gog and Magog shall march against Jerusalem, but perish by
the hand of Messiah."
* Simply speaking, "Gog is a symbolic name, representing the
leader of the world powers antagonistic to God." [The Imperial
Bible-dictionary]
In response to those who believe that Gog in the land of Magog is
specifically Russia, Revelation 20:8 provides a clarification as to
the true geographical region of Gog in the last days: "the nations
which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog,..."
This world force, from "the four quarters of the earth" is
ubiquitous, not existing in Russia only; not just exclusive to the
area of the compass north of Palestine. The names Gog and Magog
appear to be used only as an indication of their origins, not their
final location.
There is but one identifiable group which fits that "ubiquitous"
designation of occupying "the four quarters of the earth"; a group
whose religious-cultural identity has remained intact, though their
ethnic origins have vanished in antiquity; that, in spite of two
thousand years of being decimated by persecution, forced
emigration, disease and war, have still survived; whose roots are
precisely where prophetic Scripture says they would be -- in the
northland of Magog, the southern steppes of Russia.
Just as the Jews, by misinterpreting Scripture to suit their
nationalistic desires, missed the first coming of their Messiah, so
also have Christians, in the same way, reinventing the same
mistakes, missed the prophetic issues of the last days -- and --
the second coming of Messiah. They have placed the invasion of
Palestine as being sometime in the future when it has already taken
place, and in such an unexpected manner as to have come upon them,
as does the Messiah, like "a thief in the night."
As one nineteenth-century prophet wrote: "The world is no more
ready to credit the message for this time than were the Jews to
receive the Saviour's warning concerning Jerusalem." 79 This is
clearly as much the case now as when those words were penned.
If the present trend continues for another 37 years in the same
direction and at the same rate traveled for the past 37 years, the
Christian faith as it is professed today by Christians will have
disappeared from the face of the earth. In what form or by what
instrumentality the mission of Jesus Christ will thereupon and
thereafter continue to make itself manifest here on earth is as
unpredictable as it is inevitable. --Benjamin H. Freedman
In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the
goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them
by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a
general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of
America. --The Seventh Protocol of the Learned Elders of Zion
It is not my intention in this letter to expose the conspirators
who are dedicating themselves to the destruction of the Christian
faith nor to the nature and extent of the conspiracy itself. That
exposure would fill many volumes. The history of the world for the
past several centuries and current events at home and abroad
confirm the existence of such a conspiracy. The Christian clergy
appear to be more ignorant or more indifferent about this
conspiracy than other Christians. The Christian clergy may be
shocked to learn that they have been aiding and abetting the
dedicated enemies of the Christian faith. --Freedman
Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now
only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of
that Christian religion: as to other religions we shall have still
less difficulty in dealing with them. We shall act clericalism and
clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move
in retrogressive proportion to its former progress. --The
Seventeenth Protocol of the Learned Elders of Zion
What 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 text-books and out of class-room
courses in history throughout the world? The origin and history of
the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom are certainly incontestable
historical facts. --Freedman
Our power in the present tottering condition of all forms of power
will be more invincible than any other, because it will remain
invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength that no
cunning can any longer undermine it. --The First Protocol of the
Learned Elders of Zion
Benjamin Freedman, as mentioned earlier, was an Ashkenazic Jew who
was highly placed in the American government in the early to middle
part of the twentieth century and had rather free access to
presidents and statesmen up to the Kennedy Administration.
Mr. Freedman, once a wealthy Jewish businessman, became
disillusioned with his Jewish heritage after learning of their
origins and their political machinations worldwide. Breaking with
organized Jewry he spent the majority of his great wealth in
attempts to reveal to the world the true driving force behind the
establishment of the nation of Israel by the United Nations as well
as other historical misconceptions concerning the Khazarian roots
of modern Judaism.
In a compelling narrative of the world history of that era,
Freedman relates the fomenting of the treachery he witnessed in the
manipulation of the outcome of WWI.
Germany, according to Freedman and other historians, was apparently
winning, and had virtually won, the war, when they made, in the
summer of 1916, a very surprising and magnanimous offer to Great
Britain. England was in a very precarious position at that time;
essentially out of ammunition with food supplies for about one week
remaining, to be followed by national starvation; German
submarines, taking the Allies completely by surprise, had cut off
all shipping convoys. Then came the most unexpected of all --
Germany offered terms for peace.
"At that time," says Freedman, "the French army had mutinied. They
had lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of
Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting, they were
picking up their toys and going home, they didn't want to play war
anymore, they didn't like the Czar. And the Italian army had
collapsed.
"Not a shot had been fired on German soil" Freedman continues. "Not
one enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany" yet they
offered peace. And not the ordinary peace of the conqueror to the
conquered. The Germans proposed a status quo ante peace settlement,
meaning that both sides would return to the same status as before
the initiation of hostilities.
With the enticement of such an offer, and with all other options
effectively eliminated, Britain had little choice but to accept.
However, there arose another offer, much more attractive to the
British ego, which would bring about a victory heretofore
impossible.
While Germany was attempting to end the war in a
more-than-equitable manner, German Zionists, representing Zionists
from Eastern Europe, approached the British War Cabinet and offered
them an alternative to merely pretending that a war had never
happened.
At this point, it would be well to define "Zionist". Those were
(and are) Jews whose dominant purpose was the establishment of a
"Jewish Homeland", a proposition that the majority of Jews at that
time did not endorse. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines
"Zionism" as "an international movement orig. for the establishment
of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later
for the support of modern Israel."
At the time that the United Nations decreed Israel to be a
legitimate state, May 14, 1948, the most conservative of Jewish
sects, the Hasidim, strongly opposed the establishment of a secular
state of Israel, claiming that it was wrong to do so apart from
Messiah's coming.
The offer made the British at the time of Germany's near total
victory, consisted of a proposal to bring the United States into
the war on Britain's side and thus insure an Allied victory. This
was contingent on the British, after the defeat of Germany,
agreeing to secure a large section of Palestine as a Jewish
homeland -- keeping in mind that this cabal was being created by
those who had no connected ancestry, whatever, to the Semitic
tribes of ancient Israel, and therefore no ancestral right to
fabricate even a remote claim to the region.
Freedman makes the observation that England had no more right to
promise Palestine to the Jews than "the United States would have to
promise Japan to Ireland" -- but that is precisely what they did.
This promise resulted in the drafting of a small historical
document called The Balfour Declaration. The following is the text,
in its entirety, of this short and concise historical
document:
Foreign
Office
November 2nd,
1917
Dear Lord
Rothschild,
I have much
pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's
Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish
Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by,
the Cabinet.
"His Majesty's
Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a
national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best
endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being
clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice
the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities
in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in
any other country."
I should be
grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of
the Zionist Federation.
Yours
sincerely,
Arthur James
Balfour
Note the second sentence (which is also the second paragraph) which
claims that "that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the
civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in
Palestine". Was it perhaps not considered at that time that the
forcible dispossession of other persons from their land and
property -- namely the Palestinian Arabs -- was a violation or
prejudicial to their "civil and religious rights"? That does seem a
bit of a stretch.
An interesting point in Freedman's presentation is that the German
Jews were very well treated in their land, many of them having fled
persecution from Russia and other Eastern European countries. As
Freedman puts it, "the Jews had never been better off in any
country in the world than they had been in Germany." Nearly all of
the great industrial giants of that time, the Rathenaus, the
Balins, Bleichroder, the Warburgs, and of course, the Rothchilds
(to whom the Balfour letter is addressed), were Jews and resided in
Germany.
What the Zionists did was nothing less than a classical "sell out"
of their German homeland. The methods used to bring the United
States into the war against Germany also appear to be classical in
that it was a pattern for many other such inducements for the US to
enter wars it had no business fighting. As with the Serbian
conflict and many others of this age, where fabricated atrocities
against ethnic minorities, women and children were used to gain the
agreement of the American Congress and citizens, so also was that
device used to bring the US into WWI.
Freedman notes that the American media, which prior to that had
been somewhat pro-German, began reporting that the Germans were
engaged in the commission of atrocities which, it was later proven,
were utterly false: atrocities such as the shooting of Red Cross
nurses and cutting off babies hands, etc.
During Freedman's involvement with matters of state he attended the
Paris Conference in 1919, where Germany was presented with demands
for reparations. In that conference, according to Mr. Freedman,
there were 117 Jews present, being represented by Bernard Baruch,
presenting their demands for the partitioning of Palestine as a
Jewish homeland.
As to what made it possible for the actual establishment of the
State of Israel as opposed to a mere political declaration by the
United Nations, Mr. Freedman expounds. "It is a well-established
and an undeniable historic fact," he writes, "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," Freedman reemphasizes, "it is certain that the
Zionists would never have attempted the conquest of Palestine by
force of arms."
The rest, as it is said, is history.
When one considers all of that history which has been involved in
shaping the world and especially the Middle East as it is today, it
becomes less of a mystery as to why the Palestinian Muslims are
possessed of such an animosity and hatred of those who, according
to all that has been presented here, literally stole their lives
and lands. It also seems to remove the mystery from the question
the American president asked as to why they hate America as much as
they do -- America, who has been the chief military supplier and
financier of Gog and Magog in the Khazarian usurpation of
Palestine. As Mr. Bush has said, "If you support terrorists, you
are a terrorist;" so also can it be said by the Muslims, "If you
support our enemies who steal our land and our dignity and our
history, you are also our enemies."
That message should have rung loud and clear on September 11, 2001
when even two of America's top Christian evangelists (Pat Robertson
and Jerry Falwell) claimed that the act was Divine retribution for
the sins of America. They, of course, abandoned that unpopular
position when public sentiment turned against them. One would have
to ask if, in that instance, those two men had effectively defined
the terms conviction and commitment for the followers of their
brand of "Christianity".
Many historians, some cited within this work, quote widely from
Arthur Koestler's book The Thirteenth Tribe as a credible literary
resource for a comprehensive history of the Khazars. This writing
has also leaned heavily on Mr. Koestler's tome as well as several
other Jewish historians and academics. It is interesting to note
that of the Jewish scholars citing The Thirteenth Tribe in their
historical accounts, virtually none quote such comments of
Koestler, previously cited, as "The story of the Khazar Empire, as
it slowly emerges from the past, begins to look like the most cruel
hoax which history has ever perpetrated." One would have to ask if
such omissions are not intentional and do not amount to a de facto
censoring of many unpopular aspects of this interesting and
far-reaching history.
Koestler, himself an Ashkenasic Jew, expressed these sentiments in
an apparent disappointment with the history of his own faith and
the essentially deleterious effect it has had upon the world. Yet
he did not forsake the religion of his fathers, nor is it implied
in this thesis that he should have.
For a non-Jew, such as this writer, to quote him and use his work
to such an extent, incorporating it so as to illustrate that
biblical prophecies concerning the evils of Gog and Magog clearly
point to the Talmudic Khazarians, risks the accusation of
anti-Semitism. Such a response, however, should have been clearly
shown to be vacuous at best, considering the proofs herein
presented that those Jews who hold political rule over Palestine
are not even remotely descended from Semitic tribes.
One cannot, however, help but stand in awe at the consummate
ability of these peoples who, comprising from one to six per cent
of the average population of countries outside of Israel, have
managed to acquire positions of power and influence far exceeding
their representation in the general populace of those
nations.
Mr. Freedman, as mentioned, was an Ashkenazic Jew. In his disgust
with what he witnessed his brethren doing he has used rather
forcible language outlining their actions and origins.
Concerning them he unequivocally states:
There wasn't one
of them who had an ancestor who ever put a toe in the Holy Land.
Not only in Old Testament history, but back to the beginning of
time. Not one of them! And yet they come to the Christians and ask
us to support their armed insurrections in Palestine by saying,
"You want to help repatriate God's Chosen People to their Promised
Land, their ancestral home, don't you? It's your Christian duty. We
gave you one of our boys as your Lord and Savior. You now go to
church on Sunday, and you kneel and you worship a Jew, and we're
Jews." But they are pagan Khazars who were converted just the same
as the Irish were converted. It is as ridiculous to call them
"people of the Holy Land," as it would be to call the 54 million
Chinese Moslems "Arabs."
The plain, blunt conclusion to the matter is that Gog and Magog
have clearly and stealthily -- albeit, in a slow-motion tidal wave
-- invaded from the north as per Biblical prophecy. Invaded not
only Palestine, but the entire world; every nation on the "four
quarters of the earth" has come within the pale of their influence.
These descendants of the "pagan Khazars" who profess to be the true
and original people of God have insinuated themselves into every
bastion of power on earth. If there are any exceptions to that
fact, they are as insignificant, in their estimation of things, as
a fly to a rhinoceros.
They (the race of Gog) control fully ten percent of the United
States Senate, arguably the most powerful and influential
legislative body on earth. They have skillfully controlled the U.S.
Administration and the Department of Defense and again involved
this nation in a war in which it has no business. This
extraordinarily ingenious and talented race have placed spectacles
astride the noses of politicians and Christians alike that cause it
to appear to them as if this conflict is justified; to elicit
statements, as from the U.S. President, that those with whom this
nation has declared war are haters of democracy and freedom, when
all they truly wanted was to be left alone to worship under the
tenets of their own religion, unmolested by those who have already
stolen nearly everything they have -- and done so with the money,
influence and guns of the United States of America.
This writer spent some time in Israel witnessing personally the
injustices perpetrated there by a people who had no rightful claim
to the land, upon a people who did. Having gone there with a
somewhat "pro-Israeli" bias, it soon became evident that any ruling
class that skillfully engineers an economy where one segment enjoys
an average 15 to 1 income advantage over another, under the same
cost of living, cannot feign innocence when they experience the
hatred and animosity from those whom they oppress.
The "spirit of Gog" did say it would use the "guns of America" to
accomplish its purposes, and now it is clearly seen, in
Afghanistan, as they spill the blood of whom they will, to
accomplish what they will, that they were not at all jesting in
that assertion.
Another fascinating element that inspires wonderment is the
remarkable manner in which Biblical prophecy has been so accurately
fulfilled -- AND -- how thoroughly modern Christianity has missed
that fulfillment. At the outset it seems strange that these
Biblical "scholars" have mislaid the lessons of history: primarily,
that prophecies have never been interpreted in advance of their
fulfillment, except by the prophets who gave them, as to what they
would look like. Yet they continue to try, and the result is
entertaining at best, and tragic at least, for they are left to
follow interpretations of their own devising -- sparks of their own
kindling. They have been so hypnotized and "drugged" by the idea of
supporting and funding the marvelous "return of the Jews to their
homeland" that they are as lemmings being willingly herded into the
sea.
Yes, Gog and Magog have invaded the entire world, and what is even
more astonishing is that it was done with not only the blessing of
professed Christianity, but with their financial support and
liturgical encouragement. They have truly dug their own
ecclesiastical graves.
Suggested Reading:
* Benjamin Freedman Speaks
* Are Today's Jews True Israelites?
* The Dark Side of the Israeli Connection
* B'nai B'rith and ADL hypocritical, says critics
References:
1. Koestler, Arthur, The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and
Its Heritage, New York: Random House, 1976, p. 17
2. Dunlop, D. M., The History of the Jewish Khazars, Princeton
University Press, 1954
3. Brook, Kevin Alan, The Jews of Khazaria, Jason Aronson, Inc.
Northvale, NJ, Jerusalem, 1999.
4. Peter B. Golden, Khazar Studies, vol. 1 (Budapest: Akademiai,
1980), pp. 55-56.
5. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria
6. Bury, J. B., A History of the Eastern Roman Empire (London,
1912).
7. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 18.
8. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, p. 27
9. Artamonov, M. I., Khazar History (Leningrad, 1962). Koestler,
The Thirteeth Tribe, p. 19.
10. Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought
(Cambridge, England: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1989), p.
207.
11. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, p. 3.
12. Ibid., p. 4
13. Peter B. Golden, An Introduction to the History of the Turkic
Peoples, Wiesbaden, Germany, 1992.
14. Ibn-Said al-Maghribi, quoted by Dunlop, p. II. Dunlop, D. M.,
The History of the Jewish Khazars (Princeton, 1954).
15. Omeljan Pritsak, The Khazar Kingdom's Conversion to Judaism,
Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3:2 (Sept, 1978): 271.
16. Andrew C. Gow, The Red Jews (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill,
1995), pp. 40-41.
17. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, p. 10. Andrew C. Gow, The Red Jews
(Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1995), p. 191.
18. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, pp. 10-11.
19. Ibid., p. 16
20. W. E. 0. Allen, A History of the Georgian People, London
1952.
21. Douglas M. Dunlop, The History of the Jewish Khazars, p.
113.
22. Tirmidhee, Abwaab al-Tafseer: Surat al-Kahf (Hadith 5160),
8/597-99; Ibn Maajah, Kitaab al-Fitan, (Hadith 4080), 2/1364.
Ahmad, Musnad, 2/510, 511. http://www.islaam.com/ilm/gog.htm
23. Gibbon, B., The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, Vol. V (2nd ed., London, 1901).
24. Ibid.
25. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 27]
26. Ibid., p. 27-8.
27. Ibid.
28. Dunlop, D. M., "Khazars" in Enc. Judaica, 1971-2
printing.
29. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 23-4.
30. Bury, J. B., A History of the Eastern Roman Empire, p.
120.
31. George Vernadsky, A History of Russia, Vol. 1 (New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1948), p. 346.
32. Brook, Kevin Alan, The Jews of Khazaria, (Jason Aronson, Inc.
Northvale, NJ, Jerusalem), 1999.
33. Omeljan Pritsak, The Khazar Kingdom's Conversion to Judaism,
pp. 278-9.
34. Dunlop, D. M., The History of the Jewish Khazars, p. 90
(Princeton, 1954). al-Bakri (ob. 487/1094)
35. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 58.
36. Ibid.
37. Bury, J. B., A History of the Eastern Roman Empire, p.
406.
38. Ibid.
39. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, p. 126.
40. Yehuda HaLevi, The Kuzari, trans. N. Daniel Korobkin
(Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1998), p. 1.
41. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 66.
42. Ibid., p. 72-4.
43. McEvedy, C., The Penguin Atlas of Mediaeval History
(1961).
44. Macartney, C. A., The Magyars in the Ninth Century (Cambridge,
1930).
45. Dunlop, D. M., The History of the Jewish Khazars (Princeton,
1954).
46. Baron, S. W., A Social and Relgious History of the Jews, Vols.
III and IV (New York, 1957).
47. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 141, 144, 152.
48. Cecil Roth., "Jews" in Enc. Britannica, 1973 printing.
49. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 159.
50. Ibid., p. 15, 16.
51. A. N. Poliak, Khazaria -- The History of a Jewish Kingdom in
Europe (Mossad Bialik, Tel Aviv, 1951).
52. Kutschera, Hugo Freiherr von, Die Chasaren (Wien, 1910),
Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 169.
53. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 172.
54. Mieses, M., Die Jiddische Sprache (Berlin-Wien, 1924).
55. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 179-80.
56. Ibid., p.17.
57. Barker, F., Crusades, Enc. Britannica, 14th ed., p. 772,
1973.
58. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 163.
59. Baron, S. W., A Social and Relgious History of the Jews, Vols.
III and IV (New York, 1957).
60. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 164-7.
61. Ibid., p. 182.
62. Brook, The Jews of Khazaria, p. 300.
63. Hugo Freiherr von Kutschera, in Die Chasaren: Historische
Studie (Vienna: A. Holzhausen, 1910,) (English translation.)
64. Shapiro, H., "The Jewish People: A Biological History" (UNESCO,
Paris, 1953).
65. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 177.
66. Baron, S. W., A Social and Religious History of the Jews, Vols.
III and IV (New York, 1957).
67. Encyclopedia Americana, 1985 edition.
68. 13th Tribe, Appendix IV, p. 223.
69. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, Appendix IV, p. 224.
70. JVIM International,
http://www.jvim.com/IntelligenceBriefing/Dec1996/wars.html
71. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Ch. 6.
72. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VI, 1909, (Robert Appleton
Company).
73. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Ch. 2.
74. Alexander A. Vasiliev, The Goths in the Crimea (Cambridge, MA:
The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1936), p. 96.
75. Jewish Travellers, ed. Elkan N. Adler (London: George Routledge
& Sons, 1930), p. 83.
76. Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, p. 24.
77. Ibid., p. 81.
78. Schultze -- Das Martyrium des heiligen Abo von Tiflis, Texte
und Untersuchungen für Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,
XIII (1905), 13th Tribe, p. 19, 20.
79. E. G. White, The Great Controversy, (Pacific Press Publishing
Company), 1888 edition.