Nowadays, it is widely believed in science that the Khazar state made a significant contribution to the historical development of the peoples of Eastern Europe, the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia. Since H. D. Fren introduced data from medieval Arabic sources on the history of the region at the turn of the 1st and 2nd millennia into scientific circulation, this statement, as a rule, does not cause doubts about its truth in the research literature [Vashchenko, 2006, p.9]. The controversy is only about the extent and nature of Khazar influence, and not about its reality. In the works of Klyuchevsky [Klyuchevsky, 1959, p. 308], Artamonov [Artamonov, 2002, pp. 457-458], Dunlop [1954, p. 87], Golden [1980, p. 110-111], Golb and Pritsak [Golb and Pritsak, 2003], Novoseltsev [Novoseltsev, 1990], Petrukhin [Petrukhin, 1995], Konovalova [Konovalova, 2001. p. 108-135] and many others thoroughly substantiate the thesis about the influence of Khazaria on neighboring states and ethno-political associations in the field of material culture, ethnogenetic interactions, building the oldest systems of state administration in the steppes of south-eastern Europe, introducing some features of specifically eastern, nomadic political culture and political terminology into the structure of these states. But all this does not remove the question of what role the diverse Turkic, Slavic, Germanic, Byzantine, Iranian, Semitic, Finno-Ugric, Kartvelian and other ethno-cultural and political environment played in the history of Khazaria itself. After all, one cursory glance at the geographical map of south-eastern Europe is enough to understand which of all possible geopolitical factors was decisive in the history of the Khazar Khaganate. Such a factor was undoubtedly its location on the border not only of different continents, natural and climatic zones, but also of cultural and civilizational communities. In other words, the Khazar state emerged, developed, and until its death was constantly f ... Read more