WI: Khazar Constantinople

[rcduggan]

Now, I know that by the 930s the Khazars were much weaker than they had been in the 9th century. However, under Khagan (or Khagan Bek) Aaron II, the Khazar Khaganate had experienced something of a revival. They managed to temporarily stave off the Pechenegs, Cumans, and Rus', and were allied to the Byzantine Empire.

However, beginning in the 930s, Roman Emperor Romanos I had begun systematic persecution of Jews throughout the empire. He broke the centuries-old alliance with the Byzantines, and courted the Rus' to form an anti-Khazar coalition.

At this time, Constantinople was the prize for nomadic nations. The Bulgars tried it many times in the 9th and 10th centuries, mostly without success. Later the Pechenegs, Rus', Crusaders, and Turks would try to take the city, and only the last two were successful.

But here's my what if:

What if after their alliance was broken in the 930s, the Khazars allied with the Bulgarians, the Ikhshidids of Egypt, and the Pechenegs against the Byzantines and Rus'? Say the Pechenegs keep the Rus' occupied in the north, while a massive Khazar fleet sails for Constantinople. At the same time, an Arab army raids Anatolia and the Bulgarians attack Constantinople from the west.

What would happen if Constantinople fell to the Khazars ITTL?

 

[rcduggan]

Bump... I know there are few Khazar enthusiasts besides myself here, but I was hoping for a better response. Anyone?

 

[The Sicilian]

Interesting idea, but to topple Constantinople one needs either gunpowder or a traitor inside. Because the former is unavailable to the Khazars, they'll have to find someone who'll let them into the City. How's Constantinople's Jewish population around these times?

 

[David bar Elias]

Interesting idea, but to topple Constantinople one needs either gunpowder or a traitor inside. Because the former is unavailable to the Khazars, they'll have to find someone who'll let them into the City. How's Constantinople's Jewish population around these times?

That would be a fitting way for the city to fall, if it's the persecution that sparked the Khazar offensive.

 

[Roberto]

That would be a fitting way for the city to fall, if it's the persecution that sparked the Khazar offensive.

What would happen after the Jews of Constantinople rise up and welcome the Khazars in? Could the Khazars govern it?

 

[danielbd]

What would happen after the Jews of Constantinople rise up and welcome the Khazars in? Could the Khazars govern it?

The city was overwhelmingly Christian, any revolt by some merchants would have been futile.
Even if the coalition defeated the Byzantines and occupied the city (which is quite unlikely itself), Constantinople would never go to the Khazars. The Bulgarians are within a 3 days march from the city. Even if the Khazars somehow occupied it, it would still be lost easily to Bulgaria within years or even days.

 

[rcduggan]

The city was overwhelmingly Christian, any revolt by some merchants would have been futile.
Even if the coalition defeated the Byzantines and occupied the city (which is quite unlikely itself), Constantinople would never go to the Khazars. The Bulgarians are within a 3 days march from the city. Even if the Khazars somehow occupied it, it would still be lost easily to Bulgaria within years or even days.

Even if the Khazars allied with the Bulgars? The Bulgars were much more tolerant of Jews, and would probably honor their alliance. Say the Khagan offers the Bulgars most of Greece to the Bulgarian Emperor in return for Khazar control of Constantinople? Why would the Bulgarians suddenly break their alliance to liberate the city (which they would have to do in the name of the Byzantines)?

EDIT: Also, there was a substantial population of Khazar Christians in Constantinople, who probably would have avoided persecution by Romanos. They possibly would support the Khazars. Added to this maybe the various other Turkic peoples (Pechenegs, Kipchaks, Bulgars, Uzes, etc) who would support the Khazars, and you have a semi-viable base of support.
A large number of Jews from the empire also fled to Khazaria after Romanos began his persecution. Maybe the Khazars could settle those Jews back in Constantinople, would that be enough to allow them to govern it?
Lastly, the Khazars in OTL did attack the Byzantine holdings in Crimea, so it is not too implausible that they would extend the war.

 

[Scarecrow]

Did the Khazars even have much of a fleet though?

Secondly, such an alliance would have been quite an achievement, especially with out the Byzantines knowing about it. I seem to recall the Bulgars sought an alliance with the Abbasids to attack Byzantium but the messenger was intercepted in Anatolia.

Thirdly the Byzantines would have done what they had done before when a group of barbarians attack them. Buy off the group of barbarians next to them. In the case of the Khazars its the Rus.
They did it with the Magyars when the Bulgars invaded at the end of the 9th Century, so there is no reason they wouldn't do it here.

Fourthly, Greek Fire. It was effective against the Viking ships from Kiev, so it would be just as effective against this Khazar fleet.

 

[danielbd]

Even if the Khazars allied with the Bulgars? The Bulgars were much more tolerant of Jews, and would probably honor their alliance. Say the Khagan offers the Bulgars most of Greece to the Bulgarian Emperor in return for Khazar control of Constantinople? Why would the Bulgarians suddenly break their alliance to liberate the city (which they would have to do in the name of the Byzantines)?

EDIT: Also, there was a substantial population of Khazar Christians in Constantinople, who probably would have avoided persecution by Romanos. They possibly would support the Khazars. Added to this maybe the various other Turkic peoples (Pechenegs, Kipchaks, Bulgars, Uzes, etc) who would support the Khazars, and you have a semi-viable base of support.
A large number of Jews from the empire also fled to Khazaria after Romanos began his persecution. Maybe the Khazars could settle those Jews back in Constantinople, would that be enough to allow them to govern it?
Lastly, the Khazars in OTL did attack the Byzantine holdings in Crimea, so it is not too implausible that they would extend the war.

Well why wouldn't the Bulgars break the alliance and occupy Constantinople? Bulgaria was a very powerful state even in the 930s (the decline came after the 950 iirc), and had been trying for more than 100 years to decisively defeat the Romans and occupy the city. I didn't say liberate the city, but conquer it and proclaim themselves emperors like they tried OTL many times.
It is not about the Khazars not extending the war, but about their inability to project such power over the sea during this period. The Arabs couldn't do it and they had the resources of the largest part of the Mediteranean world at their disposal and the crucial help from the Avars, together with the fact that they also held Anatolia.
Imo in any Khazar-Bulgarian attack on the city i see the Bulgars as the senior partners simply for logisticalal reasons.
For a Khazar Constantinople i think a better POD would be making Rus less stronger so that the Khazars can expand westwards. Vassalage over the Cumans and the other Turkic tribes might seem very easy to attain considering the situation they were in.

 

[rcduggan]

Well why wouldn't the Bulgars break the alliance and occupy Constantinople? Bulgaria was a very powerful state even in the 930s (the decline came after the 950 iirc), and had been trying for more than 100 years to decisively defeat the Romans and occupy the city. I didn't say liberate the city, but conquer it and proclaim themselves emperors like they tried OTL many times.
It is not about the Khazars not extending the war, but about their inability to project such power over the sea during this period. The Arabs couldn't do it and they had the resources of the largest part of the Mediteranean world at their disposal and the crucial help from the Avars, together with the fact that they also held Anatolia.
Imo in any Khazar-Bulgarian attack on the city i see the Bulgars as the senior partners simply for logisticalal reasons.

Point taken, that does make sense.

For a Khazar Constantinople i think a better POD would be making Rus less stronger so that the Khazars can expand westwards. Vassalage over the Cumans and the other Turkic tribes might seem very easy to attain considering the situation they were in.

A POD similar to the one I am using in my TL is that the Varangians stay in Holmgard (Novgorod) and fail to take Kiev in the 880s. This prevents the rise of the Rus' and the fall of the Khazars. Would that work?

The Khazars didn't really show any desire to expand west past the Dnieper, AFAIK. The various Slavic and Turkic tribes to the west of the river already paid tribute to the Khagan. The Cumans were not a threat in the east until the 11th century, after they broke from the Kimeks and defeated the Pechenegs. ITTL, that might not happen.

If the Rus' don't pose a threat to the Khazars, might they be free to focus most of their strength against the Byzantines?



EDIT: Another POD I thought of involving the Bulgars. During the reign of Khan Boris I, the Bulgars were converted to Eastern Orthodox Christianity. However, there were some attempts during the reign of Boris to convert the Bulgars to Judaism. What if this had been successful, and majority of the Bulgar (Turkic) population was converted to Judaism? If this happened, would it be possibly that the Bulgars would avoid being assimilated by the Slavs? Being Jewish as opposed to their Orthodox subjects might mean less intermarrying... could that potentially lead to a still-Turkic Bulgar ruling class?

 

[danielbd]

Well imo anything that weakens the Rus is bound to make the Khazars stronger; western expansion, considering there is no organised Slav state to check it, seems quite likely.
About the Bulgars converting to Judaism... It is possible since the Khazars did it after all, but in the, Balkans converting to Christianity meant better political recognition by the neighbouring peoples (various slav statelets as well as local tribes and ofcourse the Empire itself). The decision itself was largely political imo. On the other hand, if the Khazars become stronger and extend their influence into the region it might become plausible for the Bulgar nobility to convert.

 

[rcduggan]

Well imo anything that weakens the Rus is bound to make the Khazars stronger; western expansion, considering there is no organised Slav state to check it, seems quite likely.
About the Bulgars converting to Judaism... It is possible since the Khazars did it after all, but in the, Balkans converting to Christianity meant better political recognition by the neighbouring peoples (various slav statelets as well as local tribes and ofcourse the Empire itself). The decision itself was largely political imo. On the other hand, if the Khazars become stronger and extend their influence into the region it might become plausible for the Bulgar nobility to convert.

As I said before, even at their height the Khazars showed little desire to advance past the Dnieper. They were content to exact tributes from the Slavs and Turkics and leave them be. Why would that change later?