The Khazars

The armed forces of the Khazar Khaganate had a rich array of military equipment, including various types of helmet and armour, shields, and distance weapons such as bows. Close-combat weapons ranged from slightly curved single-edged sabres and straight double-edged swords, to daggers, spears, axes and war-flails. By c. AD 750 the Khazars already made use of a broader array of military gear than any other people in Eastern Europe.

Archaeological evidence also shows that there were variations in the styles used in different regions of the Khaganate. The most complete array is found in specifically Khazar burials, and includes mail and lamellar armour, helmet, sabre, large fighting knife or khanjar, smaller knife, war-flail, axe, spear and bow. This was clearly the equipment of a mounted warrior, and it was almost invariably associated with items of horse harness.

On the western fringes of the Khaganate the Khazar army included significant Alan contingents, and up to three-quarters of their warrior burials contained axes, fighting knives and infantry bows; Alan cavalry rarely had armour, but were now armed with bow, sabre, fighting knife, axe and war-flail. The military equipment of Magyar and Bulgar soldiers was very similar to that of the Khazars during the 8th to 10th centuries, with bow, sabre, fighting knife, spear, axe and mace. There are no finds of identifiably Bulgar or Magyar armour from the steppes during this period, but Khazar helmets are known (and it is, of course, likely that any armour was normally too valuable to be deposited in the graves of any but the wealthiest warriors).

Little is known about Eastern Slav military equipment, but it may have had features in common with that of the Northern Slavs. Examples of their war gear from Bititsa (Sumy region of northern Ukraine) included a sabre with a distinctive hilt, a war-flail, mace, wooden shield with a large boss or (less likely) a small round shield, battle-axes, arrowheads, spears, and a remarkable number of javelins.

OFFENSIVE WEAPONS

The normal scenario for an early-medieval battle between steppe nomads began with a shoot-out between archers, followed by a mêlée, and then the pursuit and slaughter of the vanquished. The side that was unable to endure the initial arrow-shower was immediately upon the defensive, and almost always lost.

Khazars bows were of complex construction, in the usual Central Asian form which had appeared at the start of the first millenium AD with the arrival of the Xiongnu (whom some scholars believe were ancestors of the Huns). The core of such a bow was made of various types of wood, strengthened by plates of bone attached to the outside. Examples preserved in burials show that the bone elements of the Khazar bow included lateral and frontal pieces, plus others on the ‘ears’ (tips) and the ‘belly’ (centre). The lateral plates were almost always paired, while the ears were in the form of elongated tapering plates with a notch for the bowstring. Bows from the 7th and 8th centuries were of the same design, but during the 8th century the shape of the ends of the lateral overlays changed slightly, becoming more elongated with the bowstring notch now off-centre; meanwhile, the central plates became almost leaf-shaped.

During the 9th and 10th centuries the number of bone elements decreases; the most common form is known as the ‘Saltov’ bow, which often had only one small upper frontal bone plate with a nock and grooves for the bowstring. A significant reduction in the weight of arrows also indicates that the power of the bow had decreased with this loss of bone plates, perhaps reflecting a change in horse-archery tactics.

A typical Khazar bowstring had loops to fit over the tips of the stave, which made it easier to replace a worn or damaged string and prolonged the weapon’s useful life. The string itself consisted of twisted cords of bull hide or braided sheep intestines, though silk threads were also used.

Substantial numbers of very varied arrowheads have been found in burials. Those from the Khazar period are iron and are generally leaf-shaped. In section the great majority are three-bladed; other forms such as two-bladed, flattened triangular, rhomboid, trapezoid, and some other styles are fewer in number. A noticeable decrease in the size of arrowheads, starting in the second half of the 8th century, along with the appearance of specialized armour-piercing types, was probably due to an increasing use of armour, perhaps especially mail. Small arrowheads are almost universal among the finds, though these also include some large examples with an almost chisel-shaped blade intended to cause the broadest possible wound to an unarmoured man or horse. In contrast the slenderest forms were designed to penetrate armour, especially mail. The earliest known examples of small, narrow, three-bladed armour-piercing arrowheads were found in Voznesenka in the Voronezh region of Russia, together with fragments of mail armour. No quivers survive from this period in the Khazar territories, only the metal loops and hooks by which they were carried.

The well-known reference to the Slavs paying tribute to the Khazars in the form of swords has sometimes been taken as evidence that straight, double-edged swords were superior to the single-edged sabres otherwise used by Khazars. Arguing against this is not only the interpretation of such tribute as a disarmament of the defeated, but the plain facts that sabres were not only still used by the Khazars right up until the collapse of the Khaganate under Russian pressure in the 10th and 11th centuries, but remained the most popular close-combat bladed weapon amongst steppe nomadic horsemen◦– and many other cavalry◦– for centuries to come. It may also be the case that the spread of sabres in much of Eastern Europe was closely associated with the Khazars.

In the second half of the 7th century the swords found in steppe warrior burials are, with very few exceptions, single-edged ‘sabre’ types ranging in length from 75cm to 100cm including hilts (29.5–39.4in). The appearance of increasingly curved blades reflected a search for greater effectiveness in mounted combat, and in many 7th-century single-edged weapons the hilt was also curved towards the cutting edge. This style is unlikely to have been invented by the Khazars themselves, but was probably borrowed from the Persians. There is, however, no scholarly consensus regarding the origin of distinctive ‘D’ or ‘P’-shaped projections on the scabbard to attach the suspension straps.

In the mid-8th century the warriors of the Khazar Khaganate adopted an early form of curved or true sabre. According to A.V. Kryganov, the renowned expert on nomad weaponry:

A certain thickening towards the end of the blade may have produced greater striking power, or may simply have resulted from giving the weapon a doubled edge towards its point. In contrast to the 8th–9th century Khazars’ highly effective close-combat cavalry or infantry weapon, the early Russian sword was really only effective on foot.

Daggers traditionally served as auxiliary close-combat weapons amongst foot-soldiers, so it is not surprising that they did not immediately become widespread among the nomadic horse-riding population of the Khazar Khaganate. Early daggers did not significantly differ in shape from smaller knives, usually being single-edged with a straight grip. At the end of the 7th century a Turkish type of larger fighting knife, sometimes with a grip markedly curved towards the cutting edge, spread among the Khazars. This weapon, unknown earlier in Europe, may have been of Soghdian Central Asian origin, where it was the ancestor of the khanjar which then spread across most of the Islamic world and beyond.

Across the Volga-Ural steppe region, metal spearheads had been known from the middle of the 3rd millennium BC. These had sockets rather than tangs for attachment to wooden shafts, often with an additional crimping ring which fixed the head more securely.

Khazar burials of the 7th century rarely contain spearheads; only at the turn of the 7th–8th centuries do spearheads with slender tetrahedral (i.e. ‘diamond-section’) blades appear in a Khazar context. The appearance of this form of weapon also coincided with fragments of mail armour being found in such burials. More specifically armour-piercing types of spearheads appeared in the 8th to 10th centuries, and were especially associated with the highly developed Saltov-Khazar culture. The majority of spearheads found in graves of both nomadic and settled Khazars, as well as in Alan and Bulgar burials, are of this basic form. Broader, leaf-shaped spearheads designed for engaging warriors who were unprotected by armour are rare, but there are nevertheless two main variants: spearheads with a diamond-shaped section, and two-ended spears having a metal butt or ferrule that could also be used to strike. Meanwhile, thrown javelins were only used in the Khaganate by Slav and Finno-Ugrian tribal warriors.

The spearheads were mounted on slender wooden shafts, 3 to 4m long and up to 4.5cm in diameter (9ft 9in–13ft, x 1.8in); nowhere along its length was the shaft much thicker than the maximum diameter of the socket (from 0.8 to 1.7in). The shafts were made from straight saplings or pollard-poles of young trees, of species which varied with the local climates. As a rule, saplings were cut in late autumn or early winter during the period of minimum sap flow; they were then straightened and allowed to dry, after which the wood was scraped and polished to the desired size and shape.

Shafts might also be bound with metal bands to increase their strength when thrusting, and the addition of rawhide or birch-bark bindings gave a more secure grip. To make carrying the spear easier, a rawhide strap was attached (which the Cossacks later called a temyak). Again judging by Cossack fighting styles, the medieval steppe nomads might have fastened a looped leather strap near the butt of the shaft for the rider’s foot, to keep his weapon in an upright position when on horseback.

The methods of using this type of spear could vary, and the following examples are based upon available data:

(1) With a firm grip at the point of balance: the shaft is clamped under the bent arm tightly pressed against the warrior’s body. The effectiveness of the thrust and impact of the lance depended upon the speed of the horse at the moment of contact.

(2) Couched: the shaft is grasped nearer its lower end, and either rests beneath the armpit or is tightly pressed into it, with the arm bent at the elbow in a horizontal position. The result is a significant increase in the effective reach of the lance, but makes it difficult to control in a horizontal position because it is not grasped at the point of balance.

(3) With a free grip: the spear is held in one hand in a horizontal ‘trail’ position. Immediately before the moment of contact, the warrior thrusts his arm in whatever direction he chooses. This results in a weaker impact, but allows the rider to fence with the spear and use it to deflect enemy blows.

(4) With a fixed ‘dart’ grip: the weapon is held overarm in one hand, as if to throw it like a javelin. This permits a downwards blow, and was typical when in combat against men on foot.

The use of battle-axes by the peoples of the Khazar Khaganate reflected the influence of long-established Caucasian tradition. In fact such axes are not known in early Khazar and Bulgar burials, but are present in large numbers in Alan sites. Under Alan influence, battle-axes subsequently came to be used by the semi-settled Khazar population from at least the 7th century.

The axe was a universal weapon in the sense that it could be used by both horsemen and infantrymen. The handle was made of hardwood such as cornel or maple, normally from 60 to 75cm long (23–30in). In battle the axe’s effectiveness was comparable to that of a sabre, but it was much cheaper to manufacture. (Because axes were the most readily available weapons to the poorest among the population during the early period, little distinction may have been made between a weapon of war and a work-tool.) Nevertheless, all surviving axes are eye-catching weapons, though relatively small in size and weight. Their shapes can be categorized according to the details of both the blade and the socket which fits around the handle, but the majority of war axes from the Saltov culture are of one type, having a narrow, elongated blade; a small number also have a smaller secondary blade on the back of the head.

The war-flail was a variety of mace, consisting of a ball or other weight hanging from a short handle by means of a strap, plaited thongs or more rarely a chain. It was not easy to use in combat, requiring considerable room to deliver an effective blow. It was solely an offensive weapon, being useless as a means of defence, so those who used the war-flail may usually have been equipped with shields. Nevertheless, the number of finds suggests that it was effective, perhaps in the hands of both cavalry and infantry in fast-moving skirmishes. Consequently the flail may have been carried as part of a warrior’s full panoply, for use when a suitable occasion arose.

The war-flails of Khazar warriors may be divided by minor variations; in the most massive form the strap passed through a longitudinal hole in a flange at the top of the weight. The most common type had an oval weight made of bone with an inset iron bar, while other types had a solid weight made entirely of bone, stone, iron, bronze or lead.

DEFENSIVE EQUIPMENT

The appearance of armour among the Khazars can be traced back to the end of the 7th century, but the fact that only small fragments of mail have been found in such contexts seems to suggest that, as yet, full mail hauberks were rarely used. Perhaps mail was so expensive, having been imported from elsewhere, that small sections might have been sewn onto a leather or textile basis to protect particularly vulnerable parts of the body? In some warrior burials mail was found together with remnants of lamellar armour. It is probable that in this period efforts were still being made to achieve an optimal design which resulted, by the middle of the 8th century, in the adoption of a full mail hauberk, like those already seen in wealthier and more settled cultures. However, the mail found in Khazar-period graves was often of sophisticated manufacture, combining both riveted and hammer-welded links. The latter are sometimes made of square-section wire, formed into rings with a diameter of 10 to 14mm (0.4–0.5in). In their complete form most mail shirts had short sleeves, and slits in the hem of the skirt to prevent it riding up when astride a horse.

As pointed out by the Russian historian of arms and armour, Dr M.V. Gorelik, developments in armour were amongst the Khazars’ greatest technological achievements during the 7th to 9th centuries. In fact, the Khazars drew upon the traditions of Central Asia and China, Transoxania, Iran and Byzantium to produce something genuinely new, and the skilled armourers of the north Caucasus ensured that the results were often of the highest quality.[3]

Lamellar armour was popular from the Pacific to the Danube, and it was certainly important in the Khazar Khaganate. For reasons which remain unclear, lamellae with curved and scalloped edges fell out of fashion during the 6th and 7th centuries, and had disappeared by the close of the 8th century. What remained were rectangular plates with slightly rounded tops. These were central to the Khazar armourer’s art, and what came next demanded technological skills previously seen only amongst the Romans at the beginning of the 1st millenium AD. (Indeed, such skills only reappeared in Western and Central Europe at the close of the medieval period, though they probably survived in Byzantium.) Khazar armourers learned◦– perhaps from the Byzantines◦– how to connect plates, scales or other forms of lamellae by joining them with iron rivets rather than rawhide thongs. Even more significantly, they used a system of ‘loose riveting’, which required huge skill if the resulting armour was to be both flexible and strong. Such armours were, in fact, almost as flexible as traditional lamellar construction while being considerably stronger, because it was much more difficult to break or ‘pop’ an iron rivet than it was to cut leather, rawhide or silk lacing with a blow from a blade.

Another Khazar development was domed shoulder plates forged from a single piece of steel, which were then strapped to the cuirass◦– a form of protection probably developed from similar shoulder-pieces known in Eastern Turkestan during the 8th century. A cuirass with these ‘pauldrons’ still left most of the arms exposed, along with much of the body and the legs below the waist. To solve this the Khazars wore mail hauberks beneath the lamellar cuirass, in a style of armour that remained characteristic of Central Asia from the 6th century until beyond the end of the medieval period.

Yet another Eastern idea adopted by the Khazars was a pair of greaves forged from two substantial strips of metal connected by loops, almost certainly of rawhide or leather, and secured to the wearer’s shins by buckled straps. Further strips of metal with curved edges could also be riveted to the fronts of such greaves. Comparable greaves appear in Chinese sculptures and wall paintings from the 7th to 9th centuries, as well as in some Central Asian wall paintings of a similar period, and, famously, in some Scandinavian ‘splint’ armour of the immediate pre-Viking era.

The typical Khazar helmet was made of four segments riveted directly together, plus a conical top element or finial, and often a straight nasal bar. Helmets often also had a mail aventail attached to their rim, reaching the shoulders, to protect the back and sides of the head and neck. Images of warriors in such equipment appear in a number of places, including inscribed bone plates from the Shilovsky mound near the Oka River. A scene of battle on another engraved bone object from the Khazar stronghold of Sarkel portrays a lightly armoured, spear-armed horseman striking a heavily armoured soldier in his only unprotected place◦– his face. In contrast, many Alan helmets appear to have been Spangenhelme made of hardened leather elements attached to an iron frame consisting of a lower rim, eight vertical strips and a plate at the top.

There is no reliable archaeological data concerning Khazar shields, because their wood and leather are not preserved. However, the nomadic Khazars clearly used the standard Turkic shield of this period, which was round, and usually approximately 78cm (30in) in diameter. It was made of five wooden boards, each 15–18cm (6–7in) wide and not more than 1cm (0.4in) thick. On the inside, these boards were connected to a wooden crossbar. Such a shield could not long withstand the full impact of a cutting weapon; this indicates that the Turks did not rely on their shields in close combat, but primarily used them for defence against arrows.

On a further engraved bone object from Sarkel we see warriors without shields in their hands, though there are round objects which might represent shields lying on the ground. This seems likely, because a warrior who has been struck by a spear has thrown his bow on the ground while his sword also flies from his hand. In one Khazar grave, a slightly domed iron disk with a diameter of about 25cm (9.8in) and a thickness of 0.5cm was found, in the centre of which is a large rivet which had been driven in from the inside. The exact purpose of this object remains unclear, but it may have been used as a small ‘elbow shield’ attached to the arm by a leather strap. Such a defence could only be useful in close combat to deflect a slashing blow.

In a nomadic environment the horse was an essential feature of life, so items of harness were objects of everyday rather than specifically military use. By the end of the 7th century the Khazars were far from alone in using a rigid wooden saddle with stirrups. On the steppes the wood-framed saddle itself dated back to around the 4th century AD, so it is possible, even without the confirmation of archaeological finds, that the Khazars used it from an even earlier date◦– perhaps with leather-loop stirrups, which similarly left no archaeological trace. Metal stirrups first appeared in Central Europe with the Avars in the 7th century, but they only spread more widely across Eastern Europe during the Khazar period.

The combination of a rigid wooden saddle and metal stirrups gave greater security to a horseman’s ‘seat’◦– in other words, it was more difficult to knock him off his horse◦– and they also enabled the rider to strike more varied and powerful blows with a range of weapons, especially spear and sword. The stirrup itself had not originally been developed for this purpose, however; in its earliest manifestation it simply allowed a warrior to ride for longer without tiring, by improving circulation in his legs and thus making him less vulnerable to prolonged exposure to cold while in the saddle. In the context of combat, however, rigid saddles and metallic stirrups certainly contributed to the development of the curved sabre and other close-combat weapons, and thus, by extension, to the further development of cavalry armour and helmets.