BYZANTIUM AND THE TURKS: THE FALL AND RISE OF CIVILIZATIONS

Over time, the Byzantines became the first in the Christian Mediterranean to formulate a quasi-ethnic concept of ‘Turks’ as a general name encompassing a range of related tribes and peoples. In the sixth century, the Byzantines first used the ethnonym ‘Turkoi’ (τοῦρκοι) to refer to subjects of the Turkic khaganate, categorizing them as a variety of Scythians and Huns.

A vivid chapter in Byzantine diplomacy is represented by their ties with the Turkic Khaganate, created in Central Asia by the Gokturks, also known as the Turkuts. The founder of the khaganate and leader of the Gokturks, Bumin Khan of the Ashina clan, separated from the Turkic nomadic state of the Gaoche in the steppes north of China in the mid-sixth century. The Gokturk Khans moved westward and reached the Aral Sea by the mid-sixth century, and the Volga a few years later, which they did not cross. The Gokturks came to dominate vast steppe territories from China to the Caspian Sea, conquering the urban cultures of the eastern Iranians in Central Asia (the Sogdians, Khwarazmians, and others). It was these tribes that first began to call themselves Turks. More precisely, apparently, the name ‘Turk’ (meaning ‘strong’, ‘mighty’) emerged as an honorary appellation for the aristocracy of the Gokturks. Consequently, from that time, the name 'Turk' appeared in Pahlavi1¹The Pahlavi language is a Middle Iranian language, the predecessor of modern Persian. Pahlavi was the official and literary language of Persia during the Sassanid dynasty. and then Byzantine texts. Later, it was used by Iranians and Byzantines to refer to tribes related to the Gokturks, becoming a kind of general ethnonym.

Soon, the Turks came into conflict with Sasanian Iran,2²Sassanids were a ruling dynasty in Iran from the third to the seventh centuries. At its peak, the Sassanid Empire covered the territories of modern Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, the eastern part of modern Turkey, parts of Syria, India, Pakistan, Central Asia, the Arabian Peninsula, and Egypt. which undermined the lucrative silk trade controlled by the Sogdians. The Gokturk khan, on the advice of the Sogdian merchant Maniah, decided to establish contact with the Byzantine Empire, sell silk directly to the Byzantines, and have a political counterbalance to Sasanian Iran. An embassy led by Maniah traversed the steppes and the Caucasus Mountains with the help of the Alans, reaching first the empire's eastern border and then Constantinople. According to the envoys, the name of the supreme khan was Silzivul, and the khaganate consisted of four provinces. In August 569, a Byzantine embassy was sent to the khan by Emperor Justin II. Concerned about the emerging alliance, the Iranians tried to bribe the Alans into eliminating the envoys. However, the embassy managed to avoid the dangers and reach the khan at Mount Ektagh.iThe Altai Mountains are a mountain system in the southeastern part of the Altai on the border between modern Mongolia and China. Based on the accounts of the envoys, the impressions of the khan's reception, the customs, and the Turkic way of life are described by Menander, a Byzantine.

The khan’s reception of the Byzantine envoys led by Zimarchos was described thus: ‘The Khan was inside the yurt and sat on a golden two-wheeled seat, which, when necessary, was pulled by a single horse ... [The Khan and the Byzantine envoys] spent the whole day feasting in that same yurt. It was made of silk fabrics intricately adorned with various colors. They drank wine, but not the kind that we extract from grapes. The drink they consumed was somewhat barbaric. The Turkic land does not produce grapevines; they do not have this plant at all. The Romans then withdrew to where they were staying. On the next day, they were brought into another yurt, also decorated and adorned with silk covers. Various idols stood here, different in appearance. Dizabul sat on a bed made entirely of gold. In the middle of this room were golden vessels, censers, and barrels. They feasted again, discussed business matters, and then dispersed. On the following day, they came to another room with wooden pillars covered in gold, as well as a gilded bed supported by four golden peacocks. In front of the room, in a large space, wagons were lined up, containing a multitude of silver dishes, baskets, and many figures of quadrupeds made of silver, no less impressive than those made by our craftsmen. This is the luxury of a Turkic prince.’

In subsequent years, various diplomatic exchanges continued, and embassies usually sailed by sea from Sinope to Cherson, then to the Taman Peninsula, and from there through the steppes to the domain of the Gokturks. Menander provides a list of embassies and imperial envoys sent to the Turks.

However, soon the khaganate split into two states: the Eastern Turkic Khaganate and the Western Turkic Khaganate. The last embassy from the Gokturks arrived in Constantinople from the Western Khagan during the reign of Emperor Maurice in 598, confirming the alliance between the khaganate and the empire. The alliance with the Turks proved helpful to the Byzantines during the Persian wars of Heraclius. In 627, the Khazars, still under the rule of the Gokturks, raided Caucasian Albania and participated in the Byzantine conquest of Tbilisi. Heraclius I sent his daughter, Epiphania, to marry the Turkic khan Tun-Yabgu, but he died before the wedding could take place, and the imperial daughter returned to Constantinople.

As early as the second century CE, it is likely that the Greco-Roman geographer and astronomer Claudius Ptolemy noted the presence of the Huns on the Tanais, the river we now know as the Don. The term 'Huns' concealed a confederation of nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes of various origins (Altaians, Tungusics, Indo-Europeans, etc.) who inhabited vast expanses of inner Eurasia. The aristocratic core of this tribal composite may have been Turkic (proto-Turkic) or Turkic-Mongolian. Presumably, Hunnic tribes included the Hunnu, nomadic tribes known from Chinese sources. In the first centuries of the common era, they migrated from central or east Eurasia to the Black Sea, conquering the Alans in the north Caucasus and the northern Black Sea region, and the coastal Goths. As the Huns advanced westward, their confederation increasingly incorporated Indo-European (Scythian-Sarmatian) and Germanic elements, particularly in the northern Black Sea region.

The Greeks and Romans came into direct contact with the Huns later in the fourth century, when they invaded the northern Black Sea region and relocated some of the local Goths (known as the Visigoths) to Thrace in the late 370s. The Huns participated in attacks against the Byzantine Empire alongside the Goths but soon withdrew beyond the Danube. At the turn of the fourth and fifth centuries, the Huns threatened the empire from two directions. Initially, they reached Antioch in Syria through Derbent, breaking through the Caucasus. In the west, in the early fifth century, the Huns were located in PannoniaiPannonia is a historical region in Eastern Europe, today the territory of mainly Hungary and a number of Balkan countries. and maintained peaceful relations with the empire. Despite previous agreements with Rome, the new Hunnic leader Attila attacked Thrace and Macedonia in 447.iMacedonia is a historical region in the Balkans. Today it is the territory of Greece, North Macedonia, and Bulgaria. Once again, the empire had to pay tribute to the Huns. Priscus, the head of the Byzantine embassy to the Huns, left a detailed report on Attila's court, its customs, and the traditions of the Huns. Shortly after, the Huns turned their attention to the western part of the empire. In Gaul,iGaul is a collective name for several provinces of the Roman Empire, the territory of modern France. they suffered a defeat in the great battle of the Catalaunian Fields in June 451, and their leader Attila passed away soon after, in 453.3³Iranian nomads. It is significant that in the era of the Great Migration of Peoples, Iranian nomads, named Sarmatians, Aorses, Siraks, Roxolans, Yazygs, Alans, et cetera, invariably participated in the Hunnic and Germanic invasions. The presence of Sarmato-Alans is recorded in most of the territories covered by the Great Migration–from the Danube and the Balkans to Gaul, the Pyrenees, and North Africa.

In the years that followed, the Huns exited the historical stage as a political force, leaving a vivid memory in Byzantine literature for centuries to come. At different times, various Huns, both as prisoners and voluntary migrants, settled in Thrace, and along with the Huns beyond the Danube, they are occasionally mentioned as participants in the empire's internal political struggles during the reigns of emperors Anastasius and Justinian I in the fifth and sixth centuries. However, it is more likely that during this period, the term 'Huns' referred to Turkic nomads and semi-nomads from the northern Black Sea region, who were also known as Utigurs, Kutrigurs, or Bulgars, and who may have previously been part of the Hunnic nomadic empire. It is difficult to determine the exact Turkic branch to which the Kutrigurs and Utigurs belonged. In the mid-sixth century, the Kutrigurs roamed between the Dnieper and the Don, while the Utigurs were located east of the Don. These tribes frequently raided the empire together with the Germanic Gepid tribe.

From the mid-sixth century onwards, the Avars, having subjugated the tribes of Pannonia and the northern Black Sea, took center stage in Byzantium's relations with the northern peoples of the Danube region. They were possibly originally Turkic tribes connected to the Turkic-Ogur tribes of Central Asia, who had been displaced westward by the expansion of the Turkic khaganate. However, like the Huns, the Avar state represented a multiethnic entity in which Turkic elements were far from predominant.4⁴Avars and Slavs. The first Russian chronicle, created in the early twelfth century CE, more than 500 years after the conquest of the Slavs by the Avars, remembers that Avar warriors harnessed Slavic women instead of oxen to their carts. This scene is depicted in an illustration from the Radziwill list of the chronicle (see above). Initially, Byzantium's relationship with the Avars developed peacefully—when the Avars arrived on the Caucasian border of the empire in the mid-sixth century, they sent numerous diplomats and ambassadors on a large-scale diplomatic mission to Constantinople. The Byzantine emperor Justinian I generously rewarded the ambassadors and formed an alliance with the Avars. According to the agreement with Justinian, the Avars inflicted devastating defeats on the Turkic tribes they encountered such as the Sabirs, Utigurs, and Kutrigurs. In the 560s, under the leadership of their new khan, Bayan, the Avars moved farther west through the Danube and encountered the Franks in Thuringia.

Soon, the Avars began to raid the Byzantine Balkans, and Constantinople initially managed to buy them off with large sums of gold. Meanwhile, a new force was emerging in Pannonia—the Slavic tribes, who were embarking on campaigns, plundering the right bank of the Danube. Initially, the Byzantines sought assistance from the Avars, who made several expeditions against the Slavs. In the 570s, the Slavs apparently acknowledged the supreme authority of the Avars, but this did not stop the Slavic raids on the Balkans. The Avars also participated in these raids, demanding larger and larger sums of gold from Constantinople in exchange for ensuring the security of the Balkan provinces. The catastrophe in the Balkans unfolded with the start of the Byzantine-Persian wars in the early seventh century as the empire no longer had the strength to repel the Avar-Slavic raids effectively.5⁵Byzantine-Persian Wars (602–628). The last act of a centuries-old conflict. Emperor Heraclius eventually managed to win, but the fruits of his victory were taken advantage of by a new force in Asia: the Arabs. They quickly conquered the Sassanid Empire and entered into conflict with Byzantium.

The helplessness of Byzantine authority is amply demonstrated by an episode in June 617 when, to commemorate a peace treaty with the Avar khan, a personal meeting between the khan and Emperor Heraclius and games in the suburbs of Constantinople were arranged. In reality, the Avars wanted to lure the emperor into a trap, from which he miraculously escaped and returned to Constantinople with incredible difficulty. In the ensuing chaos, the Avars plundered the surroundings of Constantinople for several days and even made headway into some urban districts. Even this unprecedented treachery by the Avars went unpunished, and in 620, Constantinople sent a group of ambassadors and diplomats to them, and the peace treaty was renewed. Heraclius's goal was to maintain peace with the Avars at all costs in order to concentrate efforts on the war with Iran, which was considered a much more serious adversary. Heraclius agreed to increase the annual tribute to 200,000 nomismata, which amounted to at least 890 kilograms of gold (nearly a ton) and also sent noble hostages to the Avars, including some of his relatives.

Byzantine-Avar relations formed a rather intricate political configuration. On the one hand, the Avar khan acknowledged the symbolic supremacy of the Byzantine emperor: the emperor referred to the khan as his son, and the khan addressed the emperor as his father. Further, when Heraclius departed for the east, he appointed the khan guardian of his son, Constantine, who remained in Constantinople. On the other hand, the Avars' loyalty seemed limited to symbolic gestures: not only did they fail to restrain the Slavs from raiding imperial territories, but they also engaged in plunder themselves. After Heraclius's departure to the east, the khan continued to send Slavic raiders to the Balkan territories of the empire.

The simmering confrontation between the Byzantines and Avars came to a head in 626 when the Avars and Persians simultaneously besieged Constantinople. After passing through all of Asia Minor, the Persian commander Shahin took Chalcedon iThe current district of Istanbul Kadikoy, where the Fenerbahçe stadium is located. and camped on the opposite shore of Constantinople. On 29 July 626, the Avar army, predominantly consisting of Slavs, as well as Avars, Bulgars, and Germanic Gepids, approached the land walls of the city. Despite the commencement of hostilities, the khan demanded provision of supplies, which Constantine fulfilled by sending wine and spices. Apparently, presuming the fate of Constantinople as already decided, the khan arrogantly demanded surrender of the city.

On 7 August 626, the Avars launched a general assault on the city. They placed great hope in the Slavic fleet—numerous boats were launched into the waters of the northern section of the Golden Horn. The city’s sea walls from the Golden Horn side were less fortified than the three rows of defenses on the land side, and the Avars' calculation of a successful attack from the Golden HorniThe Golden Horn is a narrow bay that flows into the Bosphorus Strait. It was here, at the mouth of the Golden Horn, that Byzantium was founded. side was, thus, quite logical. However, the Byzantine fleet easily sank the Slavic boats, and the Bulgarian and Slavic units that managed to land were completely destroyed. The defenders opened the city gates and rushed at the Avars—even women and children pursued the enemy. The losses suffered by the Avars were colossal, and they soon retreated. The defenders of the city attributed the miraculous salvation of Constantinople to the intercession of the Virgin Mary.

The Avar catastrophe in Constantinople in 626 greatly undermined their power, and civil wars erupted within the Avar khanate. Initially, a fierce war broke out in the Danube region against the settled Slavs, followed by a rebellion of the Bulgars in Pannonia. Soon, Turkic tribes led by the Bulgar khan Kubrat separated from the Avars. Kubrat, who had grown up in Constantinople as a hostage, formed an alliance with Emperor Heraclius and was granted the title of Patrician.iAn honorary title in Byzantium. Under his rule, the Turkic Bulgars united, and the Avars' territories were now limited to Pannonia.

In the 660s, the Khazar conquests in the northern Black Sea region pushed several Turkic-Bulgar tribes, led by Khan Asparuh, westward. In the following decades, the Bulgars, in alliance with the local Slavs, firmly established themselves in the northeast of the Balkans and created their own state, known as the First Bulgarian Empire. Asparuh fortified Varna, and it is possible that Varna became the first Bulgarian capital. At the same time, the Bulgars moved westward and captured lands from the Avars along the southern bank of the Danube. Constantinople had no choice but to acknowledge the Bulgars' rights to the conquered lands and agree to pay an annual tribute.

The Bulgars, as is commonly believed by most researchers, were of Turkic origin. They may have been related to the Unogundur, Kutrigur, and Utigur tribes that roamed the steppes north of the Black Sea and the Caucasus. However, the Turkic identity of the Bulgars, and the tribes associated with them, is not indisputable. There are suggestions that an Iranian Sarmatian-Alan ethnic and cultural element predominated their environment, and archaeological data about the proto-Bulgars suggests that even before their emergence in the southern Russian and Ukrainian steppes, the proto-Bulgars, even if they were initially Turks, underwent significant assimilation with Iranian nomads. Like the Huns and the Avars, the Bulgars on the Danube were a consolidation of a multiethnic community of peoples and tribes in which Indo-Europeans predominated ethnically.

Linguistically, the Khazars were part of the Turks, apparently the Oghuz group.6⁶Oghuz Turks. A group of tribes and peoples, both historical and modern, belonging to the Western Turkic peoples and speaking the Oghuz branch of the Turkic language family. According to one influential theory, in the eighth century CE, the Oghuz were located west of the Altai Mountains, near Lake Issyk-Kul, in the basin of the Talas River, and, apparently, east of the Syr Darya basin. Soon they began to move west. Some of them came into contact with the Iranian (Tajik) state of the Samanids in Central Asia and partially converted to Islam. The Oghuz included the Turks of the Seljuk, Kara-Koyunlu, and Ak-Koyunlu tribal confederations, as well as the Ottomans. Initially, the Khazar tribes were ruled by the Sabirs, and together they raided the Sasanian territories in Transcaucasia. Later, they became part of the Turkic Khaganate and the Western Turkic Khaganate. In the sixth century, they occupied what is modern-day Dagestan, and after 630, when the power of the Western Turkic Khaganate waned, the Khazars formed their own state. At the same time, Old Great Bulgaria, led by Khan Kubrat, emerged from the Western Turkic Khaganate. From the 660s, after Kubrat's death, the Khazars attacked the Bulgars, and some of the Bulgars, led by Asparuh, migrated to the Danube, while the rest acknowledged Khazar suzerainty.

The Khazar Khaganate included territories from the eastern part of the northern Black Sea region to the eastern Caucasus. In the second half of the seventh century, the Khazars confronted the northward expansion of the Arab Muslims. Initially, the Khazars were stronger and temporarily halted the Muslim advance, and the struggle with the Caliphate continued in the first decades of the eighth century, with the Khazars acting in alliance with Byzantium. However, the defeat and devastation of the khaganate by the 120,000-strong army of Marwan ibn Muhammad in 737 put an end to the Khazars' conquering ambitions. They mostly ceased their raids on Muslim territories, and their administrative and economic center shifted to the northwest, to the lower Volga and the Don region. This period saw the establishment of Khazar rule over the Slavs of ancient Rus. It was also during the mid-eighth century that the Khazars adopted Judaism.7⁷Judaism among the Khazars. The question of the reasons and time of the adoption of Judaism by the Khazars in science remains controversial. A widespread version is that Judaism was adopted under the Khazar kagan named Bulan in 740. This version is set out in the correspondence of the Khazar king Joseph with the Jewish dignitary of the Cordoba caliphate of the mid-tenth century CE.

Relations between Byzantium and the Khazars were mostly friendly. The Khazars' presence in the Black Sea region led to their involvement in the internal struggles of the Byzantine Empire. The deposed Emperor Justinian II was sent into exile in Cherson around 705. Around that time, he turned to Khazar khagan Ibuzir Glavan for assistance. The khagan agreed to aid him and strengthened the alliance by giving his daughter to Justinian II in marriage. However, the ruling Byzantine emperor managed to disrupt the alliance, and the Khagan ordered Justinian to be assassinated. Justinian fled to the Bulgars and, with their help, regained the throne. However, Justinian II was soon deposed again, not without Khazar support.

Good relations between Byzantium and the Khazar Khaganate continued thereafter. In the first half of the eighth century, Emperor Constantine V married the daughter of Khagan Bihar, named Chichak, meaning ‘flower’. She took the name Irene upon baptism, and their son, Leo, the future Emperor Leo IV, acquired the nickname 'the Khazar' due to his Khazar blood through his mother.

In the mid-ninth century, Byzantium provided substantial assistance to its Khazar allies during the large-scale nomadic migrations in the Great Steppe and the emergence of new state formations in Rus under the influence of the Varangians. Around 834, Emperor Theophilos helped build the fortress of Sarkel on the left bank of the Don River, which became a key strategic stronghold in the region. Apparently, with the assistance of the Byzantines, the Khazars constructed a chain of fortifications and strongholds along the tributaries of the Don.

In the second half of the ninth century, Byzantine priorities in the north shifted. Using diplomacy, Byzantium sought to undermine Khazar power. The empire formed an alliance against the Khazars with the steppe Turks, including the Pechenegs, Black Bulgars, and other tribes, and they managed to deal with the nomads only thanks to the Alans. Nevertheless, Byzantium soon succeeded in disrupting the Khazar-Alan alliance. In the early tenth century, the Greeks incited the Rus against the Khazars, and the Ancient Rus state put an end to the Khazar Khaganate. In 965, Prince Sviatoslav of Kyiv defeated the Khazar army and conquered Sarkel. In subsequent years, the Rus, in alliance with nomadic Turks, ravaged the Khazar cities of Itil and Semender, marking the end of the Khazar Khaganate as an independent state. However, the Khazars continued to exert some influence. After defeats suffered at the hands of the Rus, the Khazars fell under the domination of Muslim rulers, and the Khazar aristocracy converted to Islam. Khazar communities are episodically mentioned in sources as late as the eleventh century.

The existence of the Khazar Khaganate, to some extent, hindered the influx of new nomads from the depths of the Eurasian steppes into Europe. Simultaneously, as the khaganate weakened, the nomadic tribes exerted increased pressure on it. The first wave of mass migration came from the tribes of the Hungarians, who lived east of the Ural Mountains. The Hungarians recognized the supremacy of the Khazars, and their leader Levedi was married to a Khazar noblewoman. In the 830s, the Hungarians appeared in the northern Black Sea region and later on the Danube, coming into contact with the Byzantines. The Bulgarians formed an alliance with them to suppress the rebellion of Byzantine prisoners on the Danube, but the Byzantine fleet repelled their attack. Since then, they alternated between supporting the Bulgarians and assisting the empire against them.

In 896, seven Hungarian tribes and three Khazar tribes of Kavars migrated to Transylvania and Pannonia. They were driven out of the Great Steppe by the Turkic Pechenegs, who were fleeing the conquests of the Oghuz Turks, who, in turn, were fleeing from the Cumans. Along with the Hungarians, numerous hordes of Iranian nomads, the Alans, also moved westward, leaving a significant impact on Hungarian medieval and modern toponymy and the Hungarian language. In the 940s, several Hungarian leaders were baptized in Constantinople, and in the mid-century, the Byzantines had appointed a bishop in Hungary.

Byzantine Christianity was influential in the eastern and southern parts of Hungary until the reign of King Stephen I (1000–38), who chose a pro-Roman orientation. Nevertheless, the Greek presence in the religious life of Hungary is recorded until the beginning of the thirteenth century.

Contact with the northern peoples left many effects on the lives of the Byzantines. The representatives of the northern peoples, both as individuals and in more or less numerous groups, settled in the empire and became Roman citizens. The barbarian elite sent their children as hostages to the Byzantines, where they were raised in Greek traditions. Specific methods of warfare practiced by the Turks and their equipment were adopted by Byzantine commanders and documented as their own in military treatises. The styles of clothing, hairstyles, and commonly used fabrics in Byzantium influenced local fashion among the Turks.

However, distinguishing any specific Turkic characteristics in the overall flow of Byzantine interactions with the northern nomads is often difficult. Only in one sphere of Byzantine culture can Turkic elements be found unambiguously—the Greek language of that time. The Byzantines recorded a small layer of Turkicisms as specific terms for nomads, including words related to aristocratic, economic, and military life, and personal and tribal names. Most of these Turkic linguistic elements were cataloged by the prominent Hungarian scholar Gyula Moravcsik.

At the same time, any attempt to describe the entire spectrum of Byzantium's relations with the northern peoples as a meeting of the Greco-Romans with the Turkic world encounters numerous methodological difficulties. The problem is that modern concepts of ethnic identity differ fundamentally from those in ancient times. The Turkic peoples listed in the sources included not only the Turks but often Indo-European tribes consolidated under Turkic aristocratic leadership. According to modern research, during the early Middle Ages in the northern Black Sea region and beyond, in all of Inner Eurasia, we are dealing with polyethnic conglomerates of tribes that included numerous nomadic and semi-nomadic ethnic groups of both Altaic (Turkic-Mongolian) and Indo-European origin (Iranians, Alans, Germans, Slavs, et cetera).

The names of the northern peoples, such as Goths, Huns, Slavs, and Avars, in the written sources of settled cultures, were by no means an ethnic designation in the modern sense, and they concealed certain proto-state or quasi-state formations characterized by remarkable ethnic diversity. These formations also included various Latin, Greek, Phrygian, Illyrian, and other indigenous elements. These conglomerates of tribes were named after the dominant ethnicity among them, which, as a rule, was not the most numerous. In this sense, the phenomenon of the Iranian nomadic Alans is quite indicative. In the fourth to sixth centuries, they invariably constituted a multitudinous and culturally influential part of the migratory movements from the steppe to Eurasia, Europe, and the Middle East.

The pronounced hybridity of these societies is vividly reflected in their spiritual and material culture. In recent decades, modern science has accumulated significant factual and analytical material in an attempt to adequately describe the complex and contradictory world of the steppe. A hybrid cultural space, predominantly of Iranian-Turkic origin, has thus formed in the Eurasian steppes, where it has become difficult to separate Indo-European ethnic elements from Altaic ones. This applies to economic practices, social organization, material culture, religious beliefs, and rituals.

However, it is not only about these things. It is now quite evident that there was no impenetrable boundary between civilizations (Rome/Byzantium, Western and Eastern Iran, China) and the steppe. Steppe nomads widely adopted craft technologies from sedentary cultures along with the techniques of organization and governance that were borrowed and adapted to the steppe regions. Proto-state and quasi-state models originated from practices invented and developed by sedentary civilizations.

It was in the Eurasian steppe that elements of different sedentary cultures—Greek-Roman, Iranian, Chinese—met and blended. The steppe acted as an intermediary in transmitting cultural and material information from one civilizational sphere to another. Often, the steppe borrowed knowledge from a civilization, transformed it, and reintroduced evolved techniques and practices (such as using long cavalry swords and stirrups).

At the same time, the nomadic space remained fundamentally multilingual, both in the linguistic and broader cultural senses. The long-term preservation of polyglossia was facilitated by the barbarian paradigm of culture, which lacked developed institutional tools for knowledge accumulation and reproduction. Consequently, there was no emphasis on a single language as an accumulative 'repository' in order to develop traditions. Polyglossia and pronounced hybridity hindered the 'ethnicization' of the sociocultural space. The practices we observe can hardly be attributed to a specific ethnicity.

Thus, until the eleventh century, the Turks rarely appeared as political and cultural entities on their own. They were an element in state formations (often not the most numerous ones) initially alongside Germanic tribes and later with the Slavs as well as nomadic and semi-nomadic Indo-European groups. The absolute predominance of Indo-Europeans in state and proto-state formations from the Migration Period until the eleventh century is demonstrated by the outcomes of ethnic transformations during this extended period. As a result of the great migrations, the Balkans did not become Turkic but rather Slavic, and the vast Celtic and Latin territories in the western part of the empire were assimilated by the Germans. Perhaps the only exception are the Hungarians, who appeared in Europe in the ninth century. Among all the non-Indo-European nomads, they were the only ones who ethnically prevailed in the state entity they created and preserved their own linguistic identity. Despite coming into contact with Byzantium, the Hungarian element left little trace in the internal life of the empire.

The Turkic ethnic element in the Turkic and Khazar khaganates in the sixth and seventh centuries was more pronounced than in the states of the Huns, Avars, or Danubian Bulgars. However, the Byzantine interactions with them were predominantly distant and mediated by diplomatic communication. Thus, it can be stated that during this period, the influence of northern Asian peoples on the internal life of the empire was quite limited. Nevertheless, it provided the Byzantine world with initial knowledge about the Turks, which would become significant later, when the Turks found themselves within the empire.