‘Karaites continue to be a fact, not a dead historical entity’.
(Karaimskaya Zhizn 1911 Book 1: 7)
Who are the Karaites?
The Karaites are one of the smallest ethnic, religious, cultural and language communities in Eastern Europe. Currently, they reside between the divided territories of Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine and Russia. They are a unique community, which in the past curiously combined Turkic language and culture with a Karaite variant of Judaism. Presently, their uniqueness is even more intriguing because of their changed ethno-cultural identity: they abandoned a Jewish identity and acquired a Turkic identity. There are approximately 2000 Karaites in Eastern Europe, 1,500 of whom live in Russia and Ukraine, 300-400 in Lithuania and roughly 45 to 150 in Poland (Shchegoleva 2007: 19).
The Karaite population of Eastern Europe has changed considerably on a few occasions. In 1783, there were 3,800 Karaites living in the Russian Empire (with 2,600 Karaites living in Crimea). By 1897, their population had grown to 12,894 in the Russian Empire. However, in the 20th century the Karaite population in Eastern Europe dramatically decreased due to the revolution in Russia and the assimilation politics of the Soviet Union (Shchegoleva 2007: 19).
Origin and Meaning of the Name
The Karaite name presumably derives from the Hebrew name Miqra in the Holy Scripture.
Karaite scholar Benjamin Nahawendi was probably the first to use the name Bene miqra (Sons of the Holy Scripture) as an all-inclusive name for the religious group in the early Middle Ages. The Hebrew verb qara means ‘to read, proclaim; to be a specialist of the Scriptures’. It is derived from the noun qara’i (singular) and qara’im (plural), which translates as ‘readers of the Scripture’. The term qara’i passed into most Indo-European languages with the Latin suffix -it, Karaites, which denotes membership in a group or nationality. An exception is the more original form of the name in German, Karäer (Harviainen 2003: 634–635).
Eastern European Karaites refer to themselves in the Slavic languages as Karaimy, where -y is a Slavic ending and plural. Whereas Karaim (or Qaraim) is already a plural form in Hebrew.
Therefore, a Slavic term Karaims is etymologically a double plural. In the English-speaking
scholarly tradition, the Latin form Karaites is common. However, some scholars on Karaite studies, for example, Tapani Harvianen, use the Slavic term Karaims for the Eastern European group of Karaites (in the post-Soviet regions, Poland, Lithuania) and Karaites for the Arabic-speaking Karaite Jews of the Middle East (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Israel) (Harviainen 2003: 634–635).
In my thesis, I employ the traditional Latin term Karaites for simplicity’s sake.
Origin of the Group
According to one historiographical tradition, the Karaites originated as a religious anti-Rabbinic Jewish movement in Iraq in the 8th century (Gil 2003: 73–118; Cahn 1937). They differed from Rabbinic Orthodox Judaism in their rejection of the Talmud and the tradition of the rabbis.
Karaites lived solely according to the biblical authority of the Old Testament. In the 12th century, or even earlier, Karaite communities appeared in Eastern Europe (primarily in the Crimean Peninsula, settling from there in the territories of what was then Poland-Lithuania, later part of the Russian Empire). They were generally well-received by the neighbouring Christians, which was quite a different case than with the Orthodox Jews (Harviainen 2003: 640).1
Language
On the basis of their linguistic differences, the Karaites may be divided into two groups: (1) the Arabic-speaking Karaites of the Middle East (Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Israel) and (2) the traditionally Turkic-speaking Karaites of Eastern Europe (the post-Soviet regions, Poland and Lithuania). At the moment, there are approximately 20–30,000 Karaites in the world. Most of them originated from Egypt, but emigrated to Israel or the United States after the 1950s.
The Eastern European Karaites (Karaimy) traditionally spoke the Turkic vernacular, the Karaim (Karaite) language. Karaim belongs to the north-western Kipchak group of Turkic languages and is closely related to the Tatar language (Akhiezer & Shapira 2001: 20–21, n. 4).
Eastern European Karaites are also the smallest group among the Turkic-speaking people in the world. Nowadays, the Karaites speak the language of their respective countries. Consequently, the Karaim language has almost become extinct. There are currently approximately 40 speakers of the language, all of whom live in Lithuania (Csató 1998: 84).
Structure of the Thesis
1 On the question of the origin of Karaims in Eastern Europe, see Akhiezer & Shapira 2001: 19-60; Ankori 1959; 60. ft.
The study is composed of eight chapters and two appendices.
The first chapter is the Introduction.
The second chapter presents the Theory. It outlines a number of concepts essential to the study of the changes in Karaite ethnic identity and the Karaite National Movement. In my study, I use the term the ‘Karaite National Movement’ to mean a proto-national movement: the right to have a culture of one’s own and be accepted as a particular group. However, I will use the term ‘National Movement’ for the sake of simplicity. The chapter provides a theoretical framework and defines the terms central to the thesis: identity, ethnicity, nation and nationalism. It also facilitates a brief analysis of the main approaches to the study of the above-mentioned phenomenon, with particular attention to theories relevant to this study.
The third chapter is a Preface, which discusses the historical and political background of the Karaites as well as earlier research (secondary sources) on the ethnic origin of the Karaites in the Russian Empire. The last triggered the beginnings of a Karaite ethno-cultural identity and the Karaite ‘National Movement’. The third chapter provides a chronological timeline of the developing Karaite identity, beginning from the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in 1783, the time at which the Crimean Karaites became subjects of the Russian Empire, and ending at the beginning of the 20th century during the Russian Revolution.
The fourth chapter — Karaite Response — analyses the Karaite response to the political events and the above-mentioned research into Karaite printed sources (which may not necessarily have reflected the opinions of the majority of the Karaites). This response triggered the beginning of the Karaite ‘National Movement’ and a change in their ethnic identity. The study traces the development of a Karaite identity on the basis of two main Karaite periodicals in the Russian Empire during this period: Karaimskaya Zhizn [Karaite Life], which was published in Moscow between 1911 and 1912, and Karaimskoe Slovo [Karaite Word], which was published in Vilnius between 1913 and 1914.
Chapter Five — Karaite Studies on the Pages of Myśl Karaimska — investigates how Karaite identity gradually changed in Poland in the 20th century. The research is based on a Polish Karaite periodical in the Polish language, Myśl Karaimska [Karaite Thought], which was first published in Wilno (Vilnius) between 1924 and 1939. After a break caused by World War II, it reappeared in Wrocław between 1945 and 1947.2 The research shows how the ‘old building components’ of the Karaite ethnocultural identity of the 19th century gradually gained a new context and then a different significance in the 20th century.
Chapter Six — Interlude — briefly outlines Soviet-era research on the Karaites, defines their status in the USSR and analyses Soviet Karaite identity in two articles on the Karaites in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, one in 1937 and another in 1953.
2 Myśl Karaimska. Wilno, V. I 1924–1928, V. II 1929–1939; Wroclaw, New Series V. I 1945–1946, V. II 1946–1947.
After 1947, it changed its name to Przygląd Orjentalistyczny [Oriental Review] and its purpose, orienting itself toward a broader scholarly audience. It still exists by this name today (see Appendix B. and Kizilov 2007: 406).
Chapter Seven — Post-Soviet Transformations — shows that at the turn of the 21st century, the conception of a Turkic identity among the Crimean and Polish-Lithuanian Karaites became firmly established among the most current Karaite leaders. The chapter analyses present-day Karaite identity on the basis of the few available Karaite periodicals, Caraimica, Karaimskie Vesti [Karaim News] and Nash Golos [Our Voice], and brochures published under the supervision of the current Karaite leaders. Nowadays, Karaite leaders have become quite creative in constructing and reconstructing the Karaite historical background and identity.
Chapter Eight provides the Final Discussion. This part summarises the development of the Karaite identity from the 19th century until the year 2014. It analyses the construction of the Karaite identity according to the theory of constructivism. It also briefly compares some the main points of the Karaite ‘National Movement’ with a few other national movements based on Miroslav Hroch’s model.
The objectives of the research are to analyse (1) the Eastern European Karaite ‘National Movement’ and (2) the genesis of Karaite ethno-cultural identity from the 19th to the 21st centuries as well as (3) to compare the main characteristics of Karaite identity (religion, language, history and tradition) during different periods of time. A significant part of the first chapters of this study is also dedicated to earlier research on the ethnic origin of the Karaites because the discussion has influenced the construction of the Karaite identity to a great extent.
What is new in this work?
There has been a great deal of scholarly discourse on the de-Judification and the fluctuating ethno-cultural identity of the Eastern European Karaites over the years. However, to my knowledge there have been no attempts to make (1) a systematic, impartial and detailed analysis of this phenomenon from a historical standpoint, focusing on the whole period between the mid-19th century and today, nor to look particularly at all the territory of the previous Russian Empire (which is now Russia, Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania). Many present-day articles that touch upon the ethnic identity of the Karaites have a subjective or non-academic and emotional character to them.
This study, therefore, is an attempt to make a systematic, unbiased analysis of the changing identity of the Karaites, from its beginnings until the present. The author of this work has no personal interest in supporting any approach to the study of the ethnic origin of the Karaites, whether
‘Semitic’ or ‘Turkic’.
This study is instead an attempt to analyse Karaite identity in a broader context of theories on nationalism and (2) to compare some points of the Karaite ‘National Movement’ with other
ethnic/national movements as a means of revealing similarities between the Karaite movement and other ethnic/national movements in Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries.
The thesis has three goals. The first goal is to identify the process of change within the ethno-cultural identity of the Karaites at different time periods on the basis of the main Karaite periodical sources and scholarly articles by Karaite and non-Karaite authors (because the latter had an impact on Karaite identity). Second, it analyses changes in the ethno-cultural identity of Karaites according to theories on the constructivism of identity and national movements. The third goal is to trace similarities between the Karaite ‘National Movement’ and other ethnic/national movements in Europe in the 19th century.
Methodology
Methodologically, the thesis examines the Karaite ‘National Movement’ through the prism of constructivism. The thesis uses an interdisciplinary approach (historical, sociological and culturological) and comparatively analyses the characteristics of Karaite identity at different periods of time both according to the sources and with respect to other ethnic/national movements. As much as 100 years ago, the classist Ernst Bernheim (1906) recommended the comparative method as being applicable to all research that seeks to distinguish between the general and the singular in every historical process. Only through a knowledge of what is general and what is unique does it become possible to categorise every historical process and every phenomenon (Hroch 2007).
As mentioned above, the thesis will compare the Karaite ‘National Movement’ with a few other national movements in Europe in the 19th century. It will analyse how the general and essential traits and connections of a few national movements (for instance, of Crimean Tatar, Lithuanian, Finnish, Scottish movements) are applicable to the case of the Karaite ‘National Movement’.
Sources
The primary sources are Karaite periodicals, scholarly and amateur articles by Karaites and Karaite narratives about themselves that touch upon discussions of Karaite ethno-cultural identity from the mid-19th century up until the 21st century. The secondary sources include scholarly and amateur articles by non-Karaites that study the ethnic origin and language of the Karaites and anthropological findings on them since the Karaites used the statements of non-Karaite authors to a great extent in the reconstruction of their identity. Other secondary sources include several travellers’ reports on the Karaites, which provide information on Karaite traditions, appearance, habits and character. The Karaites used such reports to create their ‘national image’.
The articles that first began speculating on the ethnic origin of Karaites appeared in the Russian scholar journals in the year 1843 as a reaction to Abraham Firkovich’s findings.3 I studied the articles as a source for the beginning of the discussion on the ethnic origin and identity of Eastern European Karaites. This is because Karaites have been making reference to such scholarly discussions right up until the present day for theories on their ethnic identity.
Articles and narratives by Karaite authors on their identity can be found in Karaite periodicals between the 19th and 21st centuries. I used the following periodicals for my research:
Karaimskaya Zhizn [Karaite Life], published in Moscow in 1911–1912; Karaimskoe Slovo [Karaite Word], published in Vilnius in 1913–1914; Mysl Karaimska [Karaite Thought], published in Vilnius in 1924–1939 and in Wroclaw in 1946–1947; and Caraimica, published in the USA and Simferopol in 2007–2011. Likewise, the thesis makes use of encyclopaedia articles in Evreyskaya Encyclopedia [Jewish Encyclopaedia] (1906–1913), in Bolshaya Sovetskaya Entsiklopedia [Great Soviet Encyclopaedia] (1937 and 1953), and in Narodnaya Karaimskaya Entsiklopedia [National Karaite Encyclopaedia] (1995).
Literature Review
Works on Nationalism and Identity
For my studies, I used the works of established authorities on the theories of nationalism, ethnicity and identity. The central framework of the study is as follows: Fredrik Barth Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Cultural Differences (1969); Benedict Anderson Imagined Communities (1991); Paul R. Brass Ethnicity and Nationalism: Theory and Comparison (1991); Ernest Gellner Nations and Nationalism (1983); Thomas H. Eriksen.
Ethnicity and Nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives (1993); Charles F. Keyes. Ethnic Change (1982); Anthony D. Smith Theories of Nationalism (1971) and Ethnicity and Nationalism (1992);
Hutchinson and Anthony D. Smith Ethnicity (1996); Stuart The Question of Cultural Identity (1991); Valery Tishkov Ethnicity, Nationalism and Conflict in and after the Soviet Union (1997) and Rekviem po Etnosu. Issledovaniya Po Sotsial’no-Kul’turnoy Antropologii (2003); Kath Woodward Identity and Difference (1997); Miroslav Hroch Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe (1958) and Comparative Studies in Modern European History: Nation, Nationalism, Social Change (2007), as well as other books and articles.
For a discussion and evaluation of the contributions to theories of nationalism and identity, see the chapter entitled Theory.
3Evrei-karaimy 1844: 640–649; Evreiskie religioznye sekty 1846. Part 15: 11–49; Otkuda prishli karaimy Books 5–6 1911: 46–52. (Note that there is an incorrect reference in Karaimskaya Zhizn to Part 2 of ZhMVD when the author
Karaite Bibliography
After a long period of silence on Eastern European Karaite studies during the Soviet period, an increase in the number of publications on the topic began in the early 1990s. This was when the former Soviet archives were reopened for Western research. A comprehensive collection of publications on the Karaites was compiled in 2009 (The Karaites and Karaism 2009); the bibliography lists 8,000 publications, a rather significant number. It includes a bibliography on Eastern European Karaites as well.
Early Research
The issue of Karaite ethno-cultural identity was not discussed directly until recently.
However, it was discussed within studies on the ethnic origin, anthropology, culture and language of the Eastern European Karaites. Discussions on the origin of the Karaites started in the Russian press as a reaction to A. Firkovich’s findings in the 1840s (see the paragraph Sources above). Much later, Zvi Ankori in his book Karaites in Byzantium (1959) provided arguably the first scholarly analysis of the so-called ‘Crimean’ and ‘Khazarian’ theories on the origin of the Karaites in Eastern Europe.
The book continues to be valuable.
Anthropological studies of the Karaites began already in the 19th century with works by Russian (Ikov 1887; Weissenberg 1904) and Polish (Talko-Hryncewicz, Grzegorzewski (1916–
1918) scholars. The research continued in the 1930s–40s, with works by the German scholar Reicher (1932), the Italian Gini (1936) and the Polish writer Czekanowski (1946–1947) as part of a general interest in anthropological studies in Europe. Few studies, however, were published in Eastern Bloc countries on the Karaites at the time because of fears the topic was politically unsafe.
However, the Karaim language and culture continued to be studied by scholars in Poland and the USSR on a collaborative basis (e.g. Kowalski 1926, 1929; Baskakov 1957; Musaev 1964).
Contemporary Research
Scholarly research on the history of the Eastern European Karaites blossomed in the 1990s after the collapse of the USSR. Among the first monographs were Roman Freund’s Karaites and Dejudaization (1991), Nathan Schur’s History of Karaites (1992) and Philip E. Miller’s Karaite Separatism in Nineteenth-Century Russia (1993). The introduction in Miller’s book on Karaite separatism is especially valuable for this study.
The edited collection Karaite Judaism (Polliack 2003) provides the first and most comprehensive collection of scholarly articles on Karaitica and it continues to be of major importance.
In the last two decades, Dan Shapira,4 Daniel Lasker, Golda Akhiezer, Tapani Harviainen5 and Mikhail Kizilov6 have made significant contribution to the study of the history and identity of the Eastern European Karaites.
In recent years, Mikhail Kizilov has emerged as one of the most productive researchers on the history of the Eastern European Karaites. He gave a detailed analysis on the history and changing identity of the Karaites in Galicia in his doctoral thesis – The Karaites of Galica. An Ethnoreligious Minority among the Ashkenazim, the Turks and the Slavs, 1772–1945 (Kizilov 2009). His book Krymskaya Iudeya. Ochrki Istorii Evreev, Khazar, Karaimov i Krymchakov v Krymu s Antichnykh Vremen do Nashikh Dney. Simferopol’ (Kizilov 2011a) is an exciting comprehensive history study on the ‘Crimean Judea’, a region populated by Crimean Jews, Rabbanites, Karaites, Khazars, Krymchaks and Subbotniks from ancient times until the present day.
Though richly illustrated and written in an easy-to-read style, it is a scholarly account based on archival sources.
Kizilov’s articles ‘Social Adaptation and Manipulation of Self-Identity: Karaites in Eastern Europe in Modern Times in Eastern European Karaites in the Last Generations’ in the collection Eastern European Karaites in the Last Generations (Kizilov 2011) and ‘National Inventions: The Imperial Emancipation of the Karaites from Jewishness’ (Kizilov 2014: 377) are the first studies on Karaite identity in Eastern Europe. An earlier look at the issue of Karaite nationalism can only be found in Nathan Schur’s ‘Karaite National Movement’ in The Karaite Encyclopedia (Vienna, 1995). However, Kizilov disagreed with his claim of the existence of a ‘Karaite National Movement’ already in the 19th century (see below in this work).
In the beginning of the 2000s, Tatiana Shchegoleva published a few articles on the current state of the Karaite communities in Eastern Europe and their self-identification process.7
In one of her article, ‘Osnovnye aspekty’ (2003), she divided academic and non-academic publications on the ethno-cultural identity of Eastern European Karaites into three main categories (Shchegoleva 2003: 218–235). According to her schema, present-day Crimean Karaite authors (e.g.
Yuriy Polkanov, Anna Polkanova, Mikhail Kazas, Vladimir Ormeli and Mikhail Sarach), who belong to the Association of the Crimean Karaites (Krymkalaylar), tend to present a Turkic theory on the origin of the Eastern European Karaites. They reject any Jewish heritage in the ethnogenesis of Karaite culture. However, many of those publications have a rather non-academic character.8
4 Shapira 2003b: 709–729; Shapira 2003d: 657–708; Shapira 2007: 303–393.
5 Harviainen 1992: 53–69; Harviainen 1998: 66–70; Harviainen 1999: 97*–106*; Harviainen 2003a: 634–636;
Harviainen 2003b: 55–77.
6 Kiziliv 2003a; Kizilov 2007a. See full list in REFERENCES at the end of this study.
7 Shchegoleva 2003: 218–235; Shchegoleva 2007: 6–16; Shchegoleva 2010.
Another outlook is represented by scholars falling into the Moderate Khazarian/Turkic theory category. The followers of this line of thought insist on the Turkic origin of the Karaites, but they do not reject a Jewish heritage for the Karaites either. They include Professor of Semitic
Another outlook is represented by scholars falling into the Moderate Khazarian/Turkic theory category. The followers of this line of thought insist on the Turkic origin of the Karaites, but they do not reject a Jewish heritage for the Karaites either. They include Professor of Semitic