The Tatars and the Term Zakhvatchiki in Soviet Historiography

Abstract

Soviet historiography categorized the Mongols in general and the Tatars of the Golden Horde in particular as zakhvatchiki. Reading Soviet historiography on Rus’-Tatar relations induces the thought that the use of the word zakhvatchiki had an anti-nomadic coloration, that it was a negative denomination just for nomadic tribes who were a frequent occurrence in Russian history. Post-Soviet Russian historiography has not completely overcome the heritage of using this demeaning term to dismiss the Tatars as barbarian parasites. However, examination of an artifact of Soviet historiography, a multi-volume collective work on historiography in the territory that came to comprise the Soviet Union, disproves any suspicion that application of this word to the Tatars derives from anti-nomad prejudice. To appreciate this evidence properly it must be cited in extenso. To illustrate the dispersion of such references, the author cites them individually by first surveying appearances of the term volume by volume. In each case, he enumerates the name(s) of the historian(s), their subject, where appropriate — the chronology, who the zakhvatchiki were, and who their victims were. He interprets references to zakhvatnicheskie policies as markers of who was a zakhvatchik. After that he provides aggregate analysis of this evidence. Soviet historians applied the word to all periods of world, not just Russian, history, to anyone who qualified as a villain in Soviet Marxist historiography, most often, unsurprisingly, to imperialists. The author examines the meaning of the word separately. It is difficult to convey the richness of its connotations by a single word in English. Consequently, the word itself has no anti-nomad connotations; in effect, it can be reduced to a cliche moniker for all “bad guys.” It is still anachronistic because no medieval Rus’ source ever called the Tatars “zakhvatchiki.” It should be avoided in scholarship.