A reassessment of the Kyivan letter from the Cairo Genizah

Known as the ‘Kyivan letter’, Cambridge University Library T-S 12.122 was first published more than 40 years ago by Norman Golb and Omeljan Pritsak, who identified it as a letter of introduction written by Jewish Khazars in tenth-century Kyiv. Their identification was based on the presence of Turkic runes at the base of the letter, Turkic names among the signatories, and their reconstruction of its historical background. In the decades since that publication, many of these details have been contested, but the document continues to be cited as a Khazarian artefact. The current article re-examines the original Hebrew text of the letter, offering a new edition and translation, and analyses the names of its signatories and its potential historical background. We demonstrate that, while a Khazarian connection is possible, the dominant landscape of the letter, and of the Jews whose names appear in it, is Slavic rather than Turkic.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Jewish Studies
Published
2026-04-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3828/jjs.2026.77.1.76
Primary Topic
Linguistics and Cultural Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A reassessment of the Kyivan letter from the Cairo Genizah

Ben Outhwaite, Susana Torres Prieto
Journal of Jewish Studies
Linguistics and Cultural Studies
article

A reassessment of the Kyivan letter from the Cairo Genizah

Ben Outhwaite, Susana Torres Prieto
article en

Abstract

Known as the ‘Kyivan letter’, Cambridge University Library T-S 12.122 was first published more than 40 years ago by Norman Golb and Omeljan Pritsak, who identified it as a letter of introduction written by Jewish Khazars in tenth-century Kyiv. Their identification was based on the presence of Turkic runes at the base of the letter, Turkic names among the signatories, and their reconstruction of its historical background. In the decades since that publication, many of these details have been contested, but the document continues to be cited as a Khazarian artefact. The current article re-examines the original Hebrew text of the letter, offering a new edition and translation, and analyses the names of its signatories and its potential historical background. We demonstrate that, while a Khazarian connection is possible, the dominant landscape of the letter, and of the Jews whose names appear in it, is Slavic rather than Turkic.

Journal of Jewish StudiesVol. 77(1)
IE University (ES), University of Cambridge (GB)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Linguistics and Cultural Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.