Benjamin Harrison Freedman & The Khazar Hypothesis

Benjamin H. Freedman: Biography and claims

Benjamin Harrison Freedman (1890–1984) was a U.S. businessman, former Jewish‐background individual (he is described in some sources as a “Jew by birth”) who later became a vocal critic of Zionism and of mainstream Jewish institutions. Nizkor+2Fascipedia+2
He published pamphlets and delivered speeches such as Facts Are Facts: The Truth About the Khazars (1954) in which he argued that most modern Jews (especially Ashkenazi Jews in Eastern Europe) are not descended from the ancient Israelites, but rather from the medieval Turkic‐Khazar people who converted to Judaism. Pacin Law+1
In his writings Freedman described the Khazars as a non‐Semitic, Asiatic people (“Turko‐Finns,” “Mongoloid,” in his words) who converted en masse to Judaism and later migrated into Eastern Europe, becoming what we now call “Jews.” Blue Moon of Shanghai
He then used this argument to challenge claims of Jewish “blood right” to the land of Israel, and to critique Zionist political influence. National Vanguard+1
However, Freedman’s work has been widely criticized for its polemical tone, selective use of evidence, and for its adoption by extremist and antisemitic movements. John Deacon+1

---

The Khazar Hypothesis: What it is

The Khazar Hypothesis (also called the Khazar theory) proposes that a substantial portion of Ashkenazi Jews descend not from the ancient Israelites of the Levant, but from the medieval Khazars—a multi‐ethnic Turkic polity (the Khazar Khaganate) in the Caucasus–Volga region, whose elite converted to Judaism in the 8th–9th centuries. Wikipedia+1
The hypothesis dates back to 19th‐ and early 20th‐century scholarship on Khazaria, and was popularised in the 20th century by figures like Arthur Koestler in The Thirteenth Tribe (1976). Wikipedia
It gained some traction in anti‐Zionist contexts, where it was used to argue that modern Jews lack direct genealogical ties to ancient Israelites, thereby challenging ideological claims of “return” to Palestine. Wikipedia+1
In Freedman’s version, he states that the Khazars were the “so‐called or self-styled ‘Jews’ in eastern Europe”, that they were not semitic, and that their conversion and migration form the foundation of the modern Jewish population in Europe. Mina News+1

---

Freedman’s Argument in Detail

Freedman’s pamphlet Facts Are Facts outlines several key claims:

• The word “Jew” is a relatively modern term derived from “Judaean/Judean,” and not an ancient ethnonym. John Deacon

• The Khazars were originally a warlike, pagan, Asiatic people who settled in Eastern Europe and whose elite converted to Judaism under a king (often named Bulan or similar) after evaluating Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Blue Moon of Shanghai+1

• After the collapse of the Khazar state (c. 10th–13th century), the Khazar‐Judaized population migrated or otherwise became the bulk of Eastern European Jewry (Ashkenazim). Pacin Law+1

• Because of this, the modern Jewish claim of being direct descendants of the ancient Israelites and having a hereditary “blood right” to the land of Israel is historically invalid. T NATION

Freedman’s narrative is thus both an historical assertion and a political critique of Zionism and Jewish influence.

---

Scholarly Assessment & Critique

While the Khazar hypothesis has a long history, it is important to note that the mainstream scholarly consensus finds little compelling evidence that the Khazars form the bulk of Ashkenazi ancestry. Some key points:

• Genetic studies of Jewish populations (Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi) indicate that most carry significant Middle Eastern ancestry, consistent with descent from ancient Israelites and other Levantine groups. Wikipedia+1

• The hypothesis is largely abandoned in serious academic discourse as an explanation for Ashkenazi origins. Wikipedia

• Some fringe or politically charged versions of the hypothesis (including Freedman’s) are used in antisemitic or anti‐Zionist contexts, which further damages its credibility in neutral historical scholarship. Wikipedia+1

• Some recent genetic‐statistical studies (e.g., Elhaik 2012) have argued for a partial Khazar contribution, but these findings are contested and remain controversial. arXiv

In short: while some Khazar conversion and migration may have occurred, the idea that Ashkenazi Jewry is mostly or entirely of Khazar origin is not supported by robust evidence.

---

The Significance and Use of Freedman’s Version

Freedman’s version of the hypothesis has had significance beyond purely historical debate:

• He used the hypothesis as a tool of political persuasion, particularly against Zionism, arguing that the “so‐called Jews” who control Zionist power are not biblical Israelites and thus lack legitimacy for claims in Palestine.

• His writings have been cited by antisemitic groups as supporting conspiracy theories about “fake Jews” or “Khazar Jews,” and have been entwined with racial or supremacist ideologies. National Vanguard+1

• Because of this, his work is regarded by many scholars as politically motivated, and his historical methods and conclusions criticized for selective or misleading use of sources.

It is possible to distinguish three levels of use:

1. A genuine historical hypothesis about Khazar conversion and Jewish migration (academic).

2. A political/ideological argument (Freedman, Koestler).

3. A conspiracy/antisemitic narrative (extremist groups).

Freedman’s work spans levels 2 and 3.

---

Why the Debate Matters

The debate over the Khazar hypothesis and Freedman’s version touches on broader themes:

• Ethnic and religious identity: If Ashkenazi Jews were primarily Khazar in origin, the narrative of descent from the ancient Israelites is challenged—and that narrative underpins many religious, cultural, and national claims (for Jews, Palestinians, and others).

• Historical legitimacy: Claims to the land of Israel/Palestine are deeply entwined with narratives of ancestry, covenant, exile, return. Freedman used the Khazar hypothesis to challenge the legitimacy of Zionist claims based on “blood right.”

• Use of genetics in history: Modern genetic research has complicated older narratives of ancestry and migration—showing that ethnic groups are rarely isolated. The Khazar hypothesis serves as a case study in how genetics, archaeology, and historiography intersect.

• Propaganda and ideology: Freedman’s work demonstrates how historical hypotheses can be harnessed politically and ideologically. The shift from academic debate to conspiracy narrative is instructive.

---

Conclusion

Benjamin H. Freedman’s version of the Khazar hypothesis presents a provocative challenge: that the bulk of Ashkenazi Jews descend from the medieval Khazars and not from ancient Israelites, and thus that key Jewish historical claims are invalid. While this argument has been used politically and remains influential in certain circles, it is not supported by mainstream scholarship, which shows significant Middle Eastern ancestry in Jewish populations and finds that the Khazar origin alone cannot explain Ashkenazi origins.

Freedman’s work sits at the intersection of history, identity politics, and ideology. It reminds us to ask critical questions: What claims are being made about ancestry? With what purpose? And how do genetics, history, and political motives interplay?