Первый слайд презентации
NAME :- RUDRA PATEL SRUSHTI GODHANI BHAKTI BHOJANI VARUN KETAM NANDINI LUKHI GROUP :- 20LL5(A) SOCIAL AND CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE 16th CENTURY .
Слайд 2: AGENDA
THE DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIAN CULTURE CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN 16TH CENTURY MENTALITY OF PEOPLE IN 16TH CENTURY PHOTO GALLERY MECHANISM OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION CHURCH STATE DECISION MOSCOW: THE THIRD ROME QUESTIONS
Слайд 3: THE DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIAN CULTURE
Russia’s unique and vibrant culture developed, as did the country itself, from a complicated interplay of native Slavic cultural material and borrowings from a wide variety of foreign cultures. In the Kievan period (c. 10th–13th century), the borrowings were primarily from Eastern Orthodox Byzantine culture. During the Muscovite period (c. 14th–17th century), the Slavic and Byzantine cultural substrates were enriched and modified by Asiatic influences carried by the Mongol hordes. Finally, in the modern period (since the 18th century), the cultural heritage of western Europe was added to the Russian melting pot.
Слайд 4: CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN 16 TH CENTURY
The 16th century was a period of vigorous economic expansion. This expansion in turn played a major role in the many other transformations—social, political, and cultural—of the early modern age Sixteenth-century Russians were nominally Orthodox Christian, but that statement is as misleading as saying that most Europeans before the Reformation were Catholic So diverse a populace cannot be said to have possessed a single mentality Parish schools or seminaries were nonexistent, parish organization was weak, books, sermons, and learning were limited to ecclesiastical élites.
Слайд 5: CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN 16 TH CENTURY
The Church in the sixteenth century railed against many of these practices By examining death rituals, marriage ceremonies, prayers, and a range of celebratory practices, one can discern a ‘popular culture’, that is, a range of beliefs and practices exhibited by the entire social range which was distinct from the prescriptions of the official Church Rather than seeing the world as basically good, created by God and disrupted by the Devil, sixteenth-century Russians seem to have regarded it as a universe of powerful natural forces ‘neither good nor evil but wilful and arbitrary’. They identified these forces in Christian terms (the Devil) or terms drawn from Finno-Ugric beliefs (nezhit, a force of evil in nature; bears and foxes were equated with evil) But as monasteries became less exemplary with greater worldly success, the church hierarchy diversified the focus of spiritual life, offering saints’ cults, sermons, other moralistic writings and teachings, and more ritual experiences to appeal more broadly
Слайд 6: MENTALITY OF PEOPLE IN 16 TH CENTURY
The culture of the ethnic Russian people (along with the cultures of many other ethnicities with which it has intertwined in the territory of the Russian Federation and the former Soviet Union) has a long tradition of achievement in many field. In all these areas Russia has had a considerable influence on world culture. Attitudes towards daily life in the élite can be gleaned from a handbook of household management (the Domostroi ), which was most probably based on a foreign secular model, but edited in an Orthodox Christian vein in Muscovy in the midsixteenth century The Domostroi depicts the family as the structuring principle of the community and of the polity; the grand prince is portrayed as the head of the realm construed as a ‘household
Слайд 7: MENTALITY OF PEOPLE IN 16 TH CENTURY
Christian values such as charity to the poor and just treatment of dependents are balanced by a keen attention to sexual probity all of which values worked towards social stability as much as piety Women and children are to behave and obey; physical force is recommended to fathers to keep them in line. But women also have remarkably broad latitude and responsibility. Theirs is the primary responsibility for leading the family to salvation by the example of virtue and piety; theirs is the responsibility of making the household economy and servants productive by skillful management. One can hardly argue that Russians were particularly spiritual or ‘pagan’ in the sixteenth century
Слайд 9: MECHANISM OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION…
The grand princes’ primary goals in the sixteenth century may have been expanding their territory and extracting resources from it, but to do so they needed a minimal degree of social cohesion in the realm as a whole to ensure stability. Active techniques of integration that touched all society seem to have focused on the Orthodox population. The non‑Orthodox (called ‘tribute’ people) generally were neither integrated into the élite (except for the highest clans among them) nor addressed by many of the less tangible institutions of integration.
Слайд 10: MECHANISM OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION
It has been noted that early seventeenth century texts portray the tsardom as a ‘God dependent’ community in which all, high and lowly, are personally dependent on the ruler and all equally share a responsibility to serve him loyally and offer him virtuous counsel when he errs. The central focus for building a cohesive state was the court, which sought to project a coherent public image of the realm and its relationship to the élit
Слайд 11: MECHANISM OF SOCIAL INTEGRATION
Genealogical tales of the Muscovite grand princes began to extend the family line through Kiev to ancient Rome in a typically Renaissance quest for a classical heritage. Metropolitan Makarii’s midcentury compilations of hagiography chronicles, and didactic texts presented Muscovy as a holy kingdom, part of universal Christianity, linked through Kiev Rusto Byzantine Christianity and ultimately to God’s creation of the earth.
Слайд 12: CHURCH
The Church and state recognized local holy men as saints on the national or local levels and thus worked to integrate disparate parts of the realm into a putative Orthodox community. Rulers also used architecture as a symbolic statement. Ivan III reconstructed the Kremlin churches into a magnificent that demonstrated not only his power and strength but, by incorporating architectural motifs from Novgorod and Pskov, the breadth of his conquests. Grand princes also left symbols of their authority in new churches and monasteries built to commemorate military victories or to spread their patronage
Слайд 13: STATE DECISION
The state also extended protection to all society for ‘injured honour’ (beschest’e ), implicitly defining the state as a community unified by honour. The state also appealed to all its inhabitants with a vision of community by according all subjects, even non‑Orthodox, the right to petition the ruler. Around 1550 a ‘Petitions Chancery’ was founded to encourage individuals to bring their grievances directly to the ruler.
Слайд 14: MOSCOW: THE THIRD ROME
Moscow,third Rome is a theological and political concept asserting that Moscow is the successor of the Roman Empire, representing a "third Rome" in succession to the first Rome and the second Rome Constantinople, In this concept, three interrelated and interpenetrating fields of ideas can be found: a) Theology: B)Social policy c) State doctrine:
Слайд 15: QUESTIONS
On what church hierarchy diversified focus ? Who is portrayed as the head of the realm constructed as a household ? Who reconstructed kremlin church and who left the symbols of authority in new churches ? What name was given to the community formed in early seventeenth century ? What is the concept of Moscow third Rome ?