Cultural heritage of the civilization of ancient Rome. Heirs of the Roman Empire. Late Republic period (III - 1st century BC)

Internal contradictions continued to tear apart the already devastated empire as a barbarian warlord paved his way to supreme power. He killed everyone who stood in his way, even close friends. The Roman Empire lost control of its once vast western provinces due to rebellions and violent attacks by barbarian tribes. In these troubled times, a Roman commander appears who hopes to restore Rome to its former glory. But a cruel barbarian ruler stands in his way. And the ringing of their swords will give countdown to the end of the empire.

Romans and Huns

By the 5th century AD due to hundreds of years of continuous warfare from the Western Roman Empire only a shadow remains. The Empire plunged into deep chaos. From the outside, countless enemies pressed on her - barbarians, seeking to take possession of its lands. But the main thing is the terrible economic situation; the empire did not receive the income necessary to maintain a strong army and maintain government administration.

Without a strong army, Rome was defenseless against the largest hordes of barbarians the empire had ever seen - led by a ferocious leader.

5th century chronicler Kalinnik recalled their cruelty: “The Huns became so strong that they were able to conquer hundreds of cities. This was accompanied by so many murders and bloodshed that it was impossible to count the corpses.”

The Huns, a nomadic tribe from the east, ravaged what little remained of the empire.

In the West there was no more state The West simply fell apart. There were many different armies and parties fighting for power, but there was no power itself.

The capital of the eastern part of the empire could survive the attack of the Huns, but the weaker Western Empire became the main target of their conquests and was forced to give the province to Attila.

Pannonia, 449 AD

In the former provinces of the empire, the Romans now had to get along with their barbarian rulers - the Huns.

The Romans and barbarians differed from each other in clothing, hairstyle, preferences in food and life. Although by that time the Romans and barbarians had become accustomed to each other, the centuries-old hostility had not gone away.

But one of the Romans felt free in this stormy sea and even managed to extract some benefits from Attila’s reign. His name was .

Orestes was a Roman and he grew up in Pannonia captured by the Huns. However, he became one of Attila's close associates.

The empire was collapsing, but the Roman origins of Orestes and other natives in Pannonia brought them favor with Attila. They are Romans, because they speak and behave like Romans, these people were raised in Rome, absorbed its customs and cultures, they were real Romans and acted as their fellow citizens had acted for centuries.

Orestes, who received a Roman education, stood out among Attila's many barbarian allies and associates. He soon occupied a prominent position at the ruler's court.

Orestes undoubtedly understood that Attila turned out to be a far-sighted politician who tried to connect the Huns and Romans marriage ties and political alliances, so that lay the foundations of a new empire in the north.

Constantly being close to Attila, Orestes learned firsthand how cruel barbarian justice could be. His Roman sensibilities were easily offended.

It can be said that Romans and barbarians did not understand and did not like each other, it was not easy for them to treat each other with tolerance. These different peoples with different cultures were supposed to live together and cooperate in many important matters, but they did not accept each other.

And although Orestes was disgusted that the barbarians were sacrificing their enemies, he felt that Attila’s reign opened up the path for him to achieve his own goals.

Orestes, while at the court of Attila, saw how he tried to create a state almost from scratch, and Orestes realized that this a real chance to re-create the Roman power, which would be led by a king who would unite the forces of the barbarians and the Romans to restore the glory of Rome from the time of its founders.

Although Orestes served the barbarians, he always remained a Roman and considered himself and his people above all others. He wanted to restore the former greatness of the empire.

The collapse of the power of the Huns

In 453 AD. during Attila's wedding night the reign suddenly comes to an end, and this will soon lead to the collapse of the power of the Huns and their barbarian allies.

bride found him dead, as it turned out later, from a hemorrhage, and fearing that she would be accused of murder, she spent the whole night next to the corpse.

Gundobad chose him, thinking that the emperor would remain faithful to him. It is clear that Glycerius had to rule to please Gundobad, depending on his support.

Now there are many more barbarians around the emperor than there are Romans. The army of the Western Empire was largely, if not entirely, barbarian. It is quite possible that there were still original Roman units there, but when we read about this army, we see that there were Arabs, Germans and many other foreign warriors in it.

At the head of the mercenaries of Glycerius was a barbarian named. He received a position in the emperor's guard largely because he showed military ability and the makings of a leader.

This is exactly how Rome was discovered by Orestes when, after several decades of wandering, he finally arrived there. At his first meeting with Odoacer, he had no idea how much the empire had changed since its former glory.

From the power of the Western Empire in 470 AD almost nothing left, but not everyone still understood that she's doomed, many saw this as a temporary weakness, the result of some unfortunate mistakes, and it seemed that everything could still be corrected.

Orestes' diplomatic experience allowed him to obtain a high position in the imperial army. But he was surprised to see the barbarian Odoacer, who, not possessing the same talents, occupied the same position.

They were both very ambitious. They survived very severe trials: Orestes served at the court of the bloodthirsty Attila, Odoacer was a military man and later in Rome he literally climbed out of their poverty, taking a high position. It was probably their ambition and considerable abilities that made them rivals.

Each of them saw the empire in his own way: one through the eyes of a Roman, the other through the eyes of a barbarian. After many years spent at the court of Attila, the Roman Orestes became a military leader of the Roman army, but in Italy he discovers that the empire is falling apart and is almost no longer owned by the Romans, and real rulers- not Emperor Glycerius, but barbarian warlords, Odokar and the Burgundian king Gundobad.

Italy, 473 AD

In the past, Rome hired mercenaries, but they were always kept away from power. In the 5th century they are part of the army as monolithic groups of Germans. They wore their own clothes, ate their own food, adhered to their own customs, maintaining their familiar hierarchy and methods of government. Oddly enough, they managed not to dissolve in this seething imperial cauldron.

The warriors of Gundobad could achieve the same position in the army as the noble Romans. The army of Glycerius, unlike the army of Gundobad, was more heterogeneous, including both the Burgundians and warriors of many other nations, but together they formed a single army in Italy.

The barbarians and Romans in the Roman army probably hated each other: the Romans believed that since this was the Roman Empire, then they, the Romans, should stand above the barbarians in it; many believed that the barbarians should be expelled from the army altogether.

Roman the army was no longer a single organism, in its ranks mature split. Even the military leader Orestes, a skilled diplomat, was powerless here.

While Rome suffered heavy losses in battles with tribes such as those in Gaul, Roman soldiers began to doubt the loyalty of their barbarian allies.

At that moment, everyone already had their own interests, the former unity disappeared. Even among the Romans themselves, groups with conflicting interests formed in the army.

Chaos reigned in the army: no one else fought for the emperor, everyone was for himself.

Emperor Julius Nepos at the head of the Western Empire

The weakened Western Empire could no longer save its Mediterranean coasts from plunder, and the stronger Eastern Empire with its capital in Constantinople, finally, intervened.

Constantinople, 473 AD

The aging Eastern Emperor lived in complete safety in the imperial palace in the capital.

In the Roman Empire of the mid-5th century, there was a clear division between East and West. Unlike the West, the East grew strong and prospered.

Blaming Glycerius for all the failures of Rome, Leo hoped to expand his sphere of influence by installing a new emperor in the West -.

Nepos was chosen as Emperor of the West due to the position he held in Leo's court. Nepos's position was very secure: he was married to a relative of the emperor and was quite suitable for lead the invasion of Italy.

In 474 AD. Nepot gathered an army and led her from Constantinople to Italy. The East was going to once again strengthen its power and influence in the West, replacing Glycerius with its protege. This reaction is not surprising.

As the new emperor, Nepos had a lot of work to do to justify the trust, but if he could not expel the barbarians from the Western Empire, he would collapse.

While Nepos's army sailed from Constantinople, the Western Emperor Glycerius in Rome feverishly prepared to fight back. But as soon as Glycerius gave the order to Orestes and Odoacer to prepare an army, he became convinced that he had relied in vain on the devotion of the barbarians: Gundobad with his Burgundians abandoned him in difficult times.

Gundobad left his post and again became King of the Burgundians. This seemed to him much more attractive than being commander-in-chief of Glycerius.

It was no longer the Roman Empire. Its soldiers, brought up in completely different traditions and values, were strikingly different from the people's militia of Rome.

Without the support of the Burgundians, even the army of Orestes and Odoacer could not save Glycerius from the invasion of Nepos.

When Nepos approached Rome, Glycerius and his generals went to meet him, but not for battle, but to beg for mercy.

Glycerium found itself in a very difficult position. He could not count on military support either from hired barbarian mercenaries or from his own soldiers. Therefore, when the Eastern Emperor sent Nepos to take the throne of the Western Empire, Glycerius made the only reasonable decision: he surrendered without a fight.

Nepos, who expected to have to wage a bloody war to overthrow Glycerius, now granted life to the deposed emperor.

Nepos wanted to give all this a semblance of legality. It was as if he had become emperor with the support of the eastern ruler and the consent of the western one, who voluntarily left, recognizing that Nepos was better suited for this.

He made Glycerius a bishop and sent into exile away from Rome.

In June 474 AD, when Nepos became the Western Emperor, he was recognized by both Orestes and Odoacer. Being equally ambitious, they began to vying with each other to show their devotion to the new emperor.

Orestes, being a Roman himself, was still convinced that Rome was alive and must be defended. Odoacer, it seems, was sure that Rome no longer existed. At the very time when the very fate of Rome was being decided, interests collided these two, undoubtedly, very capable people.

Nepos appointed Orestes and Odoacer to high positions at court, giving them both such power that no one else in Rome had. Elevating both Orestes and Odoacer at the same time, and endowing them with equal powers, he thereby laid the seeds the future collapse of his own power. Nepos did not understand that it was risky to elevate such strong and strong-willed people; it could become a threat.

Overthrow of Nepos

But the nuances of Roman court politics soon faded in comparison ruthless attacks of the Visigoths to the only province remaining to the Western Empire in Gaul.

During the heyday of the empire, in these lands now known as Provence in France, civilization flourished, but in the 470s AD. they became the target of constant attacks by the Visigoths and their king Eurich.

The proud and ambitious king of the Visigoths, eager to expand the borders of his possessions, decided to attack Roman territories in southern France.

The Visigoths did have a numerical advantage. This resulted in the constant reduction of the Gallic possessions of the Roman Empire until a tiny piece of land remained in modern southern France.

Bloodthirsty Visigoth warriors devastated settlements in Provence, not sparing the helpless Roman inhabitants.

Poorly armed and untrained, the Imperial legionaries were no match for the barbarians. It seems, the Goths were better organized, and their kingdom was stronger. They could gather more troops, and they were excellent warriors, ready for any vicissitudes of military action.

The battle was brutal, a real massacre, urgent action had to be taken.

Although the Roman commander Orestes was not such an experienced warrior, Emperor Nepos sends him from Rome to Gaul to drive the barbarians out of there.

He was to become commander in Gaul. But the question is: is this really such a great honor and high position, since in Gaul there are almost no territories subject to Rome left? So it's quite possible that this was just a convenient excuse. remove Orestes away from Rome.

But having arrived at the troops stationed on the Italian border, the former diplomat Orestes intends to prove himself as a military leader and strategist, hoping to bypass both Odoacer and Emperor Nepos himself.

He offers his barbarian warriors a deal: if they go with him against Emperor Nepos, Orestes will allocate them lands in Italy.

We know that Orestes went against Nepos. Instead of submitting to the authority of the emperor, he decided to take power for himself. Why did he do this? Most likely he wanted to restore the empire.

Leaving Gaul to the Visigoths, Orestes and his troops moved from northern Italy back to Rome, but when Emperor Nepos found out about this, he ran V .

In August 475 AD. Orestes came to Ravenna and ordered a search of the city to find the emperor. The barbarians began to rob, instilling fear in the inhabitants with their fury.

It can be assumed that Orestes either believed that Emperor Nepos was selling the empire to the barbarians, or he himself craved power in the empire.

But even on pain of death no one revealed where the emperor was hiding. Nepos managed to secretly escape from the city, as the 6th century chronicler Jordanes testifies: “Nepos fled to. Deprived of power, he languished, leading a lonely life in the very city where he had recently made the exiled Glycerius bishop.”

Orestes believed that since Nepos had disappeared and the barbarian warriors obeyed his orders, he could now restore order to an empire mired in chaos.

Surprisingly, Orestes did not sit on the throne himself, but did emperor of his 10 year old son. Orestes believed that since he was raised among the barbarians and served at the court of the Huns, the Italian nobility would not want to see him, Orestes, as emperor, but they would accept the purebred Roman Romulus, because this was quite consistent with their traditions. Although now the Romans’ views on power have changed greatly.

The boy remained in the well-fortified city of Ravenna. He remained under the protection of his uncle Paul. Romulus was a teenager and had not yet matured; his name Augustulus meant "little August".

Young Romulus was just his father's puppet. Exactly Orestes will rule the empire, finally pushing aside his rival Odoacer and preventing him from becoming the most influential man in Rome.

Filled with pride Orestes forgot about his promises to the barbarians. They did what they promised - they helped Orestes remove Nepos, and now they demanded lands.

The barbarians wanted to settle in Italy on the ancestral Roman lands, many of which belonged to hereditary senators. Orestes was a true Roman and could not allow this: he refused.

Orestes could not pay the barbarians, but the soldiers obeyed the emperor only if he paid them. Therefore, when Orestes, who seized power by deceit and placed his son on the throne, could not give them the money they wanted or the land they demanded, they had only one thing left: to replace the emperor with another who would give them what they wanted.

With the help of his bodyguards, Orestes escapes. But he underestimated the determination of the barbarians, thirsty for revenge.

The barbarians' revenge on Orestes

Rome, 476 AD

When Orestes refused to give the barbarians land in Italy, they turned to his main rival Odoacer for help.

The warriors acted very wisely by turning to Odoacer, because, as they believed, he was able to satisfy their demands. Odoacer himself was a barbarian, and the warriors expected that he would give them land and money without a doubt, no matter where they had to get it from - the main thing was that the warriors were satisfied. And Odoacer had to agree to the offer of the barbarian army.

They came to him and said: “If you can get land for us, you will become our king.” It was tempting. Now there was a Roman army under his command, but in fact - a hodgepodge of Germanic tribes.

Together they will perform to end Roman power in the empire. Now Odoacer, as he had long wanted, could take revenge on Orestes, who dared to deprive him of power in Rome.

And they immediately began to attack Italian cities. Cities were plundered for many days, everything that was of any value was taken from the inhabitants.

Risking their lives for an empire they did not even consider theirs, the barbarians realized that the time had come to make Rome pay in blood for what it could not pay for in money or land.

Imagine for a moment that you are a warrior. You have to live on the meager means you receive. And now you haven't been paid at all. Nothing may happen because of one time, but if it happens two, three, four times in a row, you will die of hunger. Will you continue to serve those who forced you to starve?

Odoacer was secretly pleased that he could finally subjugate Italy and settle accounts with Orestes.

Then in 476 we were not talking about a conventional war, there was no battle, no sieges. Just hungry warriors looking for a livelihood by doing what they could do. They were trained to fight, and killed everyone who stood in their way. That's why there were attacks, violence, robberies.

While Odoacer approached, Orestes left his son, the young Emperor Romulus, in Ravenna in the care of his uncle Paul, while he ran V Ticin in Northern Italy.

Orestes was forced to seek refuge from Odoacer in Ticinus, in a city that is now called. We know that the bishop of the city granted him asylum.

But even the temple of God could not protect him from the barbarians. Orestes fled, while Odoacer and the soldiers devastated the church, desperately trying to find him.

All the collected offerings were taken away from the bishop, all the money collected to help the poor was taken away by Odoacer's soldiers. They also burned many buildings, including the church.

Just as the church perished in the fire, Orestes hopes for the revival of the empire also collapsed. Odoacer didn't care about preserving Rome, he had long ago realized that Rome was no more. But what role did he play? What were you going to use your power for?

Orestes flees Ticinus with a handful of bodyguards, hoping to gain time to prepare for the decisive meeting with Odoacer. Once they both occupied a high position at court, now they are forced to fight for life.

They were proud of the position they occupied, and neither wanted to allow the other to have even an ounce of power. And of course, a collision is inevitable.

Orestes and his army reached Placentia, modern in Italy, until finally met in Odoacrom.

Northern Italy, 476 AD.

Inexperienced in military affairs, Orestes had little chance of surviving the battle against the barbarians of Odoacer. It was brutal, bloody battle. In such a battle, fighting spirit played an even greater role than training. Someone had to win and someone had to lose. Soldiers stepped over corpses, the wounded moaned, people lost their self-control in horror.

Surprisingly in the last, tragic years of the empire there was always someone who was ready to cling to imperial power and try to restore the empire. They believed that the empire could still be saved, that it had not yet collapsed, but we understand that these attempts were doomed.

Although it seemed reckless, he refused to admit defeat.

Odoacer and Orestes were key figures in the West. The future of Rome rested on their shoulders, and they had to find a common language with each other. A compromise should have been found, but this did not work out, and Italy is gripped by violence and chaos.

It was a battle to the death, and in this battle at the end of the empire, the Romans were forced yield to stronger barbarians.

We don't know exactly what happened when Odoacer managed to get to Orestes, but most likely the Roman faced a quick and cruel end. There was no elaborate ceremony, no funeral, Orestes had to disappear. No doubt she was waiting for him secret and speedy execution.

Fall of the Western Roman Empire

Having won, Odoacer and his troops headed to Ravenna to deal with the remaining matter - the young son of Ores, the last emperor of the Western Empire.

12-year-old Emperor Romulus Augustulus and his uncle Paul did not know about the death of Orestes and were not prepared for Odoacer's attack.

When Odoacer came to Ravenna, Romulus could not resist, but Paul, who was Romulus's guardian, tried to protect his nephew. Odoacer's people killed Pavel and went after the emperor Romulus Augustulus.

Frightened by the noise of his uncle's murder, the boy tried to run away. Last Roman Emperor, driven like an animal, could not escape from the barbarian’s sword, there was nowhere to run.

Romulus was just a puppet, so Odoacer had no reason to touch him. The ruthless warrior did an amazing thing: he saved the boy's life, sending him to link.

By sparing Romulus's life, Odoacer showed mercy to the Romans and made it clear that he could act as a just ruler.

In the summer of 476 AD. Odoacer became first barbarian ruler of Italy.

Now Odoacer became king. He did not become the king of Italy or the Roman Empire, he was the king of his warriors, this ragtag horde, which was then called the Roman army.

Odoacer is now king, but not emperor, because The Roman Empire more than 500 years after its origin in 27 BC. Now completely collapsed.

It has become the end of the Roman emperor's power in the West. Now there will be a king there. The Roman Empire still existed in the East, but the Western lands were not subject to it, and the Western world had changed beyond recognition.

News of the Fall of Rome quickly reached the new eastern emperor in Constantinople.

The envoys brought news that the Eastern Empire had been waiting in fear for many years. They brought the last news from the boy emperor.

The last thing Odoacer made Romulus Augustulus do before removing him from the throne was send an envoy on behalf of the Senate and the Emperor with a message about transfer of imperial power to Constantinople and that there would no longer be an emperor in the West.

Since Italy was now ruled by a barbarian, the former symbols of imperial power were no longer needed.

We know that Odoacer declared that he was not going to wear purple robes and a golden wreath - signs of the power of the emperor, he threw away these regalia of the past, he brought something new, becoming in the West a king, not an emperor. Clothes, wreaths, jewelry and other imperial items now belonged only to the eastern emperor.

But in his hands they were no longer symbols of power and authority, but only signs of failure and defeat.

In Italy, families of barbarian warriors finally received the lands they had fought for. The West was now in their hands.

Odoacer, of course fulfilled what he promised his soldiers. He kept his word, giving what was due to them, remaining in the eyes of his relatives an honest and generous leader.

But it was the distribution of land, and the women and children of the barbarians who settled within the empire, that had a much greater impact than armed attacks.

At first, powerful Rome willingly accepted strangers, drawing benefits from this for itself. But in the end when the barbarians came in large numbers and wanted to become part of the Roman Empire, the Romans were no longer ready to accept them as they had been before. This inability to turn the influx of foreigners into a source of strength became one of the main reasons for the death of the Roman Empire.

Legacy of the Roman Empire

But despite the fall of the empire, in some corners, such as monasteries, libraries, these repositories of knowledge and other achievements of Roman civilization were miraculously saved and preserved.

Rome stood the test of time because, while there was still an emphasis on learning, education and books, everything was based on Roman traditions, and Roman literature and culture were considered the basis of civilization.

Legacy of the Roman Empire, especially in its western part, is very great: a lot of new things were introduced, including new terms, concepts, and in the languages ​​we speak, traces of Roman influence can be traced, the Roman heritage is all around us, and we must not forget about it.

The rise and fall of Rome, its path from the republic to the fall of the empire, and what was created and accumulated along this path largely predetermined further development of the entire Western world.

This civilization has survived centuries of war, disaster, corruption and plague in order to disappear at the hands of one barbarian warrior.

We will always be fascinated by both the history of the Roman Empire itself and the history of its fall. It, of course, largely predetermined the formation of the modern world, but let's face it: for the last fifteen hundred years a lot has been said and written about the empire. Is it necessary to raise this topic again? The answer is simple: we must remember Rome because it exhibited all the wonderful as well as all the terrible traits of human nature. If we look at them carefully, we can understand that perhaps we can follow good examples and not be like bad ones.

Even though the Roman Empire is over 2,000 years old, its contribution to the world continues today. We usually assume that ancient people were backward and simple, but this is simply not true. We owe a lot of technology to the ancient Romans. From architecture to entertainment, Roman customs, knowledge and designs have been passed down over the centuries. 1. Concrete. The Romans knew how to make hard, durable forms of concrete. While today's concrete will deteriorate in 50 years or less, Roman concrete is still strong.
2. Roads and highways. Once the Romans realized that paved roads could help them maintain a strong army and empire, they built them everywhere. Over the course of 700 years, they laid 88,500 km of roads throughout Europe. These roads were well designed, built to last, and allowed for rapid travel throughout the empire. Even after 2000 years, many Roman roads still exist today.
3. Restaurants. The Romans loved good food and their dining room was an important part of their living space. A typical Roman dinner, which resembles much of modern restaurant dining, consisted of three courses: an appetizer, a main course, and a dessert. They also drank wine throughout the meal. This distinguished them from the Greeks, who drank wine after meals.
4. Plumbing. The ancient Romans developed a revolutionary plumbing system that first began with aqueducts, which allowed them to transport running water to developed areas, and ended with the development of a complex system of lead piping.
5. Newspapers. Newspapers have come a long way. The Romans initially began recording Senate meetings called "Acta Senatus", accessible only to senators. Later, however, after 27 BC. e. there was the "Acta diurna", which was like a daily newspaper for the public, serving as an early newspaper.
6. Graffiti. Believe it or not, graffiti is not a modern art form, but an ancient one that originated in Rome.
7. Central heating. One of the first known central heating systems was created by the Romans. It was found mainly in large public baths. With a raised floor and a constantly burning fire, the system heated the room and the water going to the bathhouse.
8. Military medicine. In ancient times, most soldiers had to fend for themselves on the battlefield when they were wounded. However, during the time of Emperor Trajan in the second century, the Roman military acquired doctors who could dress wounds and perform minor operations. Field hospitals were soon established, and more thoroughly trained doctors marched alongside the Roman soldiers.
9. Caesarean section. According to Roman law, Caesar decreed that all women who were already dead or dying during childbirth had to be cut open to save the child. The operation was never intended to save the mother's life because there was no medicine to do so. However, today the procedure has changed radically and has become more common.
10. Fast food. McDonald's probably likes to think that it invented fast food, but it simply doesn't. For example, in the ancient city of Pompeii no one liked to cook. Instead, citizens went to old restaurants. Takeaway food was quite common.

6 003

With the fall of Rome and the formation of the early Germanic kingdoms, attempts to bring together the disparate civilizations of the Mediterranean and Western Eurasia under one roof ceased. For Europe, the consequence of this was the further isolation of its western and eastern extremities, developing under the influence of various historical events and without serious connection with each other.

Heirs of antiquity

During this period, the peoples of the eastern Mediterranean and South-West Asia acted as custodians of cultural heritage. The first place among them belongs to a complex state formation known as ““. It remains a beacon of civilization and at the same time the only superpower in the Mediterranean. Its golden nomisma - the hypostasis of the Roman solidus - is the most authoritative monetary unit.

For more than three centuries after the fall of Rome, the surrounding peoples knew only one emperor - the one in Constantinople. The decline of culture affected Byzantium only to a weak extent. The achievements of the “axial time” are alive here. In the central regions, even commoners are literate, and firmly rooted Christianity promotes deep spiritual quests. True, logic and philosophy are now put at the service of theology, and democracy has degenerated into clashes of “dims” - organizations that are a cross between gangs of sports fans, political parties and religious communities.

The Byzantines consider themselves Romans - Romans, and call their empire Romania, but it no longer has almost anything to do with Rome. Its basis is the Hellenic (Greek) civilization, the one that in the time of Homer existed within the borders of the Aegean world (the south of the Balkan Peninsula, the west of Asia Minor and nearby islands). From the end of the 6th century, the imperial administrative apparatus lost all resemblance to the Roman one, and Greek was established as the state language.

However, the empire also includes areas with a completely different heritage. Its apparent unity is ensured not so much by Greek culture as by the administrative apparatus and the Christian religion. The names of Achilles, Pericles or Socrates mean nothing to the peasant in the northern Balkans and eastern Asia Minor, but he knows that there is an emperor in Constantinople, and the Holy Trinity in heaven.

However, due to the incompatibility of civilizations, the Byzantine church was split into warring currents. The Slavic newcomers are closer to the teachings of the Paulicians, which deny the official church hierarchy. The mentality of ancient civilizations - Urarto-Armenian, Syro-Phoenician and Egyptian - does not accept the union in Jesus Christ of two principles “inseparably and unmerged” - divine and human, because in the divine for them royal power is embodied - absolute, unattainably elevated above subjects, plunging into dust with its greatness. Therefore, Nestorianism is strengthened in Syria, separating the two natures of Christ with an impenetrable wall, and Alexandria of Egypt becomes a stronghold of Monophysitism, which generally denies the human element in it.

In the 7th century, the eastern provinces of Byzantium easily broke away from Christianity in order to unite under the banner of a new, more acceptable religion for them - Islam. Centuries of communication with Semitic civilizations changed the mentality of the Hellenes themselves: the difference between the courts of the Byzantine emperor and the eastern despots is sometimes almost indistinguishable, and the church of Constantinople periodically falls under the influence of eastern doctrines.

Birth of the West

The concept of the Middle Ages belongs exclusively to the history of Western Europe. In the XIV-XV centuries, the figures of the Renaissance, looking back at the past of their countries, discovered a thousand-year gap filled with ignorance and religious fanaticism between Roman greatness and their own era of free reason. They called this dark period the “Middle Ages”, although it was then that their own civilization was born - the very “West”, which for the first time in history found itself opposed to the “East”, and essentially to the rest of the world.

The development of the “fetus” proceeded extremely slowly and with great difficulties. The decline in production, trade and culture, which was already observed at the end of the Roman Empire, continued in the 6th-8th centuries. Add to this a series of epidemics that reduced the number of Europeans by a quarter or even a third. However, Roman roots were visible everywhere. The character of the population has changed little. Germanic dialects quickly faded in front of Latin dialects. Gregory, bishop of the city of Tours, reports that when the Frankish king Guntram entered Paris in 585, the townspeople greeted him with “words of praise, either in Syriac, or in Latin (that is, in folk Northern French Latin. - A.A.), or even in the language of the Jews themselves,” but not in Frankish. Almost the only type of writing was Latin. The appointees of the German kings collaborated with the Roman self-government that remained in the cities. In the south of Gaul, the Romanized nobility continued to boast of Roman polish and belonging to the senatorial class until the 8th century.

Christianity in early medieval Europe, due to general illiteracy, was rather superficial and primitive, but the church here took on a considerable share of worldly concerns. With the disappearance of the Roman imperial administration, the bishop, left to his own devices, directly governed the population of the diocese, often occupying a higher position than the royal count, and almost always surpassing him in literacy. He defends the interests of the church (and his own - it is impossible to separate them) from the encroachments of kings, dukes, counts and barons, not only with a prayer book, but often with a sword in his hand. And since the only real city in Western Europe remains Rome, its bishop - the pope - occupies a unique position. And the rest of the bishops are interested in increasing his authority as opposed to the secular rulers.

The greatest success accompanied the Frankish kings, who united under their rule the lands of the future France, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, western Germany and northern Italy. Taking advantage of the fact that in Byzantium the throne was usurped by Empress Irene, a church council convened in Rome on December 23, 800, made a decision: “Since at present there is no bearer of the imperial title in the country of the Greeks, and the empire has been captured by a local woman, to the followers of the apostles and all the holy fathers , participating in the council, like the rest of the Christian people, it seems that the title of emperor should be given to the King of the Franks, Charles, who holds Rome in his hands, where the Caesars once used to live.”

During the Christmas Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, Pope Leo III approached the king and placed the imperial crown on his head. So Western Europe again found an emperor - Charlemagne.

The end of the Avars

The European eastern periphery, unlike the western one, did not know any “Middle Ages,” but for a different reason: the decline of civilization did not affect it, since civilization itself did not yet exist here. The peoples in these regions continued to move in search of the most comfortable living environment.

In the 7th century, a redistribution of influence between the Turkic and Slavic peoples began here. The impetus for this process was given by the events of the 630s, which simultaneously shook two nomadic khaganates - the Avar, located in the center of Europe, and the Western Turkic on its eastern borders. After the death of the Avar Khagan Boyan, the Slavic tribes of Serbs and Croats defeated the Avars and occupied Illyricum, and to the east of the Avars, Khan Kuvrat united the Bulgar tribes under his rule. His khanate, called Great Bulgaria, was located in the Azov region, in the Kuban River basin and on the Taman Peninsula. (Unlike the Eastern Turks, who let their long hair loose over their shoulders, the Bulgars shaved their heads, leaving a tuft of long hair on the top of their heads, a hairstyle that was later adopted by the first Kyiv princes and then the Cossacks.)

Then, in the 630s, the Ashina clan (a Turkic name meaning “wolf”), which had previously ruled the Turks for more than two centuries, lost power in the Western Turkic Khaganate. His remnants fled to the west and united the tribes that wandered between the Don, Manych, Volga and the Caspian Sea under the common name “Khazars”. Considering themselves the direct heirs of the Turkic power, the Khazar Ashina were called kagans; their winter headquarters was the city of Itil not far from the Volga estuary.

After the death of Kuvrat, the Khazars conquered the Azov Bulgars. However, some Bulgar clans, led by Khan Asparukh, son of Kuvrat, migrated to the lower reaches of the Danube, displacing the Byzantines and subjugating the Slavs who had previously settled here. In a historically short period of time, the Danube Bulgars switched to a settled life and completely disappeared among numerous Slavic subjects. The winter khan's headquarters of Pliska became the first capital of Danube Bulgaria, and Khan Krum, a contemporary of Charlemagne, was already toasting the health of the guests in Slavic at feasts.

In 803, Krum and Charlemagne simultaneously attacked the Avars from both sides and completely defeated them. The “mobile state” in the very center of Europe was destroyed, its lands were divided by the Frankish Germans and the glorified Bulgarians. Moreover, from this moment on, the Avars as a nation disappear from the historical arena. The old Russian proverb “pogibosha, aki obry” (“perished like the Avars”) conveyed to us the impression that this event made on the Slavs.

Eastern Slavs and their new neighbors

The Slavs, after the death of the state of Ermanaric and the departure of the Germanic tribes to the west, take their place, spreading from the banks of the Danube in all directions. Their language is gradually losing its unity; it breaks up into two or three (linguists do not have a common point of view on this matter) dialect groups. In the west, they occupy lands adjacent to the Germans - from the Bohemian Forest to Schleswig. The history of these Western Slavs is subsequently closely intertwined with the history of Western Europe, especially Germany. In the east, by the 8th century, the Slavs settled in the vast expanse of what is now Ukraine, Belarus and Western Russian regions.

The forest area south of Pripyat, between Sluch and Teterev, was occupied by the tribes of the Drevlyans, the lands to the north of them, between Pripyat and the Western Dvina - Dregovichi, the upper reaches of the Volga, Dvina and Dnieper - Krivichi (“their city is Smolensk,” says the Chronicle), and the basin of the Polota River, which flows into the Dvina, is Polotsk. To the southeast of the Drevlyans, in the Kyiv region, the glades settled, even further to the east, along the Sula, Seim, Desna and Seversky Donets, the north (northerners), between the Desna and Sozh - the Radimichi. Thus, in the southeast the Slavs came into contact with the Khazars-Bulgars.

The Khazar Khaganate, which had been in close contact with Byzantium for a long time, was no longer a primitive nomadic association. It was distinguished from most other “mobile states” of the Great Steppe by two important features. First of all, a system of dual power developed in it (it is not clear how and when exactly). The Kagan was considered the supreme head of the Khazars, but actual power was in the hands of a junior ruler - a melik (king), or shad, who could remove and install kagans.

The second original feature lay in the field of religion. In Western Eurasia and the Mediterranean, the concept of civilization by the time described was already quite firmly associated with monotheism. The pagan world is at the same time a barbaric world. In Khazaria, the majority of the nomadic population revered the spirits and the supreme deity Tengri Khan - the god of the sky, sun and fire. But the ruling elite from the moment of the formation of the Kaganate sought to introduce monotheism. At the end of the 8th century, Byzantium established the Gothic Metropolis in Crimea, whose seven dioceses were located on the lands of the Khazar Kaganate. However, the Khazars feared that, having adopted Christianity, they would find themselves under the control of not only the Patriarch of Constantinople, but also the Byzantine Emperor.

The Khazars were constantly at war with the Muslims, who had taken possession of Transcaucasia by that time. And when the Muslim military operations were especially successful, the frightened Kagan promised to convert to Islam, stopped eating pork, drinking wine, but that was the end of the matter. The ruling elite of the Khazars increasingly leaned toward Judaism; fortunately, on the territory of the Kaganate there were quite a few Jewish clans that fled Iran under the pressure of the Arabs. The adoption of religion from refugees, and not from a powerful neighbor, in no way threatened the sovereignty of the kagans and kings.

The transition to monotheism was not a one-time step, so the dates of the conversion of the Khazar elite to Judaism are given very different - from 620 to the middle of the 9th century. According to historian S.A. Pletneva, the introduction of a new religion on a state scale occurred under Kagan Obadiah, a contemporary of Charlemagne, that is, at the turn of the 8th-9th centuries.

The loose Khazar power endured the operation to change its religious orientation with great stress. The struggle for power and influence intensified between the Kagan’s entourage, who had accepted the new faith, and the provincial nobility. Apparently, in this turmoil, Kagan Obadiah and his sons died, and Crimea broke away from the Kaganate and came under the rule of Byzantium.

Religious strife, as well as the constant invasions of Muslims from Transcaucasia, prompted some of the Khazars and Bulgars to migrate to the wide and abundant pastures of the Don and Volga steppes. During this movement, they imposed tribute on the Slavic tribes of the Polans, Severians and Radimichi. Some Bulgar clans moved even further north and settled in the region of the middle Volga and Kama, bringing under their control the Finno-Ugrians who inhabited the current Russian autonomies - Mordovia, Chuvashia, Tatarstan and Mari El, as well as the Rostov and Murom regions. As a result, the size of the Khaganate increased approximately threefold.

Meanwhile, part of the Slavic tribes, moving to the northeast, turned out to be neighbors of the Balts, who were close to them in language - the ancestors of the Lithuanians and Latvians. Even further to the east, these Slavs were surrounded by Finnish-speaking peoples who occupied a vast territory - present-day Estonia and Finland, the entire northern part of European Russia (the southern border of their settlement ran approximately along the line from the Gulf of Riga along the Daugava to the middle Volga) and the lands beyond the Ural ridge. In the initial Russian chronicle, compiled in the 12th century from earlier sources and called “The Tale of Bygone Years,” the Finnish peoples are mentioned - Vod, Chud, Merya, all... It is not surprising that Finnish features appear in the guise of the Slavic newcomers, which arose from numerous mixed marriages.

The chronicle says: “The Slovenes sat near Lake Ilmer, and were called by their own name.” So, the northernmost Slavic group reached Lake Ilmen (Ilmer) and, finding itself surrounded by a foreign-speaking population, adopted a common generic name - Slovenes. It is not known where they came from to these places - from the south, from Khazaria, or from the west, where around that time Slavic tribes settled from the Kiel Bay to the mouth of the Vistula. Novgorod legends spoke of the arrival of the ancestors of the Novgorodians from the shores of the Black Sea, and the historian N.I. Kostomarov noted the similarity of the Ukrainian and Novgorod dialects.

Thus, moving further and further from the Mediterranean, part of the Slavic tribes, no later than the 8th century, settled in the most remote corner of Europe, fenced off from all centers of culture by thousands of kilometers of steppes, forests and swamps. But while they were moving away from civilization, civilization was moving after them from Scandinavia.

Viking Age

The northern Germans were usually called Normans, that is, “northern people,” although, in essence, this name applied only to the inhabitants of Norway. Norman society was quite primitive, with blood feuds and a belief in witchcraft. But it allowed a large layer of people to live freely. Clans among the Normans, if they ever existed, disappeared early. They didn’t even have family surnames, like, for example, Roman ones. If a person’s name was Björn Haraldsson - “son of Harald”, then his son Gunnar was already called Gunnar Björneson - “son of Björn”, and his daughter Uni, accordingly, Uni Björnedóttir - “daughter of Björn”. Free householders decided on common affairs at annual congresses - tings. Christianity had not yet touched the Normans; they worshiped their ancient gods - Thor, Odin and others.

Kings played a special role in northern society. Unlike the others, the king was “not subject to anyone or anything,” except for ancient customs sanctified by the gods. It was believed that “a king should fight, not plow the land.” A squad formed around him, which he fed, watered and clothed. Most often, bachelors became vigilantes - young and not so young, locals and newcomers, mostly Finns and Slavs. However, not all kings were warlike; some of them did not hesitate to look after their pigs.

Civilization came to the Normans in the guise of a merchant. Trade is a grandiose invention that makes it possible (if you have gold and silver or their substitutes) to almost guarantee getting what you want. Thanks to trade, the previously simplest method of acquiring the necessary things - robbery - gradually faded into the background, and in the most developed societies it was generally pushed into the margins. However, the North Germans stood at the very beginning of this path.

Geographically, of the Normans, the closest to civilization were the inhabitants of the Jutland Peninsula, who in exchange for amber had long received products made of bronze, gold and glass. When most of the Jutes - the indigenous inhabitants of Jutland - in company with the Saxons and Angles set off to conquer Britain, their place was taken by the Danes who came from the south of Scandinavia. So Jutland became Denmark. At the time described, the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian peoples began to separate from each other, although their language still remained the same.

Already in the 7th century, the northern trade route was extended from Jutland to the southeastern coast of Scandinavia, to the Upland region inhabited by the Svei (Swedes). Trading settlements appeared in Eketorp on the island of Öland, then Helge and Birke on Lake Mälaren, near modern Stockholm. Close acquaintance with beautiful things made in civilized countries inflamed the natural greed of the Normans to the limit (one of their poetic works that has come down to us is called “The Lack of Gold”). The Normans knew how to trade and loved it, but the main source of wealth for them was not so much trade (and certainly not agriculture: there is very little land suitable for cultivation in the European North), but robbery.

A sea voyage for the purpose of robbery (and partly trade) was called “Viking” (vikingr), and its participants were also called by the same word. Such trips could only be organized by wealthy people (equipping such an expedition was not cheap), but who wanted to get even more gold, slaves and glory. Having put together a squad and equipped ships, if you were lucky, you could become a king.

Well-armed Vikings traveled the sea in long, multi-oared ships that could accommodate up to a hundred people. Having landed on land, they used every opportunity to capture horses and turned into the first mounted infantry in history. Their customs are eloquently illustrated by the custom of feasting directly on the corpses of enemies, sticking skewers into them. In the 9th century, King Alvir, as stated in one of the sagas, received the nickname “Child Lover” because he “forbade his people to throw children into the air and catch them with spears, as was customary among the Vikings.”

The end of the 8th century marked the onset of a new era in the history of both Western and Eastern Europe. Just like a thousand years ago, European territories become the target of Germanic invasions. Only now it is not tribes who are moving from the north, but fighting squads.

The Normans were first seen in Northumbria, an Anglo-Saxon kingdom that occupied the northeast of modern England. Here in 789, during the reign of King Edelred, people appeared near the walls of the city of Dorset, introducing themselves as merchants. The local ruler came out to them and was killed. However, the starting point of the Viking attacks is usually considered to be June 8, 793, when the northern pagans attacked the monastery of St. Cuthbert on Lindisfarne (modern Holy Island), a small island off the northeast coast of England. “Just think,” wrote the Northumbrian Alcuin, who lived at the court of Charlemagne, “for almost three hundred and fifty years our ancestors lived in this beautiful country, and never before had they experienced such horror as we have just experienced from the pagans. It was impossible to imagine that they were capable of making such a voyage. Look at St. Cuthbert's Church, spattered with the blood of Christ's servants, stripped of all its ornaments!”

From that time on, for more than two centuries, first the northern and then the Mediterranean coast of Europe became the object of constant attacks by robbers from the north. Fortunately for the Europeans, the Vikings were not an organized force: each leader assembled a squad at his own risk, and when they met, they usually fought each other.

"From the Varangians to the Greeks"

Europe is making efforts to introduce the northern savages to faith in Christ. The Frankish missionary Ansgarius, who lived for several years in Denmark, in the possessions of King Harald Lak, in 830 went further north on a merchant ship to the Swedish Birka. “When they had gone halfway,” writes the chronicler, “they met robber Vikings. The merchants on the ship defended themselves courageously and at first even successfully; but upon repeated onslaught the attackers overpowered them; I had to give them all my goods along with the ship; They themselves miraculously managed to escape death and escaped on land. The royal gifts that they were supposed to convey, all their property was lost, except for small things that they accidentally had with them or took with them when jumping into the water.”

If a Viking died on a campaign, his relatives placed a memorial stone in his homeland with an inscription in runes. Such stones have survived to this day:

“Tjagn, and Gautdjarv, and Sunnvat, and Thorolf, they ordered this stone to be installed after Toki, their father. He died in Greece."

Ancient Rome is one of the first and at the same time the most striking example of globalization in the history of mankind. The legacy of the Roman state is truly colossal. It is so great and palpable in our Western world that we can all consider ourselves a little Roman. And now we will talk about some of the most significant things that, even if they were not invented in Rome, came into “fashion” precisely thanks to him.

1. Latin alphabet


Where is the Latin alphabet used?

The most obvious piece of Roman heritage. Today, half the world speaks and writes languages ​​based on the Latin alphabet. The Latin alphabet itself, according to the most popular (and plausible) theory of scientists, appeared as a result of the adaptation of the Etruscan alphabet and the addition of Greek elements to it.

2. Concrete


Only the Romans appreciated this material.

Concrete was invented by people long before the Romans. However, it was the Romans who fully appreciated all the advantages of this material. In the central and western part of the empire, literally everything was built from concrete, from workshop buildings and residential buildings, to temples, aqueducts, government and cultural buildings.
Moreover, the Romans made special concrete, incredibly strong and durable! Scientists have only recently discovered its secret. The whole point was that the Romans used sea water and volcanic soot to strengthen the material.

3. Paved roads and stone bridges


The Romans were the first to widely build stone bridges.

As with concrete, people have been building roads and bridges all over the world since before the Romans. However, in the “western” part of our planet, it was they who decided that it would be nice to make roads durable and bridges more durable. As a result of the construction of these infrastructure facilities, stone and concrete began to be actively used. The need for good roads was obvious during the pax romana (the era of Roman prosperity), the Roman Empire occupied almost the entire known world and was the largest state on our planet. Roman paved roads remain to this day.

4. Road web


Roman roads have survived to this day.

Roman roads are of course no longer in use today where they remain. However, the Romans left us another gift. The transport web of Europe and Asia Minor is still determined by the places where Roman roads passed. Many modern highways and highways today coincide with ancient Roman ones.

5. Plumbing


The Romans also popularized aqueducts.

It will be difficult to patent the authorship of the water supply system to the Romans. They tried to build aqueducts back in ancient Babylon. However, it was the Romans who began to use aqueducts wherever they could. Unlike all predecessor civilizations, the Romans used aqueducts not only for irrigation, but also to supply water to cities, as well as industrial sites: craft districts and resource extraction sites. The city of Rome alone was supplied by 11 aqueducts! Today, more or less preserved aqueducts can be found throughout Europe: in Italy, France, Germany and other places.

6. Sewerage


The largest cities and the largest sewers for them were among the Romans.

It was the Romans who made sewage not just “fashionable”, but vital for large cities. Roman sewers were used both to drain sewage and to drain storm water. At first these were rather trivial cesspools and ditches, but later the Romans began to pave them with stone and even make underground tunnels! The first Roman sewer was the Cloaca Maxima, which is located in Rome itself. By the way, it has survived to this day. They even use it! True, today it is exclusively for draining rainwater.

7. Regular, professional army


The militia is good, but the army is even better.

Before the Romans, there were no regular armies as such. In ancient Greece, Egypt and the East, armies, as a rule, gathered in the form of militias when they were needed for protection or, on the contrary, for a military campaign against their neighbors. The number of “professional” warriors in all early states was negligible and most often ended up as the personal protection of the ruler and the temple guard.

The history of Rome is the history of wars, external and internal. And throughout the history of this state, its army has also developed, which has come a long way from the police and militia described above, to a regular and, moreover, a professional army. It was the Romans who changed the concept of a warrior to a soldier, realizing that a large state constantly needs those who will defend its interests with arms in hand.

It is noteworthy that the final transition to a regular army occurred due to the economic crisis in the state. The unemployment rate in the country is growing at a terrible rate due to the ruin of peasant farms. The solution was found by Guy Mari, who began to recruit all free residents of the country (not just citizens), promising a salary and land upon retirement for military service.

8. Patronage


The Romans made it fashionable to patronize the arts and sciences.

This very phenomenon in society was named after Gaius Cilnius Maecenas, the best friend of the ruler of Rome, Octavian Augustus. In modern language, one could call Maecenas the first minister of culture in the history of mankind. In fact, Guy Tsilniy did not hold any official position, but he actively sponsored cultural figures so that they would glorify state values ​​and Octavian Augustus himself.

9. Republic


The Republic is a common cause.

When modern people talk about democracy, republic and freedom, you might think that all these three words are synonyms. In fact, this is not at all true. The democracy of Athens had nothing to do with the Republic of Rome, and the latter is precisely the grandfather of all republican forms of government.

It was the Romans who were the first to appreciate the benefits of the division of power, realizing that its concentration in the hands of one person could be dangerous for the entire society. Ironically, it was the concentration of power in one hand already in the imperial period that would become one of the gravediggers of the ancient state.

Nevertheless, for a long time the Romans actually managed to successfully share power in society and achieve public consensus among all free inhabitants of the country. Even if at times, for this, the poorest representatives of society had to blackmail the richest with mass migration to other lands, or even take up arms.

10. Citizenship


Anyone who lives and is free can be a citizen.

Perhaps the most important heritage of Rome, which today, one way or another, people use. The concept of “citizen” existed in many ancient states. However, only the Romans eventually came to the conclusion that all free people should be citizens of the empire, regardless of where they were born and in what part of the state they live.

11. Christianity


Sim you will win.

For a long time in the Roman Empire, Christians were considered a dangerous Jewish sect. However, everything changed under Constantine the Great, who, after the Battle of Rome, equalized all religions in rights. He will transfer the same cross from Jerusalem to the new capital of the state - Constantinople. Already Theodosius I the Great will make Christianity the state religion. Thus, thanks to Rome, the Christian faith will begin to spread throughout the world.

12. Social mobility


The Roman Empire almost surpassed the modern United States in social mobility.

Finally, I would like to talk about one more “gift”. Like all ancient states, Rome was a slave-owning state. It was in ancient Rome that the concept of “classical slavery” was formed, that terrible phenomenon that today seems like absolute savagery. But with all this, terrible Rome was strikingly different from any other state in the matter of social mobility.

Before Rome, in some ancient Greece, Egypt, Babylon, people died as they were born. For many centuries after Rome, people died as they were born. And only in Rome, for the first time, people began to actively use social mobility. Here slaves became free, freedmen rose to the aristocracy, and ordinary soldiers made their way to the emperor.

Post scriptum


Mausoleum of a simple baker.

The hero himself.

Today, in modern Rome, in the city center, near the Colosseum and the ruins of the Forum, you can find a small mausoleum. The owner of this mausoleum was not an emperor, not a senator, or even a respectable citizen. Its owner is a simple baker - Mark Virgil Eurysak. He was born a slave in a family of Greek migrants, was able to gain freedom, entered into an agreement with the country's capital for the supply of bread and became so rich that he was eventually able to afford this very monument for himself and his wife.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http:// www. allbest. ru/

ABOUTheadship

Introduction

Main factors and trends in cultural development

Roman law

The science

Art

Meal'n'Real

Artistic design and internal form of Roman culture

Character of culture and conservative morality

Conclusion

Literature

Applications

Introduction

There is still a widespread idea that ancient Roman culture is not original, because the Romans tried to imitate the unattainable examples of classical Greek culture, adopting everything and creating practically nothing of their own. However, the latest research shows the original nature of the culture of Ancient Rome, because it represents a certain unity that arose as a result of a combination of the original with borrowed cultural innovations. We should not forget the essential point that the ancient Roman and ancient Greek cultures were formed and developed on the basis of the ancient civil community. Its entire structure predetermined the scale of basic values ​​that, one way or another, guided all fellow citizens. These values ​​included: the idea of ​​the significance and original unity of the civil community with the inextricable connection between the good of the individual and the good of the entire collective; the idea of ​​the supreme power of the people; the idea of ​​the closest connection between the civil community and the gods and heroes who care about its welfare. This perception of the deity in both Greece and Rome opened up space for free search in the field of philosophy, science, art and religion itself, not bound by dogmas and canons. The absence of a priestly caste is also significant. It should also be noted that the political life of both the Greek city-states and Rome, the struggle of leaders of various directions who sought to enlist the support of the people's assembly, open trials, which played a significant role in politics and attracted masses of listeners, stimulated the development of oratory, the ability to persuade, contributed to the refinement of logical argumentation and determined the methods of philosophy and science. The similarity of many basic features created favorable conditions for the mutual influence of cultures, and above all, for the influence of Greek culture on Roman culture.

cultural ancient rome law science

Main factors and trends in cultural development

From the very beginning of its existence, Rome waged constant wars with its neighbors, which largely determined its organization, its entire structure of life and history. If the Greeks created myths about gods and demigods, then for the Romans the center of their mythology was Rome itself, its heroic victorious people, those who fought and died for its greatness. The gods, according to the Romans, only helped them win, thereby showing their special affection for the Roman people. Iron military discipline demanded military virtues - courage, loyalty, steadfastness, stern inflexibility, proud dignity. Such virtues were required not only for war, but also for peaceful life, for fulfilling the duty of a good citizen. The relations between patricians and plebeians also had their own characteristics - the struggle for various laws, wrested by the plebeians from their opponents, acquired paramount importance, which determined the special role of law in the life of society. Both sides took advantage of religion, which was initially very close to law. The close connection of religion with law, with political struggle, on the one hand, increased its importance in the life of society, on the other, contributed to its formalization, detailing the various ways of communicating with the gods, recognizing their will. This excluded flights of fancy and personal initiative in the religious sphere, which did not become a source of poetic creativity. The mentioned differences largely determined the path of the Romans' assimilation of Greek culture.

It is not surprising that here we are faced with an interesting phenomenon - if Greek art and literature were successfully “transplanted” onto Roman soil, then Greek mathematics and logic did not take root on it. Logic ceased to be a moment of scientific research; the logical knowledge of antiquity seemed to “dry up” due to the intellectual level of the “consumers” of Roman culture, their practicality and sobriety. As a result, developed logical traditions became impoverished; early Latin translations were characterized by superficiality and confusion in terminology. All this is explained by the specifics of Roman culture: strength, not sophistication, power, not speed, massiveness, not beauty, utilitarianism, not harmony in everyday life, fact, not imagination, dominates in art; mercilessly realistic portrait painting and majestic sculpture are characteristic of her. “Strength clothed in greatness” was the Roman ideal that blocked the development of logic and mathematics. It is clear that the Graeco-Roman, ancient culture that gradually formed as the Roman power grew, which turned into the Roman Empire, not only spread in the Roman provinces, but also absorbed the achievements of the cultures of the Etruscans, Western and Eastern peoples. However, absorbing foreign cultural values ​​and samples, Roman culture evolves in its social logic, maintaining its integrity at different stages of evolution and borrowing only what does not contradict this integrity.

Roman law

The importance of law was great in ancient Roman culture, the study, commentary and development of which was considered a matter worthy of all respect. A good legal education received in special schools could open the way to the upper classes for people who did not belong to them by origin; the most famous example is Cicero. For many centuries, Roman jurists developed and improved the law, adapting it to the real needs of life; Roman law became a model for subsequent legislators and formed the basis of the Napoleonic Code and a number of other normative documents of New and Contemporary times.

We know practically nothing about ancient Roman law. From the “royal laws” only meager passages interpreting sacred law have reached us. The basis for all further development of law was the Laws of the XII Tables, compiled in 451-450. BC. The Romans’ respect for these laws was partly determined by their general conservatism, the cult of the “morals of their ancestors,” and partly by the fact that certain foundations of the Roman civil community on the basis of which they were formed, with all modifications, continued to live until the complete disintegration of the ancient world and its culture. The laws of the XII tables also contained a number of elements of customary law inherent in other nations closely related to each other.

At the same time, the Laws of the XII Tables were already distinguished by a number of features specific to the Roman civil community, which retained their significance at all stages of the evolution of Roman law. First of all, these are provisions concerning agrarian relations, according to which the civil community continued to be the supreme owner of the land and controlled its management. Also indicative is the right to acquire land as a result of two years of use of it; it continued to operate throughout Roman history. Only a Roman citizen could own land on the territory of Rome, hence the formula “mine according to Quirite law” and the inextricable connection between citizenship and land ownership.

The community's concern for good cultivation of the land also affected the special structure of the Roman family, according to the Romans themselves, which had no analogues among any other peoples. Its peculiarity, as is known, was the exclusive right of the father to all resources belonging to the family: real and movable property and people under his authority - wife, sons with their wives and children, slaves. He could arbitrarily dispose of their labor force, could hire them out, sell them, punish them up to and including death, although custom required a family court in such cases. It is usually believed that such power of the father over all the resources of the family ensured the most effective cultivation of the land in the difficult farming conditions of Ancient Rome.

A number of provisions of the Laws of the XII Tables concern the rights of Roman citizens. First of all, this is the article according to which the last decree of the people is a binding law; then a law prohibiting the execution of a Roman citizen without the sanction of the highest legislative and judicial authority. This also includes the prohibition of conferring any privileges on individuals. Thus, the equality of citizens before the law was affirmed, and the opportunity, so common in other early societies, to grant a person who was not one of the elected masters the administration of any territory, the collection of taxes from the population, etc., was excluded. Control over the entire territory of Rome and its population belonged only to a collective of citizens. Perhaps the law that punished the death penalty for composing and publishing a song that dishonored someone was also connected with this.

According to the Laws of the XII Tables, other crimes were punishable by death: the night theft of someone else's harvest, for which the culprit was crucified on a tree and doomed to Ceres, arson of a building or grain compressed and lying near the house, for which the culprit was chained, beaten and burned. This also includes permission to kill with impunity a thief caught at the scene of a crime at night, and during the day a thief who defended himself with a weapon. False witnesses were thrown from the Tarpeian rock; A judge or arbitrator convicted of bribery, a person who raised enemies against Rome or betrayed a citizen to the enemies, was executed. According to Augustine, the Laws of the XII Tables provided, in addition to execution and fines, also shackles, flogging, talion (the principle of criminal liability, when the punishment is identical to the harm caused), dishonor, exile and slavery.

As class contradictions deepened, punishments for Roman citizens became more and more severe, and their equality before the law disappeared due to social differentiation, as evidenced by the cruel punishments issued by Augustus and his successors. The court ceased to be a public spectacle, processes under autocracy lost their political significance, the role of emotions decreased accordingly, and a subtle and comprehensive knowledge of the law, the ability to interpret it and apply it to a specific case increased in value. Meanwhile, the law became more and more complex, which led to its systematization, which is represented by the Guy's Institutes. It should also be noted that the jurists of the time of the Empire were well-known in their attitude towards ancient law: on the one hand, it was recognized as an unshakable basis, on the other hand, new trends paved the way for themselves. During this same period, the famous principle of the “presumption of innocence” was finally formed, according to which, if for one reason or another the question of a person’s status or the right of a slave to freedom came to court and the case turned out to be doubtful, it should have been decided in favor of freedom. As a result of long evolution, Roman law became flexible, which allowed it to be adequate to the changing social reality.

The science

Roman science was also unique, proceeding from the ideas of an eternal, animate, indivisible and perfect cosmos - there was no antinomy between nature and man. Violent methods of mastering nature, the desire to correct or improve the initially established part-whole relationship at any cost (which is typical for modern technical civilization) were excluded by the very structure of the Roman world order. Roman science was not the dominant force in society due to the peculiarities of the existing culture; there was no social institution of scientists and groups of narrow specialists, like modern ones.

In the Roman Empire, a distinction was made between speculative (theoretical) and empirical (practical) sciences; This also included the arts (sciences) that satisfied the needs of luxury. Practical sciences are closer to reality and are dictated by necessity: these are medicine, agriculture, construction and military affairs, the art of navigation, law and other vital areas of knowledge. Studies in these sciences were traditionally considered worthy of a “noble” person and included knowledge of grammar, rhetoric, dialectics, arithmetic, astronomy, geometry and music. These subjects were part of the circle of Greek education and upbringing, and were also the basis of all practical knowledge throughout ancient history.

Speculative (theoretical) sciences are not directly related to practice (Aristotle put them above all others). The most important of them is philosophy, which is divided into physics, ethics and logic, which constitutes the method of philosophical presentation. Physics deals with questions of the structure of the universe and the laws of nature; ethics examines a person’s connections with society and his place in the cosmic whole, his position in the world and social order. Roman philosophy had all the philosophical schools of antiquity - Platonism, Stoicism, Pythagoreanism, skepticism, Epicureanism, etc., which allowed the ancient Romans to comprehend their position in the world.

The originality of Roman science is due to the nature of the worldview, in which Greek, Hellenistic and purely Roman cultural traditions were intertwined. Already in the era of the Republic, Roman culture became bilingual - the highest Roman families spoke and read Greek, which was considered a sign of education and good form; at the same time, thanks to the work of philological scientists, the Latin language is developing a categorical apparatus capable of conveying all the subtleties and complexities of the Hellenistic cultural and scientific tradition. Therefore, science in the Roman Empire became multilingual (Apulei wrote in Latin, and Marcus Aurelius and Aelian wrote in Greek). In addition, Roman science was multidirectional: the theoretical heritage was the privilege of foreigners, while people of practical knowledge like Vitruvius, Celsus, Frontinus sought to use the achievements of the Greeks for the glory of Rome. And the accumulated stock of practical knowledge and experience - Roman civil engineering, Roman sanitation and hygiene, etc. - was the pride of Rome. If we take into account that no culture with centuries-old traditions can exist on knowledge borrowed from outside without adapting it to its own value system, then the uniqueness of Roman science becomes understandable.

Art

Roman art also has its own appearance, which arose from a mixture of local (mainly Etruscan) art traditions with Greek influence. Roman art was also influenced by various peoples - the Germans, Gauls, Celts, etc., who were part of the multinational Roman Empire, but these influences did not significantly change the basic features of Roman art. Its artistic form is the result of ideological preconditions specific to Rome. Roman art is a continuation of Greek, therefore, thanks to the admiration of the Romans for Greek art, most of the creations of the Greek classics were preserved in Roman copies.

From the Etruscans Roman art received its main inheritance. Roman architecture took a lot from Etruscan architecture - the round shape of the plan and arch, which was characteristic of the city gates of Etruscan cities. The Romans turned the arch into a triumphal portal through which the winner passed. This form, such as the design of the vault, was preserved in the new European architecture.

The Romans created huge architectural structures and buildings. Forums, baths, amphitheatres, palaces, temples, fortress walls, etc. were built, which even today delight with their monumentality, thoughtfulness and beauty of architectural forms.

In the field of sculpture, the Romans were also followers of the Etruscans. They borrowed the custom of creating funerary masks and portraits on the sarcophagi of the dead, and from these tomb masks the Roman portrait developed widely based on a realistic reflection of reality. The Roman sculptor did not create an idealized image in a portrait, but depicted specific individuals, emphasizing the portrait resemblance. Roman sculpture did not create generalized images of athletes, as was customary among the Greeks. In general, the naked body is rarely found among the Romans, and if it does occur, it is always as if with some kind of “excuse.” Roman monumental sculpture creates statues dressed in togas, seriously engaged in their work.

Roman art also had significant success in painting. An original painting is created, different from the Greek one. The Roman painter, first of all, strives to reflect the surrounding nature and arrange the figures in space. He does not achieve a realistic reflection of reality, but creates certain illusions of it, emphasizes the internal space linearly, although without achieving perspective (which appears much later). All this gives Roman painting a certain advantage over Greek.

Roman poetry is also beautiful, the golden age of which began in the era of Augustus. One of the famous poets is Virgil Maron, who created the poems “Georgia”, “Aeneid” and “Shepherd’s Songs”. In the work of Horace Flaccus, Latin poetry reached its highest form of development. Taking Greek lyric poets, especially Alcaeus, as a model, he created several odes. In them he glorified the personality and work of Augustus, Roman weapons, as well as the joys of love and friendship and the contemplative quiet life of the poet-philosopher. An outstanding poet of the “golden age” was Ovid Nason, who wrote many poems about love. His poem “The Art of Love” was a kind of instruction to lovers on how to achieve love, which aroused the wrath of Augustus, who saw in Ovid’s poems a parody of his legislation on strengthening the family life of the Roman nobility and exiled the poet outside the empire. And subsequently, Roman poetry and prose of Juvenal, Apuleius, Seneca and others became widespread.

Meal'n'Real

It should be emphasized the pragmatic nature of all Roman art, the task of which was to strengthen the existing order. In ancient Rome, to use modern terminology, programs of mass influence on the population were carried out; they were expensive, but the effect was enormous. These included gladiator fights and “combat programs”: “Sometimes the arena was filled with water, thus turning it into a naumachia: fish and various sea monsters were released into the water; naval battles were also staged here, for example, the Battle of Salamis between the Athenians and the Persians or the battle of the Corinthians with the Corcyrians. In 46 BC. a battle was arranged between the Syrian and Egyptian fleets on a lake that Caesar deliberately ordered to be dug on the Campus Martius; 2,000 oarsmen and 1,000 sailors took part in the battle.

A similar battle was staged by Augustus in 2 AD. on an artificial lake on the other side of the Tiber. The number of participants reached 3000. But all these games were overshadowed by a large naval battle, which was staged during the reign of Claudius on Lake Fucin. Here two fleets opposed each other - the Sicilian and the Rhodian, and 19,000 people fought on both sides” (P. Giro).

The principle of “bread and circuses”, characteristic of the way of life of Ancient Rome, had ideological significance and carried moral and political information to the audience. Spectacles served as a very effective means of strengthening power, be it in republican or imperial Rome. There is a story that one day Augustus reproached the pantomime Pylades for his rivalry with his partner, to which Pylades replied: “It is to your advantage, Caesar, that the people are busy with us.” The spectacles pursued a very specific goal - to give the thoughts of the crowd a certain direction in favor of the existing regime. This was achieved by the splendor and luxury of festivals, spectacles and buildings that influenced the imagination and fantasy of the masses.

Artistic design and internal form of Roman culture

Studies of various aspects of the Roman way of life reveal a certain universal tendency in it. It turns out that the principles of design in the field of artistic construction, the categories of theoretical thought and the image of social reality deposited in the popular consciousness reveal a certain isomorphism in Ancient Rome. They are united by a common idea of ​​​​the changeable surface of existence, which envelops its constant basis - a half-concept - a half-image, which, however, had indisputable foundations in objective reality and was realized in it. This is what can be called the internal form of culture.

The dialectic of the externally transitory and the internally abiding arose from the very objective nature of Roman life. Let us remember: the ancient world “consisted of essentially poor nations,” and its basic form, namely the city-state, or polis, corresponded to a very limited level of social wealth. Significant historical development could not fit into such a social form, it disintegrated, periodically plunged it into severe crises, gave rise to wars, brought to life miracles of patriotism or villainy, selflessness and greed, exploits and crimes. But the limitations of the productive forces of society and the corresponding character of the polis were determined by the very nature of the ancient world, its place in the history of mankind, and therefore the polis eternally perished and was eternally reborn with the same unchanged properties. The legionnaire, who had walked thousands of miles, seen dozens of cities and countries, looted a lot of gold, wanted the same thing from the commander - to be demobilized while he was alive, to receive an allotment, to settle down on the land, to join the local community, to live the way his great-grandfathers lived. And no matter what different countries the army of the emperors conquered, the demobilized veterans always founded their cities the same, in Africa or in Brittany, with the same highways - north-south and east-west, with the same forum, temple and basilica at their intersection , with the same management system, which copied a timeless standard that was common to all - the management system of the city of Rome. Behind the flickering changes of life, the deep and motionless layers of existence were truly felt.

Nature of cultureand conservative morality

It is clear that although Rome grew from a small city-state into a gigantic empire, its people retained the old ceremonies and customs almost unchanged. In light of this, it is not surprising that the shocking display of wealth involved in the use of stretchers by some Romans caused widespread irritation. It is rooted not so much in politics or ideology, but in those hidden, but indisputably living layers of social consciousness, where the centuries-old historical experience of the people, which has been outlived on the surface, has been molded into forms of everyday behavior, into unconscious tastes and aversions, into the traditions of life. At the end of the republic and in the 1st century. AD Fantastic amounts of money circulated in Rome. Emperor Vitellius “ate” 900 million sesterces in a year, Nero and Claudius’ temporary worker Vibius Crispus was richer than Emperor Augustus. Money was the main value in life. But the general idea of ​​what is moral and proper was still rooted in natural communal forms of life, and monetary wealth was desirable, but at the same time somehow unclean and shameful. Augustus's wife Livia herself spun wool in the atrium of the imperial palace, the princesses enacted laws against luxury, Vespasian saved pennies at a time, Pliny glorified ancient frugality, and eight Syrian lecticians, each of whom should have cost at least half a million sesterces, insulted the money laid down in time immemorial. but understandable to everyone ideas about what is decent and acceptable.

It's not just about wealth. The freeborn Roman citizen spent most of his time in the crowd that filled the Forum, the basilica, the baths, gathered in the amphitheater or circus, gathered for a religious ceremony, and sat around the tables during a collective meal. Such a stay in the crowd was not an external and forced inconvenience; on the contrary, it was felt as a value, as a source of acute collective positive emotion, for it galvanized a feeling of community solidarity and equality, which had almost disappeared from real social relations, insulted daily and hourly, but nested in the very the root of Roman life, which stubbornly did not disappear and, all the more, imperiously demanded compensatory satisfaction. The dry and angry Katan the Elder melted his soul during the collective meals of the religious college; Augustus, in order to increase his popularity, revived the meetings, ceremonies and communal meals of the inhabitants of urban areas; the rural cult of the “good boundary”, which united neighbors, slaves and masters for several days in January, during a break between field work, survived and was preserved throughout the early empire; circus games and mass shows were considered part of the people's business and were regulated by officials. Attempts to stand out from the crowd and stand above it offended this archaic and enduring sense of Roman, polis, civil equality, associated with the morals of Eastern despotism. The hatred of Juvenal, Martial, their compatriots and contemporaries for the upstarts, the rich, the proud, floating in open lektika (stretchers) over the heads of their fellow citizens, looking at them “from the heights of their soft pillows,” grew from here.

The everyday necessity of life was felt as reprehensible, as contrary to the vague, violated, but omnipresent and intelligible norm - “the mores of the ancestors,” and this constant comparison of this directly visible, everyday existence with the distant, but immutable paradigm of ancient sanctions and restrictions, virtues and prohibitions constitutes one of the most striking and specific features of Roman culture. Life and development, correlated with the archaic norm, suggested either its constant violation and therefore contained something crisis-ridden and immoral, or required external conformity with it contrary to the natural course of events of reality itself and therefore contained something cunning and hypocritical. This was just a universal tendency that explains a lot in Roman history and Roman culture.

Zconclusion

At the end of the 5th century. Ancient Rome as a world empire ceased to exist, but its cultural heritage did not perish. Today it is an essential ingredient of Western culture. The Roman cultural heritage shaped and was embodied in the thinking, languages ​​and institutions of the Western world. A certain influence of ancient Roman culture is visible both in the classical architecture of public buildings and in the scientific nomenclature constructed from the roots of the Latin language; many of its elements are difficult to isolate, so firmly have they entered the flesh and blood of everyday culture, art and literature. We are no longer talking about the principles of classical Roman law, which underlies the legal systems of many Western states and the Catholic Church, built on the basis of the Roman administrative system.

Literature

1. History of Ancient Rome / ed. IN AND. Kuzishchin. M., 1982.

2. Knabe G.S. Ancient Rome - history and modernity. M., 1986.

3. Culture of Ancient Rome / ed. E.S. Golubtsova. M., 1986. T. 1 and 2.

4. Culturology: textbook. Manual for universities / under. ed. prof. A.N. Markova.- 3rd ed. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2005.

5. Mamontov S. Fundamentals of cultural studies. M.: Art. 1994.

6. Resources of the website www.ancientrome.ru.

PAppendix 1

View of the acropolis at Cumae.

Foundation of the Temple of Apollo and the Sacred Street (via Sacra).

PAppendix 2

The remains of the Temple of Apollo Palatine and its reconstruction, which was carried out in 1838 by J.J. Clerget.

Rome, Palatine.

PAppendix 3

Shepherd.

Relief from a sarcophagus.

Rome.

PAppendix 4

Sarcophagus of Nonius Zephus from Ostia.

Con. I century BC e.

Rome, Vatican Museums, Chiaramonti Museum.

PAppendix 5

Fabritsiev Bridge.

62 BC e.

Rome.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Features and circumstances of the formation of the culture of Ancient Rome, stages of its development and significance in the history of mankind. Religion, mythology and philosophy of Rome, their origins and directions of formation. Science and education, disciplines studied and success in them.

abstract, added 12/22/2009


Description of the legends about the brothers Romulus and Remus as the founders of Rome. Archaeological research and the history of the emergence of Ancient Rome from the point of view of science. Research of ancient Roman cultural heritage: remains of the city, buildings, amphitheatres, temples and columns.

abstract, added 11/26/2012


The practicality of the ancient Romans, the weak degree of their talent for creativity. Borrowing from the Etruscans in the creative sphere. Features of architecture, sculpture and painting of Ancient Rome. Types of Roman literature. Specifics of the Roman theater.

presentation, added 10/23/2013


Ancient Rome as one of the leading civilizations of the Ancient World and Antiquity. Territorial groups of cultural monuments of Ancient Rome, confirmation of its foundation, engineering structures and public buildings, features of Roman funerary architecture.

abstract, added 03/25/2010


Cultural heritage of Ancient Rome. The greatest flowering of Rome. Works of Roman folk art. Prayers and appeals to the gods. Roman comedy and tragedy. Roman architecture and periods of its development. Art and sculpture, writing and language.

test, added 03/12/2011


Characteristics of early Christian art of Ancient Rome, historical features of its appearance. The image of the Church and the picturesque decoration of the walls. The main directions of early Christian art of Ancient Rome: architecture, sculpture, painting, literature.

course work, added 07/26/2010


The main stages of the formation and development of the Olympic Games, their social and cultural significance for ancient Greek society. Opening ceremony and rules of the Games, types of competitions. Gladiator fights of Ancient Rome and the procedure for training gladiators.

test, added 10/18/2009


Ancient culture and civilization. The main directions of development of Roman culture. The variety of structures and the scale of architecture in Ancient Rome. Stages of development of Roman mythology, borrowing of Greek gods. Roman art as an artistic phenomenon.

abstract, added 11/14/2010


One of the main problems of cultural studies as a science is questions of the theory and history of world culture. Own laws of functioning inherent in culture. Characteristics of the periods of development of Roman culture corresponding to the main stages of the history of Ancient Rome.

test, added 04/06/2013


Features of ancient Greek religion. Architecture of Ancient Greece. The main features of the Doric style. Fundamentals of Greco-Roman poetry. Literature and art of the Hellenistic era. Hellenistic science and philosophy. Culture of Ancient Rome. Genre of high tragedy.