Concept of 'Barbarous Europe'.
The Term "barbarians" - "bearded", having the Greek origin, has undergone the certain evolution in scientific and ordinary consciousness. Greeks of classical epoch named so all other peoples. Such opposition of "we" - "outsiders" is present in any cultures. Hence, Greeks included in concept "barbarians" and representatives advanced ancient oriental civilisations: Egyptians, Babylonians, Lydians, and Phoenicians. From the point of view of ancient Greek thinkers, for example, Aristotle, such division existed and will exist always.
The Romans, former pupils and successors of Greeks apprehended this terminology. But they bring about an extensive coloniser politics, first of all in Europe (Iberia, Gallia, Illyria, Thrace, Britain), involving in an orbit of the activity and a way of life independent peoples. Those, accepting the Roman order, "Pax Romana", as though ceased be "barbarians", becoming, on modern expression by "civilised people", (as, for example, Gallo-Romans). Hence, "barbarians", from the point of view of Rome are peoples and tribes of Europe, yet not had time to perceive an antiques culture (or it is active opposed to this). Thus, the Romans perceived " Barbarous Europe " - "Barbaricum" as a certain ethnic-cultural integrity.
The Roman understanding in any measure has inherited and arisen in bowels of empire Christianity. But when it became prevailing, confession of the Christian doctrine was included in number of necessary attributes of a belonging to a civilisation also. The follower of new belief began to refer to as a proud name "Roman", opposing itself "Paganus" - to the pagan as whom it could be understood both the native of empire and the foreigner. Later the countryman was named Paganus (and not casually - in a countryside pagan rites longly kept).
Then, half christianisiried and romanisiried German have destroyed decayed Rome and have based the medieval world. But elements of the Roman ideology were kept. To tell the truth, new, feudal way is not deduced neither from antique society, nor from the Christian community, and represents generation of a "barbarous" society (for example, feudal tournament performance, probably, occurs from love of barbarians to tinsel and vanity). To some extent, it is a way for the tribe of the conquerors, which have replaced besides a habitant landscape to dominate over conquested Roman population. On the other hand, the European feudalism has, probably, and deeper roots about what speak feature of the organisation Celt to a generality supervising the Western Europe in pre-Roman times.
Despite of the introduced innovations, representation about universal empire as about the certain ideal it was kept. From here and Charles Great's crowning, and "Sacred Roman empire of the German nation", and even an imperial title of Napoleon. The western Europeans began to name "Barbarians" peoples which were not recognising religious authority Roman pontifics and political (let even fictitious) domination of new emperors. Mainly peoples of the East Europe fell under this concept.
After 16 century, in connection with secularisation of the Western Europe, last, having lost the name " the Christian world ", to epoch of Education began to be called as the world "civilised". Gradually the belonging to the Christian religion (not only in its western variant, but also as a whole) has ceased to play a role of the indicator for entry in this cultural - historical generality. Crucial importance, as well as in the Roman epoch, has received opposition of "barbarity" and "civilisation". From the similar point of view, mastering by such exotic country as Japan of some political, technological, legal standards has attached it to the Western, "civilised" world.
In scientific area the Roman understanding of "barbarians", as peoples of the ancient Europe which has been not covered with an antique civilisation was fixed. But there is also a parallel tendency to treat the term as any stage of development. For example, Marks, speaking about the periods of "barbarity" previous to the state development and "wildness followed for Morgan. This approach has except for lacks and the certain advantages. You see Greeks have realised the delimitation with next peoples since the certain period. As writes N. Nikulina "... Division into Greeks and non-Greeks " barbarians " has arisen, in essence, only in the classical period of the Greek history, after well-known Greek-Persian wars in which Greeks have gained a brilliant victory " (N. Nikulina, 1994, p. 20). And if we shall glance deep into their histories we shall see, that ancestors of Spartans have come to Balkan Peninsula in 12-th. c. BD From the Central Europe where lived side by side with ancestors the Celts, Illyrians, Germans, Balts and other, nothing being allocated among them. And others pre-Greek tribes were from different places of Europe where in any way did not surpass in the civilised to a level its other peoples. Means, they were then barbarians, similarly to the neighbours. We shall not approve "barbarians" environmental peoples began then when Greeks have counted as their those. And the transition to "civilisation" occured gradually. Macedonians, for example, were slighted as "barbarians" even after Peloponess war. Even later "civilised people" have realised itself the Romans and Italics as a whole.
The stage conception of "barbarity" has important value for the present research. It is the most probable that mythopoethic the tradition is a product of oral creativity of peoples which are taking place at a heroic, "barbarous" step of development. Indian rishas, Celtic bards Scandinavian skalds and even Greek aedas sang of gods and brave leaders with such force of images because their hearts were young. On words Levi-Strauss, in "... Those last times creators were such format what now seems outside achievable ".
And ingenious Italian J. Viko, developed in 18 century (on a material of Europe and Near East) wrote the cyclic concept of a history about two circulations of development. The first covered the Ancient world. The beginning of it is lost in depth of centuries when king-priests ruled. Over their era was triumphed with "religious times". Then there has come homeric epoch which Viko has named "heroic" from time to time. They were topped with Roman empire with the monarchic principle ratified in it. Each time, on Viko, was characterised by the type of legal norms: "The divine law", "the heroic law", "the human law". The new cycle of a history began from " the second barbarity " (we speak - the period of Great resettlement of peoples). Then " the divine right " (we shall recollect " the divine court " in legal practice) again was established. Divine times were replaced from time to time heroic (aristocratic) with their feudal wars and crusades. And, at last, in New Time there has come epoch of civil times. From the theory of the Italian thinker follows, by the way, that " human times " for outcome and we stand on a threshold of "the third barbarity".
CULTURE of BARBAROUS EUROPE: TYPOLOGY of MYTHOLOGICAL IMAGES
Speciality 24.00.01 - the theory and a history of culture
The dissertation on competition of a doctor degree of cultural science
Ethnic-cultural and chronological limits of Barbarian Europe.
Contact E-mail: email@example.com