IN lately patriotism takes over everything in our country higher value. It comes up in almost any political debate, and opponents inevitably accuse each other of lacking this feeling. But what, in essence, is patriotism and have people always loved their Motherland?
Ancient Greece: Land of the Fathers
The word “patriotism” comes from the Greek “πατρίς” (“patris”) - patronymic, or “country of fathers”. However, Greek patriotism was built on slightly different foundations than modern one. The ancient Greeks perceived only their small commune-polis, where people for the most part were related to each other, as a Motherland that needed to be loved and protected. This kind of “patriotic” feeling, based on kinship, is often found even among animals.
But the Greeks had another reason for their love for their Motherland. The fact is that only indigenous people could have the rights of a full-fledged citizen Greek polis, and then only those who owned land in the territory belonging to him. These rights meant that citizens could (and more often were required) to participate in public life: sit in court, pass laws and political decisions, engage in religious worship, etc. In return, they had to participate in the wars waged by the policy and provide themselves with ammunition. This function, in principle, also belonged to the sphere of public life of the city-state.
The source of patriotism was the fact that citizens own land (according to by and large, the policy itself) and protect it from foreign invaders. So their patriotic self-sacrifice was directly related to their own interests and the interests of their families. The ancient Greeks, although they had an idea of themselves as Hellenes and contrasted the Hellenes with the barbarians, still did not perceive the whole of Hellas as their homeland and treated the Greeks from other policies in basically the same way as representatives of other nations.
Ancient Rome: Citizenship of War and Peace
Xuan Che / flickr.com
Approximately the same system worked in ancient Rome. Roman Senate, chief political body The Roman Republic was an assembly of householders, each of whom represented the interests of himself and his family, over which he had almost absolute power.
It should be noted that this method of governance and, accordingly, the model of patriotism played a huge role in the decline of Rome. The fact is that as the boundaries expand and include more and more more people into Rome's area of influence, the republic became increasingly difficult to govern, since the conquered peoples had an ambiguous status in this system. On the one hand, they were obliged to provide troops and resources to support wars, and on the other, they had no right to accept government decisions. In this regard, in Rome there was a constant struggle between the patricians (the nobility, tracing their ancestry from the founders of the city), the plebeians (residents of Rome who did not belong to the families of the founders) and the allies (conquered peoples), because they were all obliged to participate in wars, but only patricians had the rights of full citizens.
Therefore, over time, as the territory of the Republic increased, new peoples were included in its area of influence and, as a result, the system of governance became more complex, the army - the people who performed the main civic duty in the Republic - began to acquire increasing importance. The army was directly connected with its military leader, whom it could support or not support in the struggle for power. As a result, a struggle began between the Senate and civil institutions on the one hand and the military leaders on the other. Lucky military campaign was one of the best ways gain popularity among the people and win them over to her side, since she provided the city with a flow of wealth and slaves. This means it contributed to improving the situation of its citizens.
It is no coincidence that the strengthening of popular military leaders was feared. Moreover, the Senate itself, as the population of the Republic increased, found itself separated from an increasing number of citizens, and therefore no longer represented their interests. Actually, that’s why the senators at one time killed Caesar, who became incredibly popular after the conquest of Gaul and Egypt. However, this did not prevent, but, on the contrary, even accelerated the process of transfer of power from the people and the Senate to a brilliant military leader (primarily Caesar's heir, Octavian). Gradually, the Republic, ruled by the Senate and the people, turned into an Empire with an emperor at its head. Rome effectively became imperial property, passed on by inheritance, and citizenship lost its meaning. And if before this citizenship could be obtained almost in exceptional cases and only for special merits, then after that they began to issue it to entire provinces.
As a consequence, Rome's strong urban civic culture began to decline because participation in public life was no longer helpful in lobbying, advancement, or status and respect, so the rich began to move to the countryside and freely organize their lives. there, on their property. This is how feudalism began to emerge, which subsequently divided Europe into thousands of small pieces.
Middle Ages: Patriarchy instead of patriotism
The feudal system established in Europe, like the polis system that preceded it, was based on personal relationships. Only in the polis these relations were horizontal relations of neighborhood and kinship - there all citizens took part in government social life. Feudal relations are vertical, i.e. a vassal to his liege who makes decisions for both of them in exchange for a promise of protection and support.
However, the lord could not make decisions for the vassal of his vassal - this is one of the basic political rules feudal Europe. This was due to the fact that there is no personal relationship between them, they are mediated by a third person. But with this third person, both his vassal and his liege have mutual obligations, but not towards each other.
Thus, with the help of a hierarchy of personal relationships between vassals and lords, the entire feudal system is built, completed and united by God, as the highest lord, whose direct vassals are the kings. All the rest are subjects of kings, fulfilling their will, as well as the will of God. And this citizenship did not depend at all on nationality or language. In this regard, divided Europe understood itself as a single cultural space. The main line of division between friends and foes was not nation or citizenship, but religion, because people of other faiths do not obey the God who is the supreme sovereign for all Europeans, so they cannot be trusted.
Modern Times: The Birth of a Nation
As you can see, in the eras described above, love for the place of one’s birth or for one’s country (although it would be more correct to call it a community) had purely pragmatic grounds and grew out of personal connections and trust in one’s compatriots, who were also neighbors, friends or relatives. This situation began to change for reasons similar to those that led to the decline and collapse of the Roman Empire. It's about about the excessive increase in the number of subjects in states and the impossibility of controlling them through minimum quantity intermediaries.
Sooner or later, larger, richer and more successful proto-state formations absorbed smaller ones, turning into large and clumsy bureaucratic systems in which there was too much between the lower and upper layers. long distance. The nobility, being close to the king, had much greater influence on him, which allowed her to lobby own interests at the expense of the interests of the people, gradually abandoning their main civilian tasks - military service and administrative work. As a result, the king and the nobility lost contact with the people.
The people increasingly felt their national unity, based primarily on the use common language, which in turn was built on the language used by the bureaucratic system. The participation of people of humble origin in this bureaucratic system also made it possible to perceive themselves as part of the state.
On the one hand, people from the lower strata could now change their position on the social ladder thanks to participation in this system. On the other hand, this change in situation was limited precisely by the borders of the state or, as in the case of colonies, by the borders of the colony. At the same time, a restriction was imposed in the form of knowledge of the language used by all other bureaucrats, so that it was easier for representatives of the dominant nationality to build a career than for representatives of subordinates language groups. In addition, unified education and cartography contributed to the formation of national self-identification, broadcasting to all citizens a certain image of the state, about which they previously had a very vague idea, since their world was limited to the nearest villages.
It turned out that the government was isolated from the people, but the people, who had no influence on the government and politics, at the same time carried out almost all the basic government functions, which previously belonged to government officials: first of all, administration and military service.
At the same time, the people, who were in vassal relations with the aristocracy, realizing themselves as one, also felt themselves to be the source of power. In contrast to the dominant before the presentation that the source of power is the monarch. Accordingly, if the people are the source of power, they can overthrow their rulers if they do not satisfy them. However, to do this, he must first recognize himself as a single people.
The Long 19th Century: Society versus State
Pieter Bruegel the Younger, via Wikimedia Commons
This is exactly what happened during the Great french revolution, when the people went against the king, the country rebelled against the state. If before the French fought for God and the king, now they fought for France. And it should be noted that this emerging patriotism had an exclusively critical attitude towards the existing system.
Having realized themselves as a nation, the French, invading more and more states during Napoleonic Wars, spread nationalist ideas throughout Europe like an infection. The Germans responded by realizing themselves as Germans, the Spaniards realizing themselves as Spaniards, and the Italians as Italians. And all these peoples began to consider themselves sources of power in their states. Nationalism was originally exclusively revolutionary and liberal idea, And European monarchs, by that time already connected by strong family ties with each other and until now, following the Roman emperors, who perceived their countries as their property, feared him.
It is no coincidence that, for example, in Germany, fragmented into hundreds of small principalities, princes, barons and kings suppressed nationalist uprisings aimed at unifying the country. Or we can remember how Russia suppressed the Hungarian uprising for national independence in Austria-Hungary.
However, the process of emergence national identity was already launched, and European monarchs partly used it for their own purposes back during the Napoleonic wars. Paradoxically, the royal houses of all Europe, mostly descended from German or French princes and kings and ruling giant multinational empires, found themselves forced to somehow fit themselves into the emerging national myths.
Ultimately, the monarchs of multinational empires, in order to maintain power, themselves began to reproduce national myths that consolidated the dominance of the titular nation over all others. So, for example, the formula “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality” appeared, which was intended to connect the Russian national myth with the idea of autocracy, which, in turn, protects state religion. This gave rise to internal, hitherto non-existent, interethnic contradictions within states. Which ultimately led to regular national uprisings and the collapse of all European empires.
Modern times: From love to hate
rolffimages/bigstock.com
The national idea, initially critical and progressive, quickly (in about a century) turned into its complete opposite. Patriotism turned into chauvinism. Love for one's homeland and one's people became hatred for others. Ultimately, this transformation resulted in the main tragedy of the twentieth century - the Second world war, Nazism and the Holocaust - because the patriotic feeling of the Germans and their allies, offended by the results of the First World War, got out of control and turned into the idea of national superiority.
Therefore, when we talk about patriotism, it is worth remembering the origins of this concept: good neighborly, almost family relationships people living together who cared about their homeland and each other. Patriotism is a concept that fundamentally contains a critical attitude towards the surrounding reality and the desire to transform it into better side, make your community better. Moreover, it does not matter at all who the members of this community are, as well as their nation, language, culture, religion, etc. The main thing is an attempt to jointly create better society, and not a blind belief in our own superiority on the sole basis that we belong to one group or another and have one or another set of characteristics. Patriotism is what unites people, but there is always a danger of it becoming your own complete opposite, which, on the contrary, splits society. This is not a blind belief that your country or nation is the best, but the desire to make it the best, such that you can be proud of it.
If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.
All-Russian scientific and social program
for youth and schoolchildren “Step into the future”
IV regional competition research work
students of grades 2-7 "JUNIOR"
Passport of the word "patriotism"
Nikiforova Ksenia,
MBOU "Lyantorskaya Secondary School No. 5",
6th grade
Bayramgulova Gulfiya Shakiryanovna,
teacher of Russian language and literature,
MBOU "Lyantorskaya Secondary School No. 5"
Surgutsky district
2014
I.Introduction:
topic, relevance, problem, object and subject of research 4
Goals and objectives, methods, hypothesis
II. Theoretical review.
Section 1. Etymology of the word 5 Section 2. Meaning of the word “patriot” 6
Section 3. Advantages of patriotism, how to develop patriotism in yourself,
catchphrases about patriotism 6
Section 4. Patriotism in the lyrics of M.Yu. Lermontov,
patriotism in the lyrics of A.S. Pushkin. 7
III. Practical part:
Study itself 7
Study Results 8
Analysis of Study 8
VI. Conclusions.
V. List of used literature.
I . Introduction
Have you ever looked at a person's passport? It contains a lot of information: where and when its owner was born, what his name is, whether he has a family, where he lives. A passport is the main document of a Russian citizen.
Not only people have a passport. For example, cars have passports - they indicate the most important technical specifications cars Attached are passports and household appliances, audio and video equipment: they tell you what this or that device is intended for and how to use it correctly.
Each word of the language can also be given its own passport. What will be written in it? First, you can indicate the origin of the word. Some words have been living in the language for a long time, they were born in it and belong to it (they are called original), some came from other languages (these are words borrowed).
Secondly, the word has age. There are words - pensioners ( outdated words), but there are only recently born words - youngsters (they are called neologisms).
Thirdly, words can have various areas consumption. Some words are known to everyone, they are understandable to everyone (they are called commonly used
words). Others are known only to the inhabitants of a certain territory ( dialectisms) or people of one specific profession ( terms and professionalisms
).
Finally, words can have a certain stylistic coloring. Some words appear only in colloquial speech(that's what they're called) colloquial words), some are rarely heard, since they are used mainly in books ( book words).
If we sum up all the information about the word, then we will get its passport. However, in order to correctly indicate one or another attribute of a word, you need to do a lot of preliminary work. Each word is unique. Even the words service units speeches have many meanings and shades. IN everyday life we do not think about each individual word, but perceive them together. There are words in the language that hurt and offend. There are words in speech that support us in difficult moment, there are words that inspire noble deeds and even exploits.
There are words - like wounds, words - like judgment, -
They do not surrender and are not taken prisoner.
A word can kill, a word can save,
With a word you can lead the shelves with you.
I will explore the word patriotism
Relevance. Currently, there is a need to understand society’s attitude towards patriotism, towards the Motherland, towards the country.
Problem: attitude towards patriotic education in schools.
Object of study: 6th grade school students, teachers, parents.
Subject of research: study of understanding and attitude towards patriotism
Target project: to create a passport of the word “patriotism”, that is, to consider it with different sides.
Tasks:
1.Determine the origin of the word “patriotism”.
2.Analyze semantic properties of this word.
3. The meaning of the word patriotism in dictionaries.
4. Identify words related to the word “patriotism”, synonyms for the word “patriotism”.
5.Check how the word is used in literature.
6.Conduct sociological research(questionnaire) among students. middle school in order to determine: students’ attitudes to patriotism.Research methods:
Questioning of school students, teachers, parents.
Hypothesis:
I assume that the word patriotism is not familiar enough to students, they will have difficulty understanding this word. Thesis: Each word can be given a passport. This can only be done after careful linguistic analysis.
Theoretical review
Section I.
Etymology of the word
Word borrowed directly from French or through German in the meaning of a person devoted and loving to his homeland. Borrowing time is defined in different ways. According to some sources - the 16th century. According to others - much later - in Peter I, during whose time the idea of serving the fatherland and, above all, the military was especially strong. Therefore, at the very beginning, patriotism as a trait of a patriot hadthe meaning of military patriotism.
Origins - in Latin word patriota. It goes back to the Greek - patriōtēs – patria descendants, relatives, land of fathers. Therefore, the starting point of the entire etymological chain is patēr- father. Other sources note that, having entered Latin from ancient Greek, it also had the meaning “countryman.”
Main derivative word from the word "patriot" - patriotism. In our time, it means love for one’s Fatherland, devotion to it and the people, readiness for sacrifices and exploits in the name of the interests of the Fatherland. Appeared and figurative meanings- devotion to something, ardent to anything.
Section 2. The meaning of the word patriot
Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language, Dal Vladimir
patriot
a patriot, a lover of the fatherland, a zealot for its good, a lover of the fatherland, a patriot or fatherlander. Patriotism m. love for the fatherland. Patriotic, fatherland, domestic, full of love to the fatherland. Patrimonial, fatherly, otniy, fatherly, fatherly.
Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. D.N. Ushakov
patriot
patriot, m. (Greek patriotes - countryman). a person devoted to his people, loving his fatherland, ready to make sacrifices and perform feats in the name of the interests of his homeland. Soviet patriots vigilantly guard the borders home country. The Bolsheviks, exposing the role of social patriots in the war of 1914-1918, pointed out that they, social patriots, were socialists in words and patriots of the imperialist fatherland in deeds. A leavened patriot is a person filled with leavened (see) patriotism.
Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. S.I.Ozhegov, N.Yu.Shvedova.
patriot
1. A person imbued with patriotism. True p.
2. transfer, what. A man devoted interests of some. affairs, deeply attached to something. P. of his plant.
and. patriot, -i.
New explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.
patriot
He who loves his fatherland, is devoted to his people, is ready to make sacrifices and heroic deeds in the name of the interests of his Motherland.
decomposition One who is devoted to something, loves something passionately.
Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998
voluntary organization patriots
underground Komsomol youth group during the Great Patriotic War in the village. Alekseevka, Zaporozhye region. in 1942 (approx. 40 people). Most of the participants were executed by the Nazis.
union Polish patriots
UNION OF POLISH PATRIOTS (UPP) mass anti-fascist organization in 1943-46. Founded by V. Wasilewska, A. Lampe, A. Zavadsky and others. Organizer (1943) of the Polish Army. In 1944, members of the SPP joined the Polish Committee of National Liberation.
Union of Russian Patriots
in 1943-48 (after 1946 - Soviet patriots), created by Russian emigrants and their children in France (one of the leaders was G.V. Shibanov); members of the Resistance Movement. After 1945 they played an active role in re-emigration.
Synonyms
Love of fatherland, loyalty, loyalty, loyalty.
Patriot, patriot, patriotism, patriotic, patriotic, patriotic, patriotic, patriotic, patriotism, patriotic,
Section 3.
Benefits of Patriotism
Patriotism gives strength from the realization that hundreds of generations of his ancestors stand invisibly behind a person.
Patriotism gives joy - from awareness of the merits and successes of one’s country.
Patriotism gives responsibility - for the family, the people and the Motherland.
Patriotism gives confidence through a sense of involvement in the fate of the country.
Patriotism gives you freedom to act for the good of your country.
Patriotism gives respect to the history, traditions and culture of the country.
Manifestations of patriotism in everyday life.
1.Liberation wars. It was patriotism, as the basis of cohesion in the face of the enemy, that helped peoples win the most terrible wars in case they were not aggressive.
2.Military service. Willingness to defend the Motherland from an external enemy is an integral sign of patriotism; the person who chose military service- shows patriotism.
3. National customs and traditions. An example of an “everyday” manifestation of patriotism can be the unique national costumes of different nations.
How to develop patriotism in yourself
1. Family education. Parents who show love and respect for their country, and instill these feelings in their children, raise their children to be patriots.
2. Interest in national culture and traditions. In order to love your people, you need to know them; By consciously studying the history of his people, a person cultivates patriotism.
3.Awareness. Patriotism involves pride in one's country's achievements; interest in information related to all aspects of the life of society and the country creates the basis for the development and manifestation of patriotism.
4. Traveling around your country. The best remedy get to know and love your homeland.
Catchphrases about patriotism
Don't ask what your homeland can do for you - ask what you can do for your homeland.
John Kennedy -
It seems to me that the feeling of love for own people is as natural for a person as the feeling of love for God.
Patriarch Alexy II -
A patriot is a person serving his homeland, and the homeland is, first of all, the people.
Nikolai Chernyshevsky -
My friend, let’s dedicate our beautiful souls to the Fatherland
Alexander Pushkin -
It is important that you are willing to die for your country; but it is even more important that you are ready to live life for its sake. - Theodore Roosevelt
–Russia can do without each of us, but none of us can do without her; woe to the one who thinks this, double woe to the one who actually gets along without it.
There is no happiness outside the homeland, everyone should take root in their native land .
A foreign land will not become your homeland.
The highest patriotism is a passionate boundless desire for good .
Love for the homeland is not an abstract concept, but a real spiritual force that requires organization, development and culture.
In a decent person is nothing more than the desire to work for the benefit of one’s country, and comes from nothing other than the desire to do good - as much as possible and as much better as possible.
Section 4.
Patriotism in the lyrics of M.Yu. Lermontov
One of the main works of Lermontov, where patriotism is manifested, is the poem “Motherland”.
“I love my fatherland, but strange love!
My reason will not defeat her.”
In these lines the author writes about true patriotism to your homeland. It is precisely by the words “but strange love” that we understand the hidden patriotism that should be in every person.
The poem “Motherland” became one of the masterpieces not only of M.Yu. Lermontov, but also all Russian poetry. Nothing, it seems, gives such peace, such a feeling of peace, even joy, as this communication with rural Russia. This is where the feeling of loneliness recedes. M.Yu. Lermontov paints a people's Russia, bright, solemn, majestic, but despite the general life-affirming background. Why was the poet’s love for his native country so controversial nature? First of all, on the one hand, for him Russia is his Motherland, where he was born and raised. Such Russia M.Yu. Lermontov was loved and glorified. On the other hand, he saw Russia as a country ruled by rude, brutal power, suppressing all human aspirations, and most importantly, the people's will, and therefore patriotism, because people's will this is patriotism. M.Yu. Lermontov puts forward something so unusual for those times that it is necessary to emphasize this unusualness several times: “I love the Fatherland, but with a strange love,” “but I love for what, I don’t know myself,” “with a joy unfamiliar to many.” This is some kind of exceptional love for Russia, which seems to be not fully understood by the poet himself. It is clear, however, that this love manifests itself in relation to people's, peasant Russia, to its open spaces and nature.
Patriotism in the lyrics of A.S. Pushkin.
Many works of A.S. Pushkin are “filled” with great patriotism for their homeland.
So what does it teach us great poet? I think that first of all - love for your homeland, big and small. One of the main features of Pushkin’s creativity was patriotism. Every line of his poems is imbued with ardent love for Russia, for the Motherland. Here are Pushkin’s lines dedicated to Moscow:
Moscow! There is so much in this sound
For the Russian heart merged,
How much resonated in him.
The homeland for Pushkin is both the inconspicuous rowan trees growing near the house and the rickety fence:
I love the sad slope
There are two rowan trees in front of the hut,
Gate, broken fence.
Paintings native nature are present in almost all chapters of Eugene Onegin. These are groves, meadows and fields, among which Tatyana Larina’s life flows. I am amazed at how the nobleman Pushkin understands and feels Russians folk songs how their sad melodies penetrate into the soul of a merry fellow and an optimist: “Something familiar is heard in the coachman’s long songs.” For Pushkin, the role of impressions associated with Patriotic War 1812.
In 1814 he writes one of the most remarkable poems Lyceum period"Memories in Tsarskoe Selo." Its main theme is the recent victory of Russia over Napoleon. Oh, how proud young Pushkin is of his homeland, his people!
Practical part.
Research methods:
1. Questioning of 6th grade students in October.
In order to study understanding and attitude towards patriotism, we conducted a survey. A questionnaire was developed containing eleven questions, seven of which required a simple answer “yes” or “no”, the remaining four questions required a thoughtful attitude.
The text of the questionnaire is given below.
12. Do national customs and traditions of the peoples of Russia influence the formation of patriotic attitudes?
Work results:
The survey was conducted with 71 students.
1.Are you familiar with the word “patriotism”?
2.What does the word “patriotism” mean?
Frequently repeated answers were: “love for the Motherland,” “a person is proud of his country,” “serves its interests,” “loves the country,” “makes the country better,” “works for his country.”
3. Do you think patriotism is a mandatory quality for every person or does it need to be cultivated?
“yes” - 50 students answered, “no” - 15 students answered, “I don’t know” - 6 students.
4.If you think that patriotism should be cultivated, in what ways, in your opinion, should this be done?
“yes” - 40 students answered, “no” - 5 students answered, “I don’t know” - 26 students
The answers were the following: “tell about Russia”, “teach responsibility”, tell children “Russia- best country in the world”, “help others”, “serve the Motherland”, “join the army”...
There were no answers from a different perspective.
5. Do you think the role of school is great in instilling patriotism?
“yes” - answered 49 students, “no” - answered 22 students.
6. Do you consider yourself a patriot?
“yes” - answered 41 students, “no” - answered 30 students.
7. Is it necessary patriotic education at school?
“yes” - 43 students answered, “no” - 21 students answered, “I don’t know” - 7 students.
8. Would you like to leave Russia?
“yes” - answered 11 students, “no” - answered 60 students.
9.Are you proud to live in Russia?
“yes” - answered 67 students, “no” - answered 4 students.
10. Do you believe in the revival of Russia?
“yes” - answered 63 students, “no” - answered 8 students
11.Are you ready to devote your life to the prosperity of your Motherland?
12. Do national customs and traditions of the peoples of Russia influence the formation of a patriotic attitude towards their country?
“yes” - answered 61 students, “no” - answered 10 students.
There are students who take part in organizing national concerts and holidays and are proud of it: Lyudmila Sengepova, national ensemble “Pimochki”
VI. Conclusions.
In the course of the work done, I was able to collect a lot of information about theoretical significance the words "patriot".
Of course, the lack of resources, and most importantly, experience, did not allow us to do all the work on our own: we had to turn to the work of linguists, as well as resort to the help of Internet resources. As a result, I managed to create a passport for the word “patriotism”. This isn't all the information about the word, but like any passport, this one will have blank pages that I hope to fill out over time.
Conclusions:
Most students understand the meaning of the word “patriotism”, are proud that they live in Russia, and honor national traditions, believe in the revival and prosperity of Russia. Our hypothesis was not confirmed.
The word “fatherland” meant among the ancients the land of the fathers, terra patria. The fatherland of each person was that part of the earth which was sanctified by his home or national religion, that land where the remains of his ancestors were buried and where their souls lived. A small fatherland was a small fenced expanse of land belonging to a family, where there were graves and a hearth; the great fatherland was the civil community with its prytaneum, its heroes, the sacred fence and the entire territory, the boundaries of which were outlined by religion. “The sacred land of the fatherland,” the Greeks said. And this was not an idle word: this land was truly sacred for people, because their gods lived here. State, civil community, fatherland - these words were not abstract concepts, like those of our contemporaries, it was a whole, consisting of local gods, daily worship and beliefs that dominated the soul.
This explains the patriotism of the ancients, that strong feeling that was for them the highest virtue and to which all other virtues were attached. Everything that could be most dear to a person was connected with the fatherland. In him he found his well-being, his security, his right, his faith, his god. By losing him, he lost everything. It was almost impossible for private benefit to diverge from public benefit. Plato says: “The Fatherland gives birth to us, feeds and educates us,” and Sophocles: “The Fatherland preserves us.”
Such a fatherland was not only a place of residence for a person. Let him leave these holy walls, cross the sacred boundaries of the region, and for him there is no longer any religion, nor any kind of social union.
Everywhere outside his fatherland he is outside right life, outlaw; Everywhere outside the borders of his fatherland he is deprived of gods, deprived of spiritual life. Only in his homeland does he feel the dignity of a person and has his responsibilities; only here can he be a human person.
The Fatherland binds a person to itself with sacred bonds; one must love him as one loves religion, one must obey him as one obeys God. “You need to give yourself completely to him, put everything into him, dedicate everything to him.” One must love him in glory and in humiliation, in prosperity and in misfortune; love him both for his good deeds and for his severity. Socrates, unjustly condemned to death by his fatherland, nevertheless loves him just as much. He must be loved, as Abraham loved his Lord, to the point of being ready to sacrifice his own son to him. The main thing is to be able to die for the fatherland. A Greek or a Roman does not die out of devotion to one person or out of a sense of honor, but for the fatherland he gives his life, because an attack on the fatherland is an attack on religion; and here a person really fights for his altars, for his hearths, pro aris et focis, because if the enemy captured the city, then his altars were overthrown, the hearths were extinguished, the graves were desecrated, the gods were exterminated, and the cult was destroyed. Love for the fatherland is the piety of the ancients.
Exile was not only a prohibition to stay in the city and removal from the borders of the fatherland, it was at the same time a prohibition of cult; it contained that modern peoples called excommunication. To expel a person meant, according to the formula adopted by the Romans, to excommunicate him from fire and water. By fire here we must understand the fire of sacrifices, and by water - purifying water. Exile placed a person, therefore, outside of religion. In Sparta, too, if a person was deprived of the rights of a citizen, then he was excommunicated from the fire. The Athenian poet puts into the mouth of one of his characters a terrible formula that strikes the exile: “Let him flee,” the verdict read, “and let him never approach the temples, let none of the citizens speak to him and take him into their home; let no one allow him to participate in prayers and sacrifices, let no one give him purifying water.” Every house was desecrated by his presence. A person who accepted an exile became unclean from contact with him. “Whoever eats or drinks with him, or who touches him,” the law said, “will have to purify himself.” Under the weight of this excommunication, the exile could not take part in any religious ceremony; for him there was no longer any cult, no sacred dinners, no prayers; he was deprived of his share in the religious heritage.
We must take into account that for the ancients God was not omnipresent. If they had some vague idea about the deity of the entire universe, then they did not consider this deity to be their providence, they did not turn to him with prayers. The gods of each person were those gods who lived in his house, in his city, in his region. The exile, leaving behind his fatherland, also left his gods. He did not find a religion anywhere that could console him and take him under its protection; he no longer felt the protective providence over him; the happiness of prayer was taken away from him. Everything that could satisfy the needs of his soul was removed from him.
Religion was the source from which civil and political rights flowed; The exile lost all this, losing his fatherland. Excluded from the cult of the civil community, he was at the same time deprived of his home cult and had to extinguish his hearth. He no longer had ownership rights to his property; all his property and land were taken away in favor of the gods or the state. No longer having a cult, he no longer had a family; he ceased to be a husband and father. His sons were no longer under his authority; his wife was no longer his wife and could immediately choose another spouse. Look at Regulus, captured by his enemies; Roman law likens him to an exile. When the Senate asks his opinion, he refuses to give it, because the exile can no longer be a senator; when both his wife and children rush to him, he pushes away their embrace, because the exile no longer has a wife or children.
Thus, along with the loss of the religion of the civil community and the rights of a citizen, the exile also lost his home religion and family. He no longer had a hearth, a wife, or children. After death, he could not be buried either on the land of the civil community or in the grave of his ancestors, because he had become a stranger.
It is not surprising that the ancient republics almost always allowed the guilty to flee from death. Expulsion did not seem to be an easier execution than death. Roman jurists called it the most severe punishment.
Municipal spirit
What we have learned so far about ancient institutions, and especially about ancient beliefs, can give us an idea of \u200b\u200bthe deep difference that has always existed between the two civil communities. Even if they were very close, next to each other, they were always two completely different societies, and between them lay something greater than the distance that now separates the two cities, greater than the boundaries that separate the two states; they had different gods, different religious
rituals, different prayers. It was forbidden for a member of a neighboring community to participate in the cult of a civil community. They believed that the gods rejected the worship of anyone who was not their fellow citizen.
True, these ancient beliefs gradually softened and changed over time, but they were in full force in an era when societies took shape, and the imprint of these beliefs remained on them forever.
The following two things are easily understood: firstly, such a religion of its own, inherent in each city separately, was supposed to establish a strong and almost unshakable system; and indeed, it is amazing how long this social system lasted, despite its shortcomings and all the possibility of disintegration. Secondly, this very religion should have made it completely impossible for many centuries to establish another social form other than the civil community.
Each civil community, due to the requirements of religion itself, had to be completely independent. Each civil community had to have its own special laws, since each had its own religion, and laws stemmed from religion. Each had to have its own supreme justice, and there could be no court higher than the court of the civil community. Each had to have its own religious festivals and its own calendar; the months of the year could not be the same in two cities, since each had its own special religious rites. Each civil community had its own banknotes; At first, coins were usually marked with religious emblems. Each had its own measure and weight. Nothing in common was allowed between the two communities. The division was so deep that it was difficult to even imagine the possibility of marriage between residents of two different cities. Such a union always seemed strange and for a long time was even considered illegal. The legislation of Rome and Athens apparently resisted recognizing it. Almost everywhere, children born from such a marriage were considered illegitimate and were deprived of citizenship rights. In order for a marriage between residents of two cities to be legal, there must have been a special agreement between these cities (jus connubii, éπιγαμ iα).
There was a line around the territory of each civil community sacred boundaries, this was the border of her national religion and the domain of her gods. On the other side of the border, other gods reigned and rituals of a different cult were performed.
The most striking characteristic feature of the history of Greece and Italy before the Roman conquest is the fragmentation carried to the extreme limits and the spirit of isolation of each civil community. Greece never succeeded in forming a single state; neither the Latin, nor the Etruscan cities, nor the Samnite tribes could ever form into a dense whole. The ineradicable fragmentation of the Greeks was attributed to geographical properties their countries and said that the mountains cutting through the country in all directions established natural boundaries between the various regions; but between Thebes and Plataea, between Argos and Sparta, between Sybaris and Croton there were no mountains. There were none between the cities of Latium and between the two cities of Etruria. Physical properties Countries have some influence on the history of peoples, but the influence of beliefs is incomparably more powerful. Something more impenetrable than mountains lay between the regions of Greece and Italy; sometimes there were sacred boundaries, sometimes there was a difference of cults; it was a barrier that the civil community erected between its gods and strangers. She forbade foreigners to enter the temples of her city deities; she demanded that her gods hate foreigners and fight against them.
On this basis, the ancients could not only establish, but also imagine any other organization other than the civil community. For a very long time neither the Greeks, nor the Italians, nor even the Romans themselves could come up with the idea that several cities could unite together and live on equal rights under one control. Between two civil communities there could be an alliance, a temporary agreement in view of perceived benefit or to avoid danger; but this was not a complete union, because religion made each city a separate whole, which could not be part of any other. Isolation was the law of the civil community.
How, given the beliefs and religious customs that we have seen, could several cities unite to form one state? Human association was understood and seemed correct only if it was based on a religious basis. The symbol of this association was to be a sacred meal taken together. Several thousand citizens could still, perhaps in extreme cases, gather around one prytaneum, read prayers together and eat sacred dishes together. But try, with such customs, to make one state out of all of Greece! How can sacred dinners and all those religious ceremonies be performed at which all citizens must be present? Where will the prytaneum be placed? How to perform the ritual of annual cleansing of citizens? What will happen to the inviolable borders that once forever separated the area of the civil community from all other territory? What will happen to the local cult, to the deities of the city, to the heroes of each region? The hero Oedipus, who was hostile to Thebes, was buried on the soil of Athens. How can the religion of Athens and the religion of Thebes be united together in one cult and under one administration?
When these beliefs weakened (and they weakened only very late in the minds of the people), then it was no longer time to establish new state forms. Separation and isolation were already sanctified by habit, benefit, strengthened by old anger, memories of the previous struggle. There was no going back to the past.
Each city greatly valued its autonomy - this is what he called the totality, which meant its law, its cult, its governance - all its religious and political independence.
It was easier for one civil community to subjugate another than to annex it to itself. Victory could be made of all residents of this city the same number of slaves, but she was powerless to make them fellow citizens of the victors. To merge two civil communities into one state, to merge a victorious people with a defeated people and unite them under one government - this is a fact that never occurs among the ancients, with one single exception, which we will talk about later. If Sparta conquers Messene, it is not to make one people out of the Messenians and Spartans; she expels or enslaves the vanquished and takes their lands for herself. Athens does the same in relation to Salamis, Aegina, Melos.
No one ever thought of giving the vanquished the opportunity to enter the civil community of the victors. The civil community had its own gods, its own hymns, its own holidays, its own laws, which were for it the precious heritage of its ancestors; and she was careful not to share them with the vanquished. She did not even have the right to do this: could the Athenians allow the inhabitants of Aegina to enter the temple of Pallas Athena? so that they honor Theseus with the cult? took part in sacred dinners? so that they, as prytanes, maintain the sacred fire on the public hearth? Religion forbade this. And therefore the defeated people of the island of Aegina could not form one state with the Athenian people. Having different gods, the Athenians and Aegineans could not have the same laws or the same authorities.
But couldn’t the Athenians, leaving at least the conquered city intact, send their authorities to its walls to rule? Such a fact would be absolutely contrary to the principles of the ancients: only a person who was a member of it could govern a civil community. In fact, the official at the head of the civil community was supposed to be the religious head, and his main duty was to perform sacrifices on behalf of the entire civil community. Therefore, a foreigner who did not have the right to perform sacrifices could not be a government official. Without performing any religious duties, he had no legal authority in the eyes of people.
Sparta tried to install its own harmonists in the cities, but these persons were not rulers; they did not judge and did not appear at public meetings. Having no legal connection with the population of the cities, they could not stay in them for long.
As a result, it turned out that each winner was given one of two things: either destroy the conquered city and occupy its territory, or leave him its complete independence; there was no middle ground. Either the civil community ceased to exist, or it remained
a sovereign state. Having its own cult, it had to have its own government; only by losing one thing did she lose the other, and then her very existence ceased.
This complete and unconditional independence of the ancient civil community could only cease when the beliefs on which it was based finally disappeared; Only after concepts had changed and several revolutions had swept over the ancient world, only then could the idea of a more extensive state governed by different laws emerge and be realized. But for this, people had to find different principles and a different social connection than was the case in ancient centuries.
PATRIOT stress, word forms
patriot
patriot,
patriots,
patriot,
patriots,
patriot
to the patriots,
patriot,
patriots,
patriot
patriots
patriot,
patriots
+ PATRIOT- T.F. Efremova New dictionary Russian language. Explanatory and word-formative
PATRIOT is
patriot
patri O T
m.1) He who loves his fatherland, is devoted to his people, is ready to make sacrifices and heroic deeds in the name of the interests of his Motherland.
2) decomposition One who is devoted to something, loves something passionately.
+ PATRIOT- S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova Dictionary Russian language
PATRIOT is
patriot
PATRIOT, -a, m.
1. A person imbued with ~ism. True p.
2. trans. , what. A person devoted to the interests of someone. affairs, deeply attached to something. P. of his plant.
| and. ~ka, -And.
+ PATRIOT- Dictionary foreign words
PATRIOT is
PATRIOT
a, m., shower
1. A man inspired by patriotism. Genuine p.
2. trans., what. A person devoted to the interests of some cause, who passionately loves something P. of the city. P. plant. Patriot - woman...
+ PATRIOT- Small academic dictionary Russian language
PATRIOT is
patriot
A, m.
He who loves his fatherland is devoted to his people, his homeland.
Gemma exclaimed that if Emil felt like a patriot and wanted to devote
all your strength for the liberation of Italy - then, of course, for such a high and sacred cause you can sacrifice a secure future. Turgenev, Spring Waters.
The word “patriot” first appeared during the French Revolution of 1789-1793. At that time, fighters for the people's cause, defenders of the republic, as opposed to traitors, traitors to the homeland from the monarchist camp, called themselves patriots. M. Kalinin, On communist education.
|| trans.; what.
One who is devoted to something, loves something passionately.
Patriot of Leningrad. Patriot of his plant.
Patriots of their native ships, With lion's courage in their chests - Guardsmen of the Soviet Navy are always and everywhere ahead! Lebedev-Kumach, Naval Guard.
By the second month of combat work, they (the pilots) were all --- steel patriots of their cause. Simonov, From the Black to the Barents Sea.
(From the Greek πατριώτης - fellow countryman, compatriot)
+ PATRIOT- Compiled dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language
PATRIOT is
patriot
PATRIOT
(Greek). A man who passionately loves his fatherland and people, trying to be useful to them.
A, M. patriote, German. Patriot gr. patriotes fellow countryman. 1. A person considered in relation to his belonging to his homeland, fatherland; usually with an additional evaluative point: zealot for the benefit of the fatherland, faithful son fatherland. Exchange 133.… … Historical Dictionary Gallicisms of the Russian language
PATRIOT- (Greek). A man who passionately loves his fatherland and people, trying to be useful to them. Dictionary of foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. PATRIOT Greek. patriotes, from patra, patria, fatherland. A person who passionately loves... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language
patriot- lover of the fatherland Dictionary of Russian synonyms. patriot, lover of the fatherland (outdated) Dictionary of synonyms of the Russian language. Practical guide. M.: Russian language. Z. E. Alexandrova. 2011… Dictionary of synonyms
Patriot- (Kaliningrad, Russia) Hotel category: 3 star hotel Address: Ozernaya Street 25A, Kaliningrad ... Hotel catalog
PATRIOT- PATRIOT, patriot, husband. (Greek patriotes countryman). A man devoted to his people, loving his fatherland, ready to make sacrifices and perform feats in the name of the interests of his homeland. Soviet patriots vigilantly guard the borders of their native country. Bolsheviks... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary
PATRIOT- PATRIOT, patriot, lover of the fatherland, zealot for its good, lover of the fatherland, patriot or fatherlander. Patriotism husband. love for the fatherland. Patriotic, native, domestic, full of love for the fatherland. Patrimonial, paternal, otniy, fatherly,... ... Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary
PATRIOT- PATRIOT, huh, husband. 1. A person imbued with patriotism. True paragraph 2. trans., what. A person devoted to the interests of a person. affairs, deeply attached to something. P. of his plant. | wives patriot, i. Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu.... ... Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary
PATRIOT- “The Patriot”, USA, Columbia Tristar, 2000, 164 min. Historical drama. Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin, director and producer, are an established team of blockbuster producers (Stargate, Godzilla, The Day... ... Encyclopedia of Cinema
patriot- PATRIOT, ah, M. Crammed. From school... Dictionary of Russian argot
Patriot- Some people do not care about the glory or misfortunes of their fatherland; they know its history only from the time of Prince. Potemkin, have some understanding of the statistics of only the province in which their estates are located; with all that, they consider themselves patriots,... ... Wikipedia
patriot- great patriot true patriot a true patriot ardent patriot true patriot passionate patriot... Dictionary of Russian Idioms
Books
- Patriot, Rubanov Andrey Viktorovich. Andrey Rubanov is the author of the books “Plant and it will grow”, “Shameful feats”, “Psychedelic”, “Prepare for war” and others. Finalist of the "National Bestseller" and "National Bestseller" awards Big book" . Main character... Buy for 614 rubles
- Patriot, Rubanov, Andrey Viktorovich. Andrey Rubanov is the author of the books “Plant and it will grow”, “Shameful feats”, “Psychedelic”, “Prepare for war” and others. Finalist of the National Bestseller and Big Book awards. The main character...
