Kievan Russia Case Study
Question 1: What does Thompson say about the lives and belies of people in Kievan Russia?
The Kievan state of Russia dates back to first settlement in 800 AD and continues on to about 1200 AD when the internal discord weakened the state paired along side the Mongol conquest of the thirteenth century. During this time, the Kievan state was diversified yet the manner in which this first state of Russia was established is unclear. This however is “where the fundamental characteristics of Russian culture and religion took root…[introducing] basic and lasting political ideas and social institutions” [Thompson 13].
A large majority of the population in Kievan Russia was composed of people living outside of the city, such as hunters, herdsmen …show more content…
The majority of the population was composed to the rural community who situated themselves into obshchina due to the harsh climate and environment to easy the strain of working the land. The adoption of Eastern Christianity is one of, if not the most, significant event in the Kievan state’s history. The adoption brought many advantages to the state such as more art, music, education, higher level of society, etc. as well as political and economical advantages in strengthening the relationship with the Byzantine Empire. However, this won’t last as “by the late 1100s under weaker princes Kievan Russia increasingly disintegrated into rival princedoms and towns that spent more time fighting each other than their common enemies” [24]. While the Kievan Russian state would come to an end, the civilization and society that had been established would not.
Question 2: Based on “The Life of Avvakum”, what does Avvakum say about Nikon’s reforms? Please provide …show more content…
This internal struggle and strife continued for the next decade, with each social class backing some figurehead, or long lost heir, in a ploy for that social group themselves to gain control of the government until around 1608 a stalemate developed and the focus turned instead to foreigners trying to wriggle their way into Russian political affairs. Thompson explains this period of time best when stating, “This was certainly the low point in the fortunes of the Muscovite state: with no tsar, the capital occupied by Poles, the northwest controlled by Swedes, and a pretender stirring up trouble in the countryside, its chances for survival seemed slim”
The Kievan state of Russia dates back to first settlement in 800 AD and continues on to about 1200 AD when the internal discord weakened the state paired along side the Mongol conquest of the thirteenth century. During this time, the Kievan state was diversified yet the manner in which this first state of Russia was established is unclear. This however is “where the fundamental characteristics of Russian culture and religion took root…[introducing] basic and lasting political ideas and social institutions” [Thompson 13].
A large majority of the population in Kievan Russia was composed of people living outside of the city, such as hunters, herdsmen …show more content…
The majority of the population was composed to the rural community who situated themselves into obshchina due to the harsh climate and environment to easy the strain of working the land. The adoption of Eastern Christianity is one of, if not the most, significant event in the Kievan state’s history. The adoption brought many advantages to the state such as more art, music, education, higher level of society, etc. as well as political and economical advantages in strengthening the relationship with the Byzantine Empire. However, this won’t last as “by the late 1100s under weaker princes Kievan Russia increasingly disintegrated into rival princedoms and towns that spent more time fighting each other than their common enemies” [24]. While the Kievan Russian state would come to an end, the civilization and society that had been established would not.
Question 2: Based on “The Life of Avvakum”, what does Avvakum say about Nikon’s reforms? Please provide …show more content…
This internal struggle and strife continued for the next decade, with each social class backing some figurehead, or long lost heir, in a ploy for that social group themselves to gain control of the government until around 1608 a stalemate developed and the focus turned instead to foreigners trying to wriggle their way into Russian political affairs. Thompson explains this period of time best when stating, “This was certainly the low point in the fortunes of the Muscovite state: with no tsar, the capital occupied by Poles, the northwest controlled by Swedes, and a pretender stirring up trouble in the countryside, its chances for survival seemed slim”