What parts of the world belong to the old world. Old World - what is it? Wine lists replace geographical

Only a third of the planet Earth is occupied by land, while the remaining 2/3 are endless expanses of water. That is why it is also called the "blue planet". Water separates parts of the land, creating several continents from the once-existing merged land masses.

In contact with

What parts is the earth divided into?

In geological terms, the land is divided into continents, but from the side of history, culture and politics - into parts of the world.

There are also concepts of "Old" and "New World". During the heyday of the ancient Greek state, three parts of the world were known: Europe, Asia and Africa - they are called the "Old World", and the rest of the land that was discovered after 1500 is called the "New World", this includes North and South America , Australia and Antarctica.

Most of the land, which has a common cultural, scientific, economic and political heritage, is called "part of the world."

It is interesting to know: what exist on planet Earth?

Their names and locations

Often they coincide with the continents, but it is known that one continent can contain two parts of the world. For example, the continent of Eurasia is divided into Europe and Asia. And, on the contrary, two continents can be one part of the world - South and North America.

So, there are six parts of the world:

1. Europe
2. Africa
3. America
4. Australia and Oceania
5. Antarctic

It is worth noting that the islands adjacent to the mainland also belong to a certain part of the world.

The mainland, or continent, is not covered by water, a large and inseparable area of ​​​​the crust of the Earth.. The boundaries of the continents and their outlines change over time. The continents that existed in ancient times are called paleocontinents.

They are separated by oceanic and sea waters, and those between which the land border lies are separated by isthmuses: North and South America are connected by the Isthmus of Panama, Africa and Asia by the Isthmus of Suez.

Eurasia

The largest continent of the Earth, washed by the waters of four oceans (Indian, Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific), is Eurasia.. It is located in the Northern Hemisphere, and part of its islands - in the Southern. It covers an area of ​​​​about 53 million square kilometers - this is 36% of the entire land surface of the earth's surface.

On this mainland, there are two parts of the world related to the "Old World" - Europe and Asia. They are separated by the Ural Mountains, the Caspian Sea, the Dardanelles, the Strait of Gibraltar, the Aegean, Mediterranean and Black Seas.

Initially, the mainland was called Asia, and only since 1880, Austrian geologist Eduard Suess the term Eurasia was introduced. This part of the land was formed during the division of the protocontinent Laurasia into North America and Eurasia.

Why are parts of the world Asia and Europe unique?

• The presence of the narrowest strait in the world - the Bosphorus;
• The continent is the birthplace of great ancient civilizations (Mesopotamia, Egypt, Assyria, Persia, Roman and Byzantine empires, etc.);
• Here is an area that is rightfully considered the coldest point on earth - this is Oymyakon;
• In Eurasia is Tibet and the Black Sea depression - the highest and lowest points on the planet;
• The mainland has all existing climatic zones;
• 75% of the world's population lives on the continent.

It belongs to the New World, surrounded by the waters of two oceans: the Pacific and the Atlantic. The border between the two Americas is the Isthmus of Panama and the Caribbean Sea. The countries bordering the Caribbean Sea are called Caribbean America.

In terms of size, South America ranks 4th among the continents, with a population of about 400 million.

H. Columbus discovered this land in 1492. In his desire to find India, he crossed the Pacific Ocean and landed on the Greater Antilles, but realized that behind them lies a whole hitherto unknown mainland.

• A third of the entire area is occupied by the Amazon, Parana and Orinoco rivers;
• Here is the largest river in the world - the Amazon, according to the results of the world competition in 2011, it is one of the seven natural wonders of the world.
• In South America is the largest dry-bottom lake in the world - Titicaca;
• On the territory of the continent there are the highest - Angel, and the most powerful - Iguazu waterfalls of the world;
• The largest mainland country is Brazil;
• The highest mountain capital in the world - La Paz (Bolivia);
• In the Atacami Desert of Chile, precipitation never falls;
• It is also home to the largest beetles and butterflies in the world (lumberjack beetles and agrippina butterflies), the smallest monkeys (marmosets) and life-threatening poisonous red-backed frogs.

North America

Another continent belonging to the same part of the world. It is located on the Western Hemisphere from the North side, washed by the Bering Sea, the Mexican, California, St. Lawrence and Hudson Bays, the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic Oceans.

The discovery of the mainland took place in 1502. It is believed that America was named after the Italian navigator and traveler Amerigo Vespucci who discovered it. However, there is a version according to which America was discovered long before by the Vikings. First appeared on the map as America in 1507.

On its area, which occupies about 20 million square kilometers, there are 20 countries. Most of the territory is divided between two of them - Canada and the United States.

North America also includes a number of islands: the Aleutian, Greenland, Vancouver, the Alexander Archipelago and the Canadian.

• In North America is the largest administrative building in the world - the Pentagon;
• Most of the population spends almost all their time indoors;
• Mauna Kea is the highest mountain in the world, the height of which is two thousand meters higher than Chomolungma;
• Greenland - the largest island on the planet, belongs to this continent.

Africa

The second largest continent after Eurasia. Its area occupies 6% of all land on Earth. It is washed by the Mediterranean and Red Seas, as well as the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. The mainland crosses the equator.

It is believed that the name of the mainland comes from such Latin words as "sunny", "without cold", "dust".

What is unique about Africa?

• On the mainland there are huge reserves of diamonds and gold;
• There are places here that no human foot has set foot on;
• One can see the tribes with the shortest and tallest people on the planet;
• The average human life expectancy in Africa is 50 years.

Antarctica

Part of the world, a continent, almost entirely covered with a thickness of ice of 2 thousand meters. It is located in the very south of the globe.

• There are no permanent residents on the mainland, only scientific stations are located here;
• Traces have been found in the glaciers that testify to the "former tropical life of the continent";
• Every year a large number of tourists (about 35 thousand) come to Antarctica who want to see seals, penguins and whales, as well as those who are fond of scuba diving.

Australia

The continent is washed by the Pacific and Indian Oceans, as well as the Tasman, Timor, Arafura and Coral Seas of the Pacific Ocean. The mainland was discovered by the Dutch in the 17th century.

Near the coast of Australia there is a huge coral reef - the Great Barrier Reef, with a length of about 2 thousand km.

Also, sometimes under a separate part of the world they mean Oceania, the Arctic, New Zealand.

But most scientists still divide the land into 6 parts of the world presented above.

Section 1. Division into the Old World and the New World.

Section 2. Opening old world.

Section 3. "East" and "West" in history old world.

The old world is the common name of the countries of three parts of the world - Europe, Asia and Africa.

The old world is the continent of Earth known to Europeans before the discovery of America in 1492.

Division into the Old World and the New World.

The fact is that when the division of the Old World into three parts came into use, it had a sharp and definite meaning in that very sense of large continental masses separated by seas, which constitutes the only characteristic feature that defines the concept of a part of the world. What lay north of the sea known to the ancients was called Europe, which is to the south - Africa, which is to the east - Asia. The very word Asia originally referred by the Greeks to their primitive homeland - to country, lying at the northern foot of the Caucasus, where, according to legend, the mythical Prometheus was chained to a rock, whose mother or wife was called; from here this name was transferred by settlers to the peninsula known as Asia Minor, and then spread to the whole part of the world lying east of the Mediterranean Sea. When the outlines of the continents became well known, the separation of Africa from Europe and Asia was indeed confirmed; the division of Asia from Europe turned out to be untenable, but such is the force of habit, such is the respect for long-established concepts that, in order not to violate them, they began to look for different boundary lines, instead of discarding the division that turned out to be untenable.

Parts of the world- these are regions of the land, including the continents or large parts of them, together with nearby islands.

Usually there are six parts of the world:

Australia and Oceania;

America;

Antarctica;

The division into parts of the world should not be confused with the division into the "Old World" and "New World", that is, concepts denoting the continents known to Europeans before 1492 and after (except australia and Antarctica).

The Old World was called all three "known to the ancient" parts of the world - Asia and Africa, and the New World, the part of the southern transatlantic continent, discovered by the Portuguese in 1500 and 1501-02, began to be called. It is believed that such a term was proposed by Amerigo Vespucci in 1503, but this opinion is disputed. Later, the name of the New World began to be applied to the entire southern mainland, and since 1541, together with the name America, it was extended to the northern mainland, denoting the fourth part of the world after Europe, Asia and Africa.

The continent "Old World" includes 2 continents: and Africa.

Also, the territory of the "Old World" continent is historically divided into 3 parts of the world: Europe, Asia and Africa.

Discovery of the Old World.

Over the past two centuries, millions of Britons have left their homelands in search of work abroad: in America, Canada, australia and other countries. After the Second World War, due to large restoration works and the development of industry increased the influx of workers into Britain from European countries. Now in England there are about 1 million immigrants from various European countries (not counting the Irish). The growth in the number of immigrants from the former English colonies gave rise to the question of race relations in the British Isles. Government Britain in special acts made attempts to restrict immigration from their former colonies. The intensification of racial discrimination, the growth in the number of conflicts on a racial basis led to the fact that from the beginning of 1960 to 1971 a number of special laws on racial relations were adopted.

In the 1970s, due to immigration restrictions and economic difficulties in England itself, the number of people leaving the country begins to exceed the number of immigrants. About 200,000 Britons now live in New Zealand alone, and for Australia, England has been and remains the most important "supplier" of skilled labor. The flow of emigrants to North America (Canada, USA) and other Western European countries was somewhat less. Emigrated and mostly specialists, and there was a so-called brain drain.

Emigration and immigration have been and continue to be a vital factor in the development of the economy and every year international students alone spend over £3bn on living and boarding in Britain. According to the data of the Ministry of Finance, in the event of the cessation of migration processes in the country, the economic growth of the state over the next two years will decrease by 0.5%. A decrease in government revenues means a decrease in the level of individual and family well-being and a reduction in funds allocated for social needs.

The number of immigrants in the country today has reached 10% of the total population of working age. Analysts on the basis of the research concluded that immigrants do not pose a threat to the British labor market. Contrary to popular belief, admission to work"foreigners" does not provoke an increase in unemployment among the indigenous population, and in some cases even contributes to higher wages. Britain, in general, is not a country with a high level of population migration. Even today, British subjects of foreign origin in relation to the total population of the country are much lower than those in France, USA or the Republic of Germany.

At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, England annually receives about 160,000 immigrants from countries outside the European Union. considers itself a multinational state and the role of foreign workers and entrepreneurs who manage to fit into society in England is important not only because they bring diversity to British culture, but also because they do not reduce the birth rate in the camp. The fact is that in Britain there is process an aging population due to improvements in the health care system, and because young couples in which both partners work are facing increasing economic difficulties, the birth rate is falling, as a result of which the population is declining.

The government of England, headed by Prime Minister Tony Blair, has decided to revise some of the provisions of immigration policy in such a way as to encourage migration if it is consistent with state interests, and limit it. Britain will continue to accept immigrants who are able to invest financial resources in the country's economy, to contribute intellectual and professional abilities and skills in the development of the British economy. On the other hand, new measures are being taken to restrict the entry of persons who are undesirable both from the economic, social and from the point of view of maintaining the security of the country. Border and immigration are being strengthened and the introduction of identification cards (ID cards) of immigrants is envisaged. In addition, some immigration routes to the UK that were illegally used in the past are now being blocked. Foreign students will only be allowed to enter the country to study if they have chosen an accredited educational institution. To prevent fictitious marriages, a new requirement will be introduced for residents of third world countries: they will have to undergo additional registration in specially created services.

Regulations concerning internal politicians countries are also changing. Immigrants will be limited in their rights to use social benefits: they will not have access to the social housing program until they receive official permission to stay and work in Britain.

The censuses of England and England* do not contain statistical data about Koreans, therefore, other sources and materials are used that do not allow a detailed demographic analysis related primarily to migration processes, but allow us to understand the main course of the history of the emergence of the modern Korean community in Britain.

By data Embassy of the Republic of Korea in England, the number of Koreans as of May 2003 was 31 thousand people. It turns out that the largest Korean community lives here, second only to the number of Koreans in the Russian Federation.

One of the first Koreans who ended up in Britain in the post-war period were 6 employees of the Embassy of the Republic of Korea in England, which opened in March 1958. Later, they were joined by about 200 Korean students who arrived to study at universities and colleges. Thus, the first Koreans who arrived in the UK had no intention of staying in it and were not directly related to immigrants. Due to the numerical superiority of students, first of all, "Korean students in Britain" formed. Anyone who had studied at least 3 months at universities or passed a scientific internship at research institutes in the UK could become a member of the association.

With the growth in the number of Koreans in November 1964 at a general meeting, this student company company was renamed the "Association of Koreans in Britain", whose members, in addition to Korean students, were all other Koreans who had lived in the UK for more than 3 years. In November 1965, structural and organizational changes took place in the association, and in 1989 it was renamed the Society of British Koreans.

"East" and "West" in the history of the Old World.

From time to time it is very useful to revise our customary historical concepts, so that in using them we do not fall into the errors generated by the tendency of our mind to attribute absolute significance to our concepts. It must be remembered that the correctness or falsity of historical, as well as any other scientific concepts, depends on the chosen point of view, that the degree of their correspondence with reality can be greater or lesser, depending on what historical moment we apply them to, that their content is constant, then imperceptibly and gradually, then suddenly it changes. Among the concepts most often used, and, moreover, with the least degree of criticism, are the concepts of East and West. The opposition between East and West has been a walking formula since the time of Herodotus. By the East is meant Asia, by the West - Europe - two "parts of the world", two "continents", as the gymnasium textbooks assure; two "cultural worlds," as the "philosophers of history" express it: their "antagonism" is revealed as a struggle between the "principles" of freedom and despotism, striving forward ("progress") and inertia, and so on. In various forms, their eternal conflict continues, the prototype of which is given in the clash of the King of Kings with the democracies of the land of Hellas. I am far from thinking of criticizing these formulas. From certain points of view, they are quite correct; help to cover a significant part of the content of historical "reality", but they do not exhaust its entire content. Finally, they are true only for those who look at the Old World "from Europe" - and who will argue that the historical perspective obtained from such an angle is "the only correct one"?

Not for "criticism", but for a better analysis of these concepts and for introducing them into proper boundaries, I would like to recall the following:

The antagonism of East and West in the Old World can mean not only

antagonism between Europe and Asia. The West itself has "its own East" and "its own West" (Romano-Germanic Europe and Byzantium, then Rus') and the same applies to the East: the opposites of Rome and Constantinople here to some extent correspond to the opposite of "Iran" and "Turan", Islam and Buddhism; finally, the opposition between the Mediterranean region and the steppe world, which is outlined in the western half of the Old World, corresponds in the Far East to the ratio of the People's Republic of China and the same steppe world in the center of the Eurasian continent. Only in the latter case East and West change roles: China, which is geographically "East" in relation to Mongolia, is culturally "West" for Mongolia.

The history of the Old World, understood as the history of the relationship between the West and the East, is not exhausted by the struggle of two principles: there are too many facts at our disposal that speak of the development in both the West and the East, as well as common, rather than fighting, principles.

Along with the picture of the history of the Old World, which is obtained when we look "from the West", another, no less "legitimate" and "correct" picture can be constructed. As the observer moves from West to East, the image of the Old World will change in front of him: if you stop at Russian Federation, all the outlines of the Old Continent will begin to emerge more clearly: Europe will appear as part of the continent, however, a very isolated part, having its own individuality, but no more than Iran, Hindustan and China. If Hindustan is naturally separated from the main mass of the mainland by the wall of the Himalayas, then the isolation of Europe, Iran and the People's Republic of China (PRC) follows from their orientation: they face the seas with their "main face". In relation to the center, Europe and keep mostly defensive. The "Chinese Wall" became a symbol of inertia and not at all the wise "ignorance of foreigners", although in fact its meaning was completely different: China shielded its culture from the barbarians; thus this wall fully corresponds to the Roman "frontier", by which Middle-earth tried to defend itself from barbarism, which pressed from the North and East. The Mongols showed an example of brilliant divination when they saw "great China", Ta-Tzin, in Rome, the Roman Empire.

The concept of the history of the Old World, as the history of the duel between the West and the East, can be opposed by the concept of interaction between the center and the outskirts, as a no less permanent historical fact. Thus, on the whole, the same phenomenon is revealed that we have hitherto been better aware of in its discovery in one part of this whole: the problem of Central Asia corresponds to the problem of Central Europe. The concentration in one hand of trade routes leading from West to East, connecting our Middle-earth with India and China, the involvement of several economic worlds in one system - such is the trend that runs through the entire history of the Old World, found in politics the kings of Assyria and Babylon, their heirs, the Great Kings of Iran, Alexander the Great, later the Mongol khans and, finally, the emperors of All Russia. For the first time this great task looms with full clarity at the end of the 6th century in 568, when Bu-Ming, the Khagan of the Turks, who reigned in a state that stretched from the Republic of China proper to the Oxus, holding in his hands the roads along which the Chinese silk was transported, sent his ambassador emperor Justin with an offer of an alliance against the common enemy Khosr I6 of the king of Iran.

At the same time, Bu-Ming enters into diplomatic relations with China, and emperor Wu-Ti marries a Turkish princess. If the Western Celestial Empire accepted offer Bu-Ming, the face of the earth would be transformed: what people in the West naively took for a "circle of lands" would become part of a great whole; the unity of the Old World would be realized, and the Mediterranean centers of antiquity, perhaps, would be saved, for the main reason for their depletion, constant war with the Persian (and then the Perso-Arab) world, was to fall away. But in

Byzantium, the idea of ​​​​Bu-Ming was not supported ...

This example shows how important it is for understanding the political history of the "West" to be familiar with the political history of the "East".

Between the three marginal coastal "worlds" of the Old World lies its own special world of nomadic steppe dwellers, "Turks" or "Mongols", splitting into many ever-changing, fighting, then splitting - not tribes, but rather military alliances, the centers of formation of which are the "hordes "(literally - the main apartment, headquarters) receiving their names from the names of military leaders (Seljuks, Ottomans); an elastic mass in which every shock echoes at all its points: thus the blows inflicted on it at the beginning of our era in the Far East are echoed by the emigration of the Huns, Avars, Hungarians, Polovtsians to the West. So the dynastic clashes that arose in the center after the death of Genghis Khan responded on the periphery with the invasion of Batu in Rus', Poland, Silesia and Hungary. In this amorphous mass, points

crystallizations come and go with incredible rapidity; gigantic empires that live no longer than one generation are created and collapse several times, Bu-Ming's brilliant idea is almost realized several times. Twice it is especially close to realization: Genghis Khan unites the entire East from the Don to the Yellow Sea, from the Siberian taiga to the Punjab: merchants and Franciscan monks go all the way from the Western People's Republic of China to the East within one state. But it falls apart upon the death of the founder. In the same way, with the death of Timur (1405), the pan-Asiatic power he created perishes. All through this period a certain completeness prevails: Central Asia is always in antagonism with the Middle East (including Iran) and is looking for rapprochement with Rome. Abasid Iran, a continuation of Sassanid Iran, remains the main enemy. As early as the 11th century, the Turks were decomposing the Caliphate, but taking its place: they themselves were "iranized", split off from the general Turco-Mongolian masses, infected with Iranian fanaticism and religious

exaltation. They continue the policy of the Caliphs and the great Kings, the policy of expansion to the West, to Asia Minor, and to the South-West, to Arabia and Egypt. Now they are becoming enemies of Central Asia. Menge-Khan repeats Bu-Ming's attempt, offers St. Louis joint actions against the Middle East, promising to help him in the Crusade. Like Justin, the Holy King did not understand anything about the plan of the eastern ruler: the negotiations opened by Louis by sending a model of the Parisian Notre Dame and two nuns with her, of course, did not lead to anything. Louis goes against the "Babylonian" (Egyptian) sultan without allies, and the Crusade ends with the defeat of the Christians near Damietta (1265).

In the XIV century. - a similar situation: in the battle of Nikopol, Bayazet destroys the crusading militia of Emperor Sigismund (1394), but soon he himself is captured by Timur near Angora (1402) ... After Timur, the unity of the Turanian world collapses irrevocably: instead of one, there are two centers of the Turanian expansions: western and eastern, two Turkeys: one "real" in Turkestan, the other "iranized", on the Bosporus. The expansion comes from both centers in parallel and simultaneously. The highest point - 1526 - the year of two battles of world-historical significance: the battle of Mogach, which gave Hungary into the hands of the Caliph of Constantinople, and the victory at Panipash, which gave Sultan Baber over India. At the same time, a new center of expansion was emerging - on the old trade routes across the Volga and the Urals, a new "middle" kingdom, the state of Moscow, until recently one of the uluses of the Great Khan. This power, which the West looks at as Asia in Europe, plays in the 17th-19th centuries. the role of the vanguard in the counteroffensive of the West against the East. " Law synchronism" continues to operate now, in a new phase in the history of the Old World. Penetration Russian Federation to Siberia, the victories of Jan Sobessky and Peter the Great are simultaneous with the first period counteroffensives of the People's Republic of China (PRC) against the Mongols (Kang-Khi's reign, 1662-1722); wars Catherine and the beginning of the collapse of the Osmanlis Empire coincide chronologically with the second decisive moment of the Chinese expansion - the completion of the formation of the present Republic of China (the reign of Kien-Lung, 1736-1796).

The expansion of the Celestial Empire in the West in the 17th and 18th centuries. was dictated by the same motives that guided China in antiquity when it erected its wall: the expansion of the People's Republic of China was purely defensive in nature. Absolutely

Russian expansion was of a different nature.

The advance of the Russian Federation to Central Asia, Siberia and the Amur region, the construction of the Siberian railway - all this from the 16th century. and to this day is a manifestation of the same trend. Ermak Timofeevich and von Kaufman or Skobelev, Dezhnev and Khabarov are the successors of the great Mongols, laying paths connecting West and East, Europe and Asia, "Ta-Tzin" and China.

Like political history, the cultural history of the West cannot be divorced from the cultural history of the East.

Here, too, the transformation of our historical vulgate should not be imagined in a simplified way: it is not a question of its "refutation", but of something else; about putting forward such points of view from which new sides would be opened in the history of the development of civilized mankind. The contrast between the cultures of the West and the East is not a delusion of history, on the contrary, it has to be emphasized in every possible way. But, firstly, behind the contrast one should not lose sight of the features of similarity; secondly, it is necessary to raise again the question of the carriers of contrasting cultures themselves, and thirdly, it is necessary once and for all to put an end to the habit of seeing contrast in everything and everywhere, even where it does not exist. I'll start with the latter and give some examples.

Until recently, the opinion about the complete independence of Western European, medieval Germano-Romanesque art prevailed. It was recognized as indisputable that the West reworked and developed the ancient artistic tradition in its own way, and that this "own" was the contribution of the German creative genius. Only in painting for some time the West depends on the "dead spirit" of Byzantium, but by the XIII, by the beginning of the XIV century. the Tuscans are freed from the Greek yoke, and this opens the Renaissance of the fine arts. Little is left of these views today. It is proved that the West owes the first examples of "Germanic" art (jewelry works of Frankish and Visigothic burial grounds and treasures) to the East, namely Persia, that the prototype of the characteristic "Langobard" ornament is in Egypt; that from the same place, from the East, comes both the floral and animal ornamentation of early miniatures, which until recently testified, in the eyes of art historians, to a specific German "sense of nature." As for the transition from conventionalism to realism in fresco painting of the 14th century, here we have before us a fact common to both the East (Byzantium and the areas of influence of its culture, for example, Old Serbia) and the West: no matter how the question of priority is decided - in In any case, the scheme dating back to Lorenzo Ghiberti and Vasari, which previously limited the revival to one corner of Italy, must be abandoned.

Equally untenable is the opposition between "Romano-Germanic Europe" and the "Christian East" in another area—philosophical thought. The Vulgate depicts the matter as follows. In the West, scholasticism and the "blind pagan Aristotle," but here a scientific language is being forged, a dialectical method of thinking is being worked out; in the East, mysticism flourishes. The East feeds on the ideas of Neoplatonism; but, on the other hand, religious-philosophical thought here turns out to be fruitless for

"intellectual progress in general," exhausts itself in childish debates about needlessly subtle concepts, gets entangled in the abstractions it has created, and degenerates without creating anything significant... The facts decisively contradict the Vulgate. Platonism is a phenomenon common to all medieval thought, both Western and Eastern, with the difference that the East was able to make Platonic idealism the basis of its religious philosophy thanks to the fact that it turned to the primary source of Neoplatonism - Plotinus; while the West knows Plotinus only second hand, as well as Plato, and moreover often confuses them. Mysticism in the West is just as significant a fact as scholasticism, or rather it is one and the same thing: one cannot oppose scholasticism to mysticism, for the great scholastic systems of the West are created precisely by mystics and have the aim of preparing for a mystical act. But the mysticism of the West, the mysticism of St. Bernard and the quizmen,

St. Francis and St. Bonaventure, which is not inferior to the eastern either in the power of mood or in depth, is still lower than the eastern as a worldview. This, however, does not diminish its role in the history of Western culture: on the basis of mysticism, Joachimism arises, which gave a powerful impetus to a new historical understanding and was thus the ideological source of the early Renaissance, a great spiritual movement associated with the name of Dante, Petrarch and Rienzi, as later in the 15th century

The birth of mysticism in Federal Republic of Germany was the source of Luther's reformation, as Spanish mysticism is the source of Loyola's counter-reformation. That's not all. Modern science puts forward the need for a comparative study of Christian philosophy - Western and Eastern - Jewish and Muslim, because here we have one and the same ideological phenomenon, three arms of one stream. Particularly close to Christian is the Muslim religious culture of Iran, where "Islam" has nothing to do with the Islam of the first caliphs or with Islam as it was understood by the Turks.

Just as the power of the Abasids is a continuation of the power of the Sassanids, so Islam in Iran acquires a specifically Iranian coloring, absorbs the ideological content of Mazdeism3, with its mysticism and with its grandiose historical and philosophical concept, which is based on the idea of ​​progress completed in the other world. .

We have come to the main problem of the history of world culture. We will understand it most quickly if we briefly trace its origin. The overcoming of the historical vulgate began with the gradual expansion of the sphere of interest of historians. Here we must distinguish between the 18th century and our time. The noble universalism of Voltaire, Turgot and Condorcet was rooted in the assumption of the sameness of human nature and, in essence, in the absence of a genuine historical interest, in the absence of a sense of history. Western Europeans, who still let themselves be led by the nose, "priests", Voltaire contrasted the "wise Chinese", who managed to get rid of "prejudices" a long time ago. Volnay undertook a "refutation of the truth" of all religions, using in an original way a kind of comparative method, namely, establishing that the "delusions" and "inventions" of the worshipers of all decidedly deities were the same. Progress in the 18th century imagined something like this: one fine day - here earlier, there later - people's eyes are opened, and from delusions they turn to "Common Reason", to "truth", which is everywhere and always identical to itself. The main, in fact the only, difference between this concept and the concept created by the "positive" historical science of the 19th century is that now the transition from "errors" to "truth" (in the 19th century, instead of lumieres or saine raison, they speak of "exact science") is declared to be taking place "in an evolutionary way" and naturally. On this premise, the science of "comparative history of religions" is built, with the aim of:

To understand the psychology of religious phenomena by drawing on materials selected from everywhere (if only the compared facts were at the same stages of development);

To build, so to speak, an ideal history of the development of the human spirit, a history of which individual empirical histories are partial manifestations. The other side of the question—the possible interaction of the facts of the development of cultural humanity—was left aside. Meanwhile, the evidence in favor of this assumption is such that it involuntarily draws attention to itself. Modern science has stopped before a phenomenon of exceptional importance: synchronism in the religious-philosophical development of the great cultural worlds. Leaving aside the monotheistic tradition of Israel, we see that after the beginning of the monotheistic reform of Zarathustra in the northwestern corner of Iran, in Hellas, in the 6th century, the religious reform of Pythagoras takes place, and in India the activity of the Buddha unfolds. The emergence of the rationalistic theism of Anaxagoras and the mystical doctrine of Heraclitus about the Logos dates back to the same time; their contemporaries in China were Konfu-chi and Lao-chi, the latter's teaching contains elements close to both Heraclitus and Plato, their younger contemporary. While the "natural religions" (fetishistic and animistic cults, ancestor cult, etc.) develop anonymously and organically (or is this perhaps just an illusion generated by distance?), the "historical" religions considered are indebted to creative activity. genius reformers; religious reform, the transition from "natural" cult to "historical religion" - consists in a conscious rejection of polytheism.

The unity of the history of the spiritual development of the Old World can be traced further. Concerning the reasons for the undoubted similarity of mental development lands of Hellas and the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the same era, one can only make assumptions. It is difficult to say to what extent Hindu theophanistic religious philosophy influenced Near Eastern gnosis and Plotinus' theophanism, in other words, the religious philosophy of Christianity; but it is hardly possible to deny the very fact of influence. One of the most important elements of the Christian worldview, which perhaps left the greatest imprint on all European thought, messianism and eschatology, was inherited by Judaism from Iran. The unity of history is also reflected in the spread of the great historical religions. Mithra, the old Aryan god, whose cult survived in Iran the reform of Zarathustra, becomes, thanks to merchants and soldiers, well known to the whole Roman world just at the time when the

preaching Christianity. Christianity is spreading in the East along the great trade routes, along the same routes by which Islam and Buddhism are carried. The Christian religion in the form of Nestorianism was widespread throughout the East until the middle of the 13th century, until the careless and awkward activity of Western missionaries, which developed after the unification of the enterprises of Asia by Genghis Khan, caused a hostile attitude towards Christianity in the East. From the second half of the century, Christianity began to disappear in the East, giving way to Buddhism and Islam. The ease and speed of the spread of great spiritual currents in the Old World is largely due to the qualities of the environment, namely, the mental

warehouse of the population of Central Asia. Turanians are alien to the highest demands of the spirit. What St. Louis and Pope Alexander IV naively took for "the natural inclination of the Mongols towards Christianity" was in fact the result of their religious indifference. Like the Romans, they accepted all kinds of gods and tolerated all kinds of cults. The Turanians, who entered the Caliphate as mercenary soldiers, obeyed Islam, as "yasak" - the right of a military leader. At the same time, they are distinguished by good external assimilation abilities. Central Asia is a wonderful, neutral, transmission environment. The creative, constructive role in the Old World always belonged to the worlds of the marginal seaside - Europe, Hindustan, Iran, China. Central Asia, on the other hand, the space from the Urals to Kuen-Lun, from the Arctic Ocean to the Himalayas, was a field for the crossing of "marginal-coastal cultures", and also - since it was a political magnitude - and a factor in their distribution and an external condition for the development of cultural syncretism ...

Timur's activity was more destructive than constructive. Timur was not that fiend, that conscious destroyer of culture, as he was depicted by the frightened imagination of his enemies, the Middle Eastern Turks, and in their footsteps, the Europeans. He destroyed for the sake of creation: his campaigns had a great cultural goal, determined by their possible consequences - association of enterprises Old world. But he died without completing his work. After his death, Central Asia, exhausted by the hostilities of several centuries, perishes. Trade routes move from land to sea for a long time. The ties between the West and the East are interrupted; of the four great centers of culture, one - Iran - spiritually and materially droops, the other three are isolated from each other. China freezes in its religion of social morality, which degenerates into meaningless ritualism; in India, religious-philosophical pessimism, combined with political enslavement, leads to spiritual stupor. Western Europe, cut off from the sources of its culture, having lost contact with the centers of excitation and renewal of its thought, develops its inherited heritage in its own way: there is no numbness, no marking time; here is the gradual degradation of the great ideas bequeathed by the East; through Comte's famous "three stages" - to agnosticism, to stupid optimism with its base naive faith in the kingdom of God on earth, which will automatically come as the final result of "economic development"; until the hour of awakening strikes, when the whole immensity of spiritual impoverishment immediately opens up, and the spirit grabs at anything, at neo-Catholicism, at "theosophy", at Nietzscheism, in search of lost wealth. Here already lies the provision of the debt of revival. That it is possible, and that it is possible precisely by restoring the broken cultural unity of the Old World, is evidenced by the fact of the revival of the East as a result of "Europeanization", i.e. the assimilation of what the East lacked and what the West is strong in - the technical means of culture, everything that relates to modern civilization; and, however, the East does not lose its individuality. The cultural task of our time should be conceived as mutual fertilization, finding ways to cultural synthesis, which, however, would manifest itself everywhere in its own way, being unity in diversity. The fashionable idea of ​​a "one world religion" is just as bad taste as the idea of ​​an "international language", a lack of understanding of the essence of culture, which is always created and never "made" and therefore always individual.

What role can the Russian Federation play in the revival of the Old World?.. Is it necessary to recall the traditional interpretation of the Russian "world mission".

This is not new. The fact that Russia "with its breasts defended the European civilization from the pressure of Asianism" and that this is her "merit to Europe" - we have been hearing for a long time. Such and similar formulas only testify to our dependence on the Western historical vulgate, dependence, from which, as it turns out, it is difficult to get rid of even people who have felt Russian "Eurasianism ". The mission, the symbol of which is a "shield", "wall" or "hard stone chest", seems honorable and sometimes even brilliant from a point of view that recognizes only European " civilization"real" civilization, only European history "real" history. There, behind the "wall" there is nothing, no culture, no history - only the "wild Mongol horde." The shield falls from our hands - and the "fierce Hun" will be "white fry the brothers. "I would oppose the symbol of the" shield "to the symbol of the" path ", or, better to say, I would supplement one with the other. The Russian Federation not only separates, but connects Asia with Europe. But Russia did not limit itself to this role of the continuer of the historical mission of Genghis Khan and Timur "Russia is not only a mediator in the cultural exchange between individual Asian outskirts. Or rather, it is least of all a mediator. In it, a synthesis of Eastern and Western cultures is creatively carried out ...

Again one has to subject the inspired words of a great poet to a "cold" analysis, because such an analysis reveals a curious and very typical confusion of ideas.

The essence of the confusion lies in the fact that the entire "East" is taken in one bracket. We have "narrow" or "slanted" eyes - a sign of a Mongol, Turanian. But then, why are we "Scythians"? After all, the Scythians are by no means "Mongols" either in race or in spirit. The fact that the poet, in his passion, forgot about this is very characteristic: he obviously had before him the image of "Oriental man in general." It would be more correct to say that we are "Scythians" and "Mongols" together. From an ethnographic point of view, Russia is an area where dominion belongs to the Indo-European and Turanian elements. As regards the cultural atavistic influences of the Turanian element, it cannot be denied. Or, perhaps, it was simply the inoculation of the Tatar region, as the spiritual heritage of the Batu and Tokhtamyshev times, that had an effect here? Anyway, firm The Bolshevik Russian Federation is too much like a "horde" company: just as the Mongols of the 11th century. perceived the will of Allah revealed in the Koran as "yasak", so for us the communist manifesto became "yasak". Socialismo Asiatico, as Francesco Nitti dubbed Bolshevism, is a very wise word. But, really, there is nothing "Turanian", nothing "Central Asian" in the deep religiosity of the Russian people, in their propensity for mysticism and religious exaltation, in their irrationalism, in their tireless spiritual yearnings and struggles.

Again, the East affects here, but not the Central Asian, but the other - Iran or. In the same way, the exceptional sharpness of artistic insight inherent in the Russian people brings them closer to the peoples of the East,

but, of course, not with Central Asians deprived of artistic independence, but with the Chinese and Japanese.

"East" is an ambiguous term, and one cannot speak of one "Eastern" element. The receptive, transmitting Turanian-Mongolian element has been processed, absorbed, and dissolved by the higher elements of Iran, the Republic of China, India, and the Russian Federation for centuries. The Turko-Mongols are not at all a "young" people. They have already happened to be in the position of "heirs" many times. They received "inheritances" from everywhere and each time acted the same way: they assimilated everything and everything equally superficially. Russia can carry the highest culture to the trans-Urals, but for itself, from contact with the neutral, empty Turanian elements, it will not receive anything. Fulfill your "Eurasian" mission, realize your essence of the new Eurasian cultural world. Russia can only follow the paths along which it has hitherto developed politically: from Central Asia and through Central Asia to the coastal regions of the Old World.

The outline of the plan of a new historical scheme outlined here is in conscious contradiction both with the historical vulgate known to us from textbooks, and with some attempts to transform it that pop up from time to time. The proposed plan is based on the recognition of the connectedness of history and geography - in contrast to the Vulgate, at the beginning of the "manual" gets rid of "geography" with a small outline of "surface structure" and "climate" in order not to return to these boring things again. But unlike Helmolt, who took geographical division as the basis for the distribution of material in his

world history, the author puts forward the need to reckon with the true, and not with the conditional geography of the textbook, and insists on the unity of Asia. This facilitates the path to understanding the fact of the unity of Asian culture. Thus, we come to the need to make some adjustments to the new concept of world history proposed by the German historian Dietrich Schaefer. Schaefer breaks with the vulgate of "world history," which has long since turned into a mechanical collection of individual "histories." One can speak of "world history," he argues, only from the moment when the peoples scattered over the earth begin to come into contact with each other, i.e. since the beginning of modern times. But from the very exposition of Schaeffer's Weltgeschichte der Neuzeit it is clear that, from his point of view, "world history" is preceded by the same old "history of Western Europe." From our own point of view,

The history of Western Europe is only a part of the history of the Old World;

The history of the Old World does not lead by way of consistent development to the stage of "world history". Here the relationship is different, more complex: "world" history begins just when the unity of the Old World is broken. That is, there is no rectilinear progress here: history at the same time gains in "extensiveness" and loses in "integrity."

The proposed plan is also a correction to another well-known scheme depicting the world-historical process as a series of stages at which, embodied in separate "types of development", "cultural values" are realized in turn, chronologically replacing each other and stretching into a progressive series.

There is no need that the ideological sources of this theory go back not only to Hegel’s metaphysics, which rapes history “as it really happened,” but even worse, to the mythological ideas of antiquity and the Middle Ages about the “nomadic culture”: for the mistake here lies not in ascertaining fact, but in its understanding. The fact, however, that culture does not stay permanently in the same place, but that its centers move, is like the other fact that culture is eternally changing, and not quantitatively, but also qualitatively, or rather, only qualitatively (for culture cannot be to "measure" in general, but only to evaluate), is not subject to any dispute. But it would be futile to try to bring the transformation of culture under " law"about progress. This is, firstly. Secondly, the usual, chronological series of individual stories (first Babylon and Egypt, then Hellas, then Rome, etc.) is inapplicable to the history of the Old World as a whole. We have learned the point of view, from which open

synchronicity and internal unity of the history of the Old World in its entirety. First - and this "beginning" stretches from about 1000 BC. before 1500 A.D. - one huge, unusually powerful and intense movement, from several centers at once, but centers that are by no means isolated: during this time all problems have been posed, all thoughts have been rethought, all great and eternal words have been spoken. This "Eurasian" left us such riches, beauties and truths that we still live by his legacy. It is followed by a period of fragmentation: Europe separates from Asia, the "center" falls out in Asia itself, only "outskirts" remain, spiritual life freezes and becomes poorer. The latest fate of the Russian Federation, starting from the 16th century, can be viewed as a grandiose attempt to restore the center and thereby recreate "Eurasia". On the outcome of this attempt, still undecided and now darker than ever, the future depends.

Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Literary Language Read more

Europeans traditionally attributed to the concept of the Old World two continents - Eurasia and Africa, i.e. only those that were known before the discovery of the two Americas, and to the New World - North and South America. These designations quickly became fashionable and became widespread. The terms quickly became very capacious, they referred not only to the geographical known and unknown world. The Old World began to be called something well-known, traditional or conservative, the New World - something fundamentally new, little studied, revolutionary.

In biology, flora and fauna are also usually divided geographically into gifts from the Old and New Worlds. But unlike the traditional interpretation of the term, the New World biologically includes the plants and animals of Australia.

Later, Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania and a number of islands in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans were discovered. They did not enter the New World and were designated by the broad term Southern Lands. At the same time, the term Unknown Southern Land is a theoretical continent at the South Pole. The icy continent was discovered only in 1820 and also did not become part of the New World. Thus, the terms Old and New Worlds refer not so much to geographical concepts as to the historical border "before and after" the discovery and development of the American continents.

Old World and New World: winemaking

Today, the terms Old and New Worlds in the geographical sense are used only by historians. These concepts acquired a new meaning in winemaking to designate the founding countries of the wine industry and countries developing in this direction. The Old World traditionally includes all European states, Georgia, Armenia, Iraq, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine. To the New World - India, China, Japan, the countries of North, South America and Africa, as well as Australia and Oceania.

For example, Georgia and Italy are associated with wine, France with Champagne and Cognac, Ireland with whiskey, Switzerland and Great Britain with Scotland with absinthe, and Mexico is considered the ancestor of tequila.

In 1878, on the territory of the Crimea, Prince Lev Golitsyn founded a factory for the production of sparkling wines, which was named "New World", later a resort village grew around it, which is called the New World. The picturesque bay annually receives crowds of tourists who want to relax on the Black Sea coast, get to taste the famous Novy Svet wines and champagne, walk along the grottoes, bays and the reserved juniper grove. In addition, there are settlements of the same name on the territory of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.

Although it sounds somewhat paradoxical, the discovery of the New World marked the appearance of the Old. Five centuries have passed since then, but the Old World is a concept that is still being used today. What value was put into it before? What does it mean today?

Definition of the term

The Old World is that part of the land that was known to Europeans before the discovery of the American continent. The division was conditional and was based on the position of the lands relative to the sea. Merchants and travelers believed that there were three parts of the world: Europe, Asia, Africa. Europe lies in the north, Africa in the south, and Asia in the east. Subsequently, when the data on the geographical division of the continents became more accurate and complete, they found out that only Africa was a separate continent. However, the ingrained views were not so easily defeated, and all 3 continued to be traditionally mentioned separately.

Sometimes the name Afro-Eurasia is used to define the territorial array of the Old World. In fact, this is the largest continental mass - a supercontinent. It is home to approximately 85 percent of the world's population.

A period of time

When talking about the Old World, they often mean more than just a certain geographical location. These words carry information about a specific historical period, culture and the discoveries made then. We are talking about the Renaissance, when the medieval asceticism and theocentrism were replaced by the ideas of natural philosophy and experimental science.

The attitude of a person to the world around him is changing. Gradually, from the plaything of a whole host of gods, who have the power to dispose of human life according to their whims and whims, a person begins to feel like the master of his earthly home. He strives for new knowledge, which leads to a number of discoveries. Attempts are made to explain the structure of the surrounding world with the help of mechanics. Measuring devices are being improved, including navigational ones. It is already possible to trace the origin of such natural sciences as physics, chemistry, biology and astronomy, which come to replace alchemy and astrology.

The changes that took place then gradually prepared the way for the expansion of the boundaries of the known world. They served as a prerequisite for the discovery of new lands. Courageous travelers went to uncharted lands, and their stories inspired even more daring and risky ventures.

The historical journey of Christopher Columbus

In August 1492, three well-equipped ships under the command of Christopher Columbus set sail from the harbor of Palos for India. It was a year, but the famous discoverer himself never knew that he had discovered a continent previously unknown to Europeans. He was sincerely sure that he had made all four of his expeditions to India.

The journey from the Old World to the new lands took three months. Unfortunately, it was neither cloudless, nor romantic, nor disinterested. The admiral hardly kept the subordinate sailors from rebellion on the first voyage, and the main driving force for the discovery of new territories was greed, the lust for power and vanity. These ancient vices, brought from the Old World, subsequently brought much suffering and grief to the inhabitants of the American continent and nearby islands.

He didn't get what he wanted either. Going on his first voyage, he prudently tried to protect himself and secure his future. He insisted on the conclusion of a formal agreement, according to which he received a title of nobility, the title of admiral and viceroy of the newly discovered lands, as well as a percentage of the income received from the above lands. And although the year of the discovery of America was supposed to be a ticket to a secure future for the discoverer, after a while Columbus fell out of favor and died in poverty without receiving the promise.

The New World Appears

Meanwhile, ties between Europe and the New World grew stronger. Trade was established, the development of lands lying in the depths of the mainland began, claims of various countries for these lands were formed, and the era of colonization began. And with the advent of the concept of "New World", the terminology began to use the stable expression "Old World". After all, before the discovery of America, the need for this simply did not arise.

Interestingly, the traditional division into the Old and New Worlds has remained unchanged. At the same time, Oceania and Antarctica, unknown during the Middle Ages, are not taken into account today.

For decades, the New World has been associated with a new and better life. The American continent was in which thousands of immigrants sought to get. But in their memory they kept their native places. The Old World is traditions, origins and roots. Prestigious education, fascinating cultural journeys, historical monuments - this is still associated today with European countries, with the countries of the Old World.

Wine lists replace geographical

If in the field of geography terminology, including the division of continents into the New and Old Worlds, is already a relatively rare phenomenon, then among winemakers such definitions are still in high esteem. There are stable expressions: "wine of the Old World" and "wine of the New World". The difference between these drinks is not only in the place where the grapes grow and the location of the winery. They are rooted in the same differences that are characteristic of the continents.

Thus, the wines of the Old World, mostly produced in France, Italy, Spain, Germany and Austria, are distinguished by their traditional taste and delicate elegant bouquet. And the wines of the New World, which Chile, Argentina, Australia and New Zealand are famous for, are brighter, with obvious fruity notes, but somewhat losing in finesse.

Old World in the modern sense

Today, the term "Old World" is mainly applied to states located in Europe. In the vast majority of cases, neither Asia nor even Africa is taken into account. So, depending on the context, the expression "Old World" can include either as many as three parts of the world, or only European states.