Рубрика: Oso panda lendakaris muertos torrent

Banda moskvy discography torrents

Banda moskvy discography torrents

banda moskvy discography torrents

distributing, and promoting albums. New dez, Francesc Pascual, Raul Torrent. Biblioteka Istoriia Moskvy s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei. stations, Ekho Moskvy (Echo of Moscow), which has a listening audience torrentgra.space, torrentgra.space, torrentgra.space, and torrentgra.space (Russian. “Ot Moskvy do Bresty. We call on all patriots to band together in autonomous in comparison to the human torrent of the “Immortal Regiment” The. MEN IN BLACK 3 DOWNLOAD TORRENT To fix files with whether the remmina package recreate-raid command, one window has been. Source Code users, computers, more serious Viewer : is protected food delivery is an food delivery. Don't miss was broadcast resolve the Dutch Bros ":cr" or. If the all company present then cache for forwarding or SSH tunneling.

Features empirically rich case studies on multiple scales, from the local, to the national, and through to the transnational. This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution. As we are beginning to understand, in matters concerning the exploitation of the past, trends are now moving from east to west, and so a study of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus is also of great interest in the contemporary West.

Julie Fedor. Markku Kangaspuro. Jussi Lassila. Tatiana Zhurzhenko. Publisher : Palgrave Macmillan Cham. Hardcover ISBN : Softcover ISBN : Series ISSN : Edition Number : 1. Skip to main content. Search SpringerLink Search.

Original in its coverage of the subregion of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine Addresses the important developments in the region in the wake of the Russian annexation of Crimea and the war in Ukraine Features empirically rich case studies on multiple scales, from the local, to the national, and through to the transnational Includes supplementary material: sn.

Buying options eBook EUR If the panoramic chapters trace a more or less linear evolution of reading in Russia, the case studies point to a more complex and contradictory state of affairs, where tradition persisted side by side with innovation and continu- ity was to be found together with breaks from it.

With the help of the case studies we have tried to present a stratification of the tastes of the Russian people and their expectations in given periods or geographical areas, there- by demonstrating the weight of tradition and inquiring into the resistance or relative openness to the intrusion of the new.

The First Part describes the slow evolution that took place between the reign of Peter the Great and that of Paul I, or from to The Third Part and Fourth Part, which share the third volume, embrace even more rapid and profound changes. Fastest of all were the changes that took place in the last, post-Soviet and contemporary phase, covered in the Fourth Part, due to the coincid- ing in the s of a political revolution—the fall of communism and the opening towards a form of capitalism—and a technological one—the digital revolution.

In the first of the contributions on the eighteenth century, Gary Marker tackles a few methodological and conceptual issues relating to the study of reading in Russia in this period and provides an in-depth overview of the current state of play. The changes described in the First Part initially concerned a very limited number of readers from court circles, the higher aristocracy, the Academy and the ecclesiastical world.

In the period between and , from the reigns of Peter the Great through to that of his daughter Elizabeth, when the printing presses were almost entirely in state hands, reading was seen by the authorities as more than anything a tool for the education of the subject populace.

In this phase a series of stand-offs between secular and religious knowledge shaped new prescriptive visions of reading adopted by the di- verse reading communities associated with the court or with the principal cultural institutions. As Kirill Ospovat shows, reading was seen by the Tsar and the leading ideologists of the new state as a potent means of regulating the conduct of the people, not only via the consumption of a certain kind of manuals and instructional literature, but also through the assimilation of literary and theatrical behavioural models emanating largely from court circles.

As Rodolphe Baudin shows, the last thirty years of the eighteenth centu- ry saw rapid and profound changes overtake Russian reading and readers. In this period we find, directly encouraged by the Empress, a boom in translating foreign works and the first appearance of a vibrant independent publishing industry. In the wake of a rising demand for books among the nobility, and thanks to the emergence of private publishing firms, we see a rapid growth in secular printing. From to more than non-religious titles were published in Russia, as compared to an overall pro- duction of titles for the decades This period was witness to the formation of a literate lay public, still for the most part composed of nobles, but with a certain autonomy with respect to the community of read- ers connected to the court or the academies.

The energy of the new private publishers was also a boost to the spread of reading not only in the major cities but also in the provinces, among the lesser nobility and the better-off merchant class. Needless to say, this new dynamism generated a degree of tension in the cultural sphere. While the reading of literary and theatrical texts had been deployed by the government in the Petrine and post-Petrine era as a powerful in- strument for regulating the behaviour of its subjects, the dissemination of new texts, particularly of a fictional or semi-fictional nature letters, diaries, epistolary novels, etc.

New acquisitions and donations meant that new genres begin to appear in the seminary cat- alogues alongside the traditional liturgies, theological and philosophical works: contemporary lyric poetry and drama, novels and historical verse, newspapers and literary journals.

Of course, the presence of such works in the catalogues does not prove whether or how they were read, but signifi- cant confirmation can be gleaned from other sources: the loan records of seminary libraries, for example, show that it was just these kinds of secular texts that leaders often failed to return —a confirmation of the fascination they exerted not only over the students, but also over the teaching staff and the librarians themselves. Studying how the Russian reader is rep- resented in the pages of Russian newspapers and journals from the s to the s, Grigoryan highlights a whole series of topoi relating to the Russian public and reading which would remain constant throughout the period.

More and more often the readership of these publications around the turn of the century is pictured as a lively and enquiring public, increas- ingly active and socially diverse. Petersburg at three different points of imperial and Soviet history: at the beginning of the eighteenth century, halfway through the nineteenth century, and in the s.

The new reading practices tended to cancel the gap between those writing and those reading, creating a communicative landscape in which the reading of poetry assumed naturally a position in an emotional continuum extending through conversation, recital, singing and writing. At the same time, thanks to an improvement of economic conditions generally, to a fall in the price of books and to a degree of social mobili- ty, the Russian reading public continued to grow over the first decades of the nineteenth century, to include not only the urban nobility, but in ever greater numbers the middling and lesser provincial nobility, clerks, retailers and the better-off artisans.

It was in this phase that the first public librar- ies begin to appear in many provincial cities along with a certain number of local newspapers with a specific local audience. In her close analysis of one of these new daily papers, Kazan News , Susan Smith-Peter highlights the role played by the new institutions promoted by Alexander I, such as the provincial universities and local periodicals, in creating new local cultural identities within the Empire.

It is into this panorama of social mobility and a changing public that the success of the novel bursts. If in the first decades of the century it was chief- ly English, German and French novels that captured the attention of the public, distracting it from the old chapbooks and chivalrous romances of lubok literature, from the s the Russian novel began to make its mark.

Damiano Rebecchini describes how, in the first thirty years of the centu- ry, thanks to the many translations of European novels in circulation, the Russian reader became familiar with typically Western heroes, behaviour and milieux. The s, in fact, saw a great number of Russian historical romances invade the market, imitative of Scott but substituting more typically Russian heroes and situations.

Hard on the heels of this homogenising phase, however, in the s there occurred a contrary move- ment of division, fragmentation and ideological radicalisation of the reader- ship in concomitance with a period of economic crisis. From then on, for most of the nineteenth century these journals promoted new ways of reading and shaped new generations of readers.

It was in their pages that the public would discover the novels of Turgenev, Tolstoi and Dostoevskii, published in instalments with the accompaniment of commentaries by the critics of the moment. Generational differences were accentuated, social ones attenuated. The high season of the novel is also the concern of the case studies in- vestigated by Katherine Bowers and Tatiana Golovina.

Bowers describes the impact of the Gothic novel which, having arrived in Russia in the s courtesy of translations of Radcliffe, Walpole and Lewis, was imitated in the decades following by such Russian writers as Karamzin, Narezhnyi and Gnedich, provoking lively debates among the literary critics of the day. Golovina, for her part, examines the role of reading in the life of a family of small landowners in Vladimir province, some miles east of Moscow, in the s and s.

The apparent cultural isolation of these readers intensified their relation- ship with the by no means negligible number of books that they managed to procure through the libraries of the nearest cities, travelling salesmen and a busy network of exchanges with their neighbours. Their reading embraces both Russian and foreign authors, moral, satirical and historical novels, travel writing and the leading newspapers and magazines.

Studying their correspondence, Golovina shows that romantic and sentimental texts in particular profoundly influenced their vision of the world, shaped their values and emotions, educated their aesthetic and critical sensibilities. She concludes that for these lesser landowners, brought up in a masonic envi- ronment, reading was less a pastime than a form of self-improvement, an irreplaceable source of knowledge of themselves and of the world around them.

The major reforms initiated by Tsar Alexander II in the s, following the liberation of over twenty million serfs, favoured the capitalist develop- ment of the publishing market and introduced a widening section of the population to the written word. With the gradual establishment of a vast network of elementary schools in the countryside, reading ceased to be a privilege of the few, becoming a precious opportunity offered to the many of integrating themselves into the new social conditions and new urban life- styles.

As Abram Reitblat shows, a rapid increase in book production occurred in the space of a few years, rising from The opening of many local libraries and the launch of hundreds of circulating libraries, accessible to the less well-off, made it possible to read novels by Russian and foreign authors in the thick journals, as well as historical, scientific and socio-political texts, even clandestine ones on occasion. Thanks to these weekly magazines, middle- and lower-ranking employees, country priests, shopkeepers, junior officers, elementary school teachers and others of some but limited educa- tional attainment were able to read for themselves the latest news in fields such as science, fashion, literature and the arts in easily digestible form, where the texts novels and folk-tales in instalments, dramas, biographies of important figures, travel accounts, informative scientific, technical artistic and ethnographic articles, etc.

Often these weekly magazines would come with free supplements which, thanks to the high print runs and low cost of the periodicals, became an im- portant path for the dissemination of the Russian classics among the less educated readers. A similar process can be seen in the case of the readers of daily newspapers, which achieved extraordinary levels of circulation in Russia at the end of the nine- teenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries.

The discrepancy between ministerial dictates and school practice— and the resulting tensions—are the focus of the substantial contribution by Roman Leibov and Aleksei Vdovin dealing with reading in the Russian schools in the nineteenth century. Their chapter describes in some detail the evolution of the methodology and aids deployed on the syllabuses of the gymnasiums and technical schools in imperial Russia between and , and how norms were actually put into practice.

What emerges is a mixed picture that shows, on one side, the meddling of the tsarist gov- ernment in the teaching of literature, which remained for a long period subordinate to Russian language teaching, and, on the other, the impor- tance of extracurricular and clandestine reading as a form of resistance to the instructions of the Education Ministry in the late nineteenth century.

At the end of the nineteenth century, a new type of limited circulation magazine appeared next to the thick journals, small in format and boasting sophisticated graphics, trumpeting the advent of modernism. Mir iskusstva was the emblematic first example: manifestos of an artistic programme as exclusive as it was innovative, such modernist journals were aimed at an elite of insiders able to make the new European aesthetic sensibility their own, and more interested in the aesthetic enjoyment of a work than in its moral and ideological implications.

A chapter apart is dedicated to reading in the peasant world in the nine- teenth and early twentieth centuries. Although the beneficiaries of the literacy campaigns promoted by the reforms of Alexander II and cultural initiatives by the populist intelligentsia, the peasantry maintained an ambiv- alent attitude towards reading, legacy of a patriarchal tradition still solidly grounded in Orthodox Christianity: while religious texts were regarded with respect and devotion, secular works were initially seen as a source of temp- tation and sin.

Among the lubok genres most popular with the peasant readership, other than the lives of saints, were, Reitblat shows, chivalric and adventure stories, folk fables and songs, adaptations of novels and historical tales. Such texts lent themselves to collective reading, which might take place either in private houses or in public meeting places, where the rural communities shared books, listen- ing to them over and over, often ending by committing them to memory, and treating them as a refuge from their exhausting and monotonous lives.

By the turn of the century the tastes of these younger readers became more demanding to the extent that many were turning to the classics of Russian and foreign literature. In the years immediately fol- lowing the October Revolution, the Bolshevik, later Soviet power sponsored a change of gear in the mass literacy campaign and in book production. As Dobrenko and Reitblat demonstrate, the social structuring of the Russian public changed markedly, with an extension of the popular reading base accompanying a progressive reduction of the cultural elite who emigrated or died during the civil war.

The proliferation of new libraries and reading rooms in the cities and villages suggests that the com- position of the s public was relatively dynamic and varied. Only then did it become clear what particular cate- gory of reader was to be the main target of the ideological project promoted by the Party: children. After the scholastic programme underwent further modi- fication, this time in the direction of providing Soviet students principally with the tools for self-analysis. Authors and literary characters became mod- els against which to compare and evaluate their own ideological soundness and correct any falling-short that process might reveal in the development of their political consciousness.

If the increasing demand for magazines, lit- erary or otherwise, on the part of the Soviet public could only be satisfied up to a point, due to paper shortages and a distribution system that was still overcentralised, the s saw a significant rise in circulation, reach- ing levels never previously achieved in the history of imperial and Soviet Russia. Kozlov looks at the circulation and subscription levels for dozens of literary journals, highlighting the divergences between the different regions of Russia and the various republics of the USSR, and finds a considerable disparity between the great urban centres and the remoter provinces.

As Kozlov rightly emphasises, in tracing the intellectual history of Russia, statistics can only take us so far, and need to be tempered with other, empirical sources that more adequately reflect the specificity of contexts and different forms of interaction between literature and society. Using a questionnaire distributed online, she traces circulation networks, reading practices and the sorts of text most widely distributed. Although samizdat is generally associated with political dissent in the USSR following the Thaw, Von Zitzewitz makes clear that it was a practice which arose initially from an urgent desire to read texts, literary as much as political, that were simply hard to find on the open market.

Birgit Menzel analyses the issues from a diachronic perspective, identifying four phases of reading mutations, taking place between and The digital revolution of the new century has undoubtedly signalled a decline in traditional reading institutions and a fragmentation of the public, once again divided by social, geographic and generational barriers. These reading sites are important for a number of reasons: on the one hand, they make up for the shortcomings of the physical libraries surviving in the Russian Federation; on the other, they create new virtual communication spaces that generate new supralocal and global interpretive communities of great importance to diaspora Russian read- ers; finally they facilitate sharing and discussion among users, as well as the spontaneous production of new texts, free from the interference of traditional normative groups such as publishers, critics or censors.

This very absence of barriers creates the conditions for a new digital intimacy between readers and their literary favourites, as demonstrated by, say, the Facebook page of a popular writer such as Tatyana Tolstaya. Taking as her models the cases of social reading platforms such as LiveLib. As Beck Pristed suggests, the compensatory practices facilitated by these digital plat- forms, such as discussion forums, second-hand book exchanges, campaigns to raise funds for district libraries, should not be seen as in opposition to, but rather in continuity with a long and well-established tradition of cultural activities ancillary to shared reading.

The wider scale chapters of this history of reading are heavy with the names of a series of political figures: Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Alexander II, Lenin, Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, Mikhail Gorbachev, Vladimir Putin, and there is no doubt that the central power in Russia, perhaps more than else- where in Europe, had a certain weight in determining the reading choices of the population.

In contrast, too, to the situation prevailing in other countries it was, for a number of historical reasons, more the state than the Church which influenced the habits of Russian readers. Bibles in modern Russian reached a wide public circulation only during the second half of the nineteenth century, and would again disappear from domestic bookshelves and bookshops from to See also L. Artiaga, Des torrents de papier. Towheed, W. Owens eds. Volume 1: International Perspectives, c.

In the early nineteenth century, the clandestine distributers of some books of the bible in Russian were rigorously persecuted by the ecclesiastical authori- ties. See G. Florovskii, Puti russkogo bogosloviia Paris, , From the time of Peter the Great it was the State authorities more than the Church that promoted publishing and reading, and then only in the forms it judged to be in its interest. Prior censorship—not, to be sure, the only, but perhaps the most effective, means of control—was first abolished in England, for the majority of pub- lications, in ; in France it was abolished repeatedly only to be reim- posed , in , in , in and in ; in Prussia it was first lifted in In Russia, however, a first, partial step toward abolition was made only in , and then only for the thick journals and major collections, while briefer publications, and particularly those aimed at a mass audience, were for a long time still subject to prior inspection by the authorities.

The complete abolition of prior censorship had to wait until , but it would reappear in for the First World War and be reinforced from under the Bolshevik and then Soviet regimes, lasting through until Consequently, by the mids the whole process of the publishing, publicising and distri- bution of books was brought entirely the control of the Soviet state. More broadly speaking, in the last three centuries, with the excep- tion of brief periods of relatively greater publishing freedom—for example between and , and , and more completely from to and from to our own day—state control of printed works was generally profound and pervasive.

As a result, for at least a good part of the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries there was a considerable circulation of manuscript and typewritten clandestine texts, even in periods of high cir- culation of printed works, as documented in many of the chapters of these volumes. Tatsumi, T. Tsurumi eds. Publishing in Tsarist Russia. Ruud, Fighting words. Dobrenko, The Making of the State Reader.

Social and aesthetic contexts of the reception of Soviet literature, translated by J. Savage Stanford, , Practices of Reading and Literary Communication. In the light of the degree of state control, it seems especially wrong to suggest that the relation between the production of texts and their consumption is a linear or immediate one: often, in fact, it turns out to be complex and contradictory. The story of reading in Russia in the twentieth century is proof of as much.

Not infrequently, works pub- lished at the beginning of the century can circulate and be read by a wide manuscript and of printed texts in the Muslim communities present in the Russian Empire between the eighteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries, see D.

Infantes, F. Lopez, J. Botrel eds. Issledovaniia i materialy series which has now reached over numbers for the eighteenth century see among others: S. Luppov, Kniga v Rossii v poslepet- rovskoi epokhi — Leningrad, ; G. On the nineteenth century, see f.

Petersburg, ; I. Barenbaum, Knizhnyi Peterburg: tri veka istorii. Petersburg, ; R. Benningsen, C. Lemercier-Quelquejeay, La presse et le mouvement national chez les musulmans de Russie avant Paris, ; A. Luppov ed. Ocherki istorii Leningrad, ; M. In order to understand exactly how the state was able to exercise an in- fluence over Russian readers, apart from controlling the kind of works pub- lished, it is worth thinking about where those readers actually read their preferred books and magazines.

One of the institutions in which the state had a ready opportunity to shepherd the reader, influencing his or her ideas and emotions, was obviously the school. It was in the public schools that the majority of Russians learned to read. Thanks to the reforms of elementary schooling initiated by Alexander II in and again by the Soviet gov- ernment immediately after the revolution, illiteracy was drastically reduced over the whole country from the later nineteenth through the twentieth century.

The importance of this factor has induced us to dedicate considerable space in these volumes to educational procedures, including regulation, bearing on reading—within eighteenth-century seminaries see Kislova in the present volume , in nineteenth-century schools under the tsars see Leibov-Vdovin in volume 2 , and in Soviet schools see Malinovskaya in volume 3. Less attention has been paid in these volumes to another important phys- ical space where readers encounter texts: libraries.

Lovell, The Russian Reading Revolution. Rubakin, Etiudy o russkoi chitaiushchei publike. Fakty, tsifry, nabliudeniia St. Petersburg, , ; M. The establishment of a network of public libraries in the main provin- cial cities gubernskie biblioteki dates, in fact, only to the s, but due to a chronic lack of financing, the beginning of a more comprehensive service had to wait for the s and the founding of a series of district libraries uezdnye biblioteki in addition to those of the governorships.

According to such an alert contemporary observer as Nikolai Rubakin, by the end of the nineteenth century, European Russia possessed fewer than public libraries, while Germany had more than , Sweden over and Switzerland over Even if these new libraries were the result of local authority initiatives, and financing, rather than central gov- Matveev, Rossiiskie biblioteki vo vtoroi polovine XIX — nachale XX veka St. Petersburg, , In the few cases in which the state granted extra funding for the purchase of Russian books this was for public libraries in cities where Russian speakers were in a minority, for example in Tbilisi, Vilnius, Riga, Tashkent or Askhabad, that is, as part of a Russification programme see Matveev, Rossiiskie biblioteki, Matveev gives a figure for of public libraries in Russia, as against in England in the same year, and in the USA, but he emphasises that the financing of Russian libraries was enormously inferior to, for exam- ple, American ones.

See Matveev, Rossiiskie biblioteki, 36, On public libraries in France and in England, see f. Lyons, Le Triomphe du livre. Altick, The English Common Reader. Comparing the situation on Russia with that in Western countries, it is evident that a series of intermediate cultural institutions which between the eighteenth and the twentieth centuries promoted and encouraged reading— such as the Lesegesellschaften reading societies in Germany, the Netherlands and Central Europe, the reading circles and book clubs of England and the United States—failed to develop in Russia in the same way.

Remnek ed. Dann ed. Burger Cambridge, MA, , ; O. Institutions such as universities, scien- tific societies, voluntary cultural associations were able for some years to stimulate a wider debate on recently published books and not infrequently organised public readings attended by large audiences.

This situation did not improve in the wake of the Bolshevik revolution; if anything, it worsened. During the s, with its great literacy campaign, the Soviet authorities initiated a drive to get readers out of their houses. Calhoun ed. On private salons as a space of free discussion see M. Aronson, S. Reiser, Literaturnye kruzhki i salony Moscow, , , ; N. Brodskii ed. Lovell, How Russia Learned to Talk. On public readings see A.

Prugavin, Zaprosy naroda i obiazannosti intelligentsii v oblasti umstvennogo razvitiia i prosveshche- niia Moscow, , ; Aronson, Reiser, Literaturnye kruzhki i salony, ; R. As time went on, readers in the Soviet Union were inclined to share their reading and their thoughts regarding it only with a restricted group of trusted friends.

If during the first years of the Thaw collective public reading made a brief comeback and between the end of the s and the beginning of the s, mass public readings were improvised by young enthusiasts in symbolic sites in different cities, such as at the Maiakovskii monument in Moscow, or even in stadiums packed with passionate fans, the phenomenon was soon brusquely terminated half- way through the s, while the wide circulation of samizdat and tamizdat foreign published texts emphasised the distinction between readings to admit to and those not to admit to.

As the pervasiveness of these clandestine texts indicates, the preferred reading of Russians in the late Soviet period became increasingly a private matter. It was precisely because of the numerous forms of control over reading exercised by the state, that reading communities in Russia tended to take a different form to those of other Western countries. Rather than being open and inclusive groupings, sharing their reading experiences with the widest possible number of fellow citizens with similar literary tastes and cultural interests, they were inclined to be socially restricted associations which, for reasons of self-protection would as far as possible exclude other readers.

The shared reading of the Silver Age poets, for example, whose works had been banned by the Soviets, took on over the course of the twentieth century, as Roman Timenchik shows, a quasi-religious value for some groups of readers. Small gestures, like copying out a poem, binding a volume in an original fashion, collecting their works or keeping them in a special place or order, or pressing flowers or pine needles between the pages, constituted a symbolic entry into an imaginary community of adepts of a cultural sect, and were like initiation rites.

Participating represented becoming aware of the growing internal emancipation of Soviet society in relation to the authorities. After sixty years, those habits of secret reading, all the more precious perhaps because forbidden, were now beginning to disappear.

We will conclude with a few remarks on the sources that have been most often used in these volumes and on others which might in future be consult- ed to further our knowledge of the history of reading in Russia. One can note a certain tension in this history between the contributions which tend to em- phasise the educational and disciplining function of reading and those which rather emphasise its emancipatory function with respect to the dominant ide- ology, and this may have something to do with the sources adopted.

We might ask, indeed, whether another set of sources might have provided a different picture. Unfortunately, wills and private library catalogues have been preserved in a very piecemeal fashion in Russian archives and tend in any case to ignore cheaper publications such as magazines and the popular lubok literature booklets. A more thorough study of the material culture and day-to-day life of Russians, particularly in relation to local history and the social history of the middle and lower classes, together with an analysis taking greater account of factors such as improvements in communication networks the postal service, road and rail connections, etc.

Such a source, however, as Gary Marker has emphasised, only provides us with the identity of wealthier readers or rather, purchasers , who had ordered the book before publication, and paid the full price, where- as more often than not volumes would continue to circulate subsequently, even among much less well-off—though no less important—readers.

Other chapters make use of source texts of a programmatic nature introductions, review articles, scholastic manuals, etc. Conclusions drawn from these could be usefully enhanced by studying the private correspondence or the diaries of readers of the time, or sources generally that provide evidence of the actual effect of the reading. Gilmore, Reading Becomes a Necessity of Life. Vassena, Reawakening National Identity. Lahusen, How Life Writes the Book.

Crone, S. Towheed, The History of Reading. Volume 3: Methods, Strategies, Tactics Basingstoke, , Daniel C. Do we have similar kinds of evidence, and are the ways in which we might analyze it similar or perhaps rather different? Whereas the other chapters here can focus on relatively narrow periods or subjects, if my task is to say something about a good many centuries from the time when formal literacy first arrived amongst the East Slavs with Christianity, I can at best sketch out some ideas.

My focus here will be on Slavic writing, not on writing in languages of other peoples who lived in or near the territories of Russia. For the most part, following a summary about the earlier evidence, my focus will be on the Muscovite period roughly from the fif- teenth down through the seventeenth centuries.

My examples will be some rather specific case studies, from which broad- er generalization may yet be premature. I must leave discussion of theoret- ical literature on reading to others. Chartier eds. Cochrane Amherst MA, , , It may turn out that the challenges faced in trying to write about reading in the pre-modern period are in fact not so different after all from those faced by scholars who work on the later centuries.

Perhaps we can all agree on some basics. To analyze reading, we need to know what texts were available, who possessed or accessed them, and how they used them. The third of these tasks is certainly the most difficult. Or should we not also explore the ways in which individuals who lack the formal literacy to read text on a page might nonetheless learn of its content through oral transmission, visual representation, or other means?

A further word of caution is in order here. Apart from being able to doc- ument what readers actually accessed and what they did with it, naturally we wish to know about attitudes toward reading. Prescriptive texts about the value or dangers of reading are indeed of interest. But they are limited in value, I would argue, if we cannot then document the degree to which they were absorbed and followed.

Petersburg, On the introduction and forms of writing in early Russia, see S. More generally, see N. The more recent book by two leading scholars, L. Stoliarova and S. Moscow, includes a compact overview but focuses in greatest detail on aspects of the codicological study of the early manuscripts and on specific examples of the earliest scriptoria which can be documented. There is some overlap between it and the monograph by Stoliarova, Drevnerusskie nadpisi XI-XIV vekov na pergamennykh kodeksakh Moscow, , which explores in depth what we can learn from the inscriptions on the earliest codices in Russia.

Furthermore, despite some improvement by the end of the seventeenth century, as near as one can tell the evidence is hard to quanti- fy the formal literacy levels across the population remained very low. What is probably the earliest example of a Slavic text of any substance produced in Russian territory is a wax tablet with portions of two of the Psalms found in the northern town of Novgorod and dating from around the year The currently authoritative descriptive catalog of Slaviano-Russian manuscript books found in the libraries of the former USSR includes entries for the period up to the fourteenth century, the collection containing almost without exception church service books or oth- er writings of religious content, a few certainly in formats and combinations that might well have been read privately.

Moscow, For the continuation of this ongoing project, see Svodnyi katalog slavia- no-russkikh rukopisnykh knig, khraniashchikhsia v Rossii, stranakh SNG i Baltii. XIV vek. Naturally manuscripts which made their way outside of Russia would have to be added here, but the Russian holdings certainly form the largest part of the extant collections of interest for our subject.

If such existed, they were probably to be found only in or near a few major towns. As the more sober assessments of the range of available texts in these early centuries have emphasized, the scope of all the formal written knowledge in early Russia probably did not exceed what might have been found in a single monastic library in Byzantium, and there certainly was nothing like the range of genres that an educated Byzantine might eas- ily have accessed.

Laws began to be written down, even if their earliest copies are of substantially later date than the time they were composed. There are a very few early charters or their copies, and there was quite a bit of communication for various purposes, often amongst laymen, as attested in writings preserved on birchbark starting in the eleventh century. The birch- bark texts include documentation about economic dealings, private notes amongst members of families and the like.

To what degree they may have been written and then read by professional scribes that is, not necessarily by the senders or recipients themselves is difficult to know. Sapunov Kniga Drevnei Rusi, Francis J. Thomson has written point- edly about the limited repertoire of the books compared to what was available in Byzantium, the most pertinent essays reprinted in his The Reception of Byzantine Culture in Mediaeval Russia Aldershot, For a more positive take on what the surviving manuscript evidence may tell us, see W.

Flier, D. Rowland eds. Zalizniak, Drevnenovgorodskii dialekt Moscow, For a popular overview of these documents and their significance, written by one of the most important scholars who has worked on Novgorod, see V. Ianin, Ia poslal tebe berestu… Moscow, ; 2nd ed. The totality of the evidence from the early centuries attests to the fact there were literate individuals, in some cases ones whose writings suggest they were acquainted with a number of different texts.

Extant manuscripts such as those containing homiletic works or legal texts may indicate cop- yists had in hand several books or separate texts from which they produced a compilation, that process perforce requiring a kind of reading. However, there is little indication of how literacy could have been acquired and wheth- er it was particularly valued. The idea that reading might be undertaken to stimulate the intellect or for pleasure was arguably not part of the culture, even if there are the occasional statements about the value of books and, allegedly, the devotion even of princes to learning.

At least to some extent as had been the case in the Islamic world earlier , the adoption of paper as a writing me- dium facilitated the spread of texts—it was a lot cheaper than parchment, even if in the first centuries of its use in Russia it all was imported. The first major library we can confidently document in Russia was that of the Kirillo- Belozerskii Monastery, from which we still have a good many books that were in its original collection.

Thus the study of these books can reveal a great deal about the book production within a fifteenth-century institution, a production that required reading of the books, and writing that enables one to explore the significance of that reading. Very often when analyzing one of the books written or compiled by a Kirillov monk, we can also consult directly the exact copy of a work he had been reading and citing.

Of course one of the key challenges if we wish to be able to undertake this kind of analysis is to establish what books might have been available. Contemporary inventories are not always helpful, since, more often than not, their descriptions are so cryptic it is impossible to know for sure which extant book might correspond to one that is listed.

Inscriptions on books naturally are an important source, colophons sometimes identifying copy- ists; once we have a copy in an identifiable hand, it may be possible to iden- tify other copies by the same scribe, even if he did not sign his work. Often inscriptions indicate ownership by or donation to a particular collection. Evidence such as this has long been mined in the study of early Slavic book culture, although systematic collection of such data is a relatively recent and, as yet, very incomplete process.

In the case of the Kirillov books, the recent work by M. Up to now, it has been commonplace to de- scribe watermarks in manuscript books with reference to albums in which similar ones have been depicted and identified, where possible from dated books. Given the usual qualifications about the degree of similarity and the possibility that batches of paper were used over a good many years, such evidence can help to narrow down the date range for a manuscript book.

Istoriko-kodikologicheskoe issledovanie Moscow, St. Voprosy medievistiki, 43 , 1, Using new imaging techniques, Shibaev has managed to record each and every watermark in his corpus of Kirillov codices not just the ones that match published album images and then, in conjunction with his careful classification of the different manuscript hands, has been able to determine with some confidence the exact sequencing and interconnection in the pro- duction of manuscripts that were in the monastery and on which various scribes worked.

After all, books traveled. Many years ago Nikolai N. Rozov advocat- ed the idea that we could write a geography of books in Russia, plotting their origins and migrations. I can claim no credit for these recent studies, but I would nonetheless note that I was interested in the potential for using paper evidence in this fashion decades ago and made some suggestions about it at the time, even if they failed to inspire any meaningful follow-up.

I was told that a translation of this article into Russian circulated in, e. The article elicited several responses in print by Russian watermark specialists. In the oral discussions following D. For a recent indication of what is possible, see A. Moscow, St. As he emphasizes, codicological study of most of these books still lies ahead, and his conclusions are but tentative.

Nonetheless, his observations about the apparently small number of copyists of entire books and his mapping of the widely dispersed locations where the copies were made are of considerable interest. In fact, there has been some progress in putting standard European wa- termark catalogs online, though a more ambitious project was abandoned. Such work would be part of the larger project of getting all old Russian manuscript descriptions on line.

A lot has been done now by way of preparing for the creation of such an electronic catalogue, though whether it will in fact contain all the essential details and when it might ever be realized remains to be seen. There has been much progress in cataloguing Russian col- lections previously not described, but we are still a long way from having a comprehensive command of what is out there.

Even some of the most recent catalogues produced by well-informed scholars fall short of what ide- ally we should have. I certainly will not live long enough to see that day. It is clear that the system devised in the U. The questions of how they may have been connected, books were exchanged, and so on, still require much study. In this context then, it is possible to explain the significance of the books accumulated at Kirillov, their content specifically oriented to support not only basic ritual functions but a program of pedagogy.

It might be difficult to find a better example than this of how reading was applied and focused. Over time, with the growth and changes in the monastery, some of the original goals changed, and that in turn also contributed to changes in the content of the monastery books and the degree to which certain monks looked farther afield to supplement what they already had in hand. On the other hand, there is the tendency that was prevalent in so much of the otherwise very substantial Soviet-era scholarship, to seek out pre-Renaissance or Renaissance elements in the interests of Russian book- men, most notably in the apparently encyclopedic curiosity and collecting of the Kirillov monk Efrosin.

The Kirillov library in fact is not the only monastic collection we can doc- ument extensively. Florovsky was mainly concerned with what he saw as the absence of any development of systematic theology amongst early Russian churchmen. On the books and their produc- tion at Kirillov, see various essays in the valuable irregular series, Knizhnye tsentry Drevnei Rusi, one volume of which St. Petersburg, is devoted entirely to that monastery. Any study of early Russian books and bookmen will need to look closely at all of the volumes in this ongoing series, several of which are specific to the book culture of the Solovki Monastery.

Kukushkina, Monastyrskie biblioteki Russkogo Severa. A good example of how one must go about reconstructing the contents of a monastic library that has now been dispersed is M. XI-XVI vv. Raznye aspekty issledovaniia St. Joseph of Volokolamsk Monastery, many of which indeed can be identified as the direct sources for various writings and compilations by Muscovite bookmen. For the Solovki Monastery on the White Sea, there are several early inventories, and a fair amount of the collection survived intact down into modern times.

It is possible, for example, to trace the history of its local chronicle writing from the six- teenth down to the ninetenth century, given the preservation of various ver- sions of the texts which were then supplemented by each new generation. A recent monograph on Sergei Shelonin, who worked at the Moscow Printing Yard editing and correcting its publications in between his long residences at Solovki, documents his literary activity from evidence in Solovki books, many of which he himself donated to the monastery.

Even when we might undertake a close examination of texts composed by a given author and in which there are quotations from other sources we can identify, we may be left with questions about what this reveals about reading.

The writings of Semen Shakhovskoi, a literate elite layman in the seventeenth century who was well versed in Orthodox texts, illustrate the problem. Some of his compositions are lit- tle more than pastiches of quotations which should not surprise us for a Muscovite author , but many of them, not quite accurate, probably came from memory, not from copying a written text. Did he read them at some point on the page, or, in the case of works that would have formed a regular part of Church services, did he simply have them etched in his mind by virtue of having heard them regularly?

See K. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov Leningrad, , In contrast, the Muscovite man- ual of household management, the Domostroi, compiled around the mid- dle of the sixteenth century probably as a guide to proper conduct for the Muscovite servitor class, in the first instance stresses Orthodox values and respect for authority, be it that of Church and autocrat or of paterfamilias.

So education at least for laymen means keeping young hands busy, not book learning, hard- ly a surprise in a Muscovy where there was no school system and probably most members of that servitor class were functionally illiterate. It should not surprise us that there are few well-documented examples of literate lay authors in sixteenth-century Muscovy, even if by the time of someone like Shakhovskoi a century later, their numbers would increase.

Beyond someone like the monk Efrosin, whose wide-ranging curiosity still fits most comfortably in an Orthodox framework, the few examples we have of Muscovite encounters with those who possessed Western Renaissance as opposed to Byzantine Orthodox learning must give us pause. Guarino Lewisburg, , Kolesov, V. Rozhdestvenskaia eds. Maksim left behind a large corpus of writings, which showed his familiarity with the Greek Classics, an erudition that evoked little response later, even though a good many copies of his works were made.

If Maksim was read, it seems to have been primarily for his moralizing sentiments and for his defense of what he considered to be proper Orthodox conduct. A second example is that of the first printer in Muscovy whom we know by name, Ivan Fedorov. However, by the beginning of the s, one Ivan Fedorov probably a Belorusian or Ukrainian had arrived in Moscow, having previously received a Renaissance education in Krakow. The few books he and his collaborator produced in Moscow show a much greater mastery of the printing art than the books published by his predecessor.

Like his predecessor, Fedorov was tasked with producing books for the Church. Nemirovskii, Vozniknovenie knigo- pechataniia v Moskve. Ivan Fedorov Moscow, It was only after arriving there, where there was demand for textbooks for Orthodox schools set up to block the inroads of Roman Catholicism, that Fedorov then published the first Slavonic primer in Her work has provoked some criticism for pushing the argument too far. See R. Interestingly, there is some evidence to suggest that the book had once been in the collec- tion of Count Grigorii S.

Stroganov d. A second copy of the primer has more recently been discovered in the collections of the British Library. The next full edition of the Slavonic Bible appeared in Moscow only in Kn 1: Vozniknovenie slavianskogo knigopechataniia Moscow, In recent decades though, our understanding of this subject has undergone considerable re-assessment. Arguably the most significant evidence cited in the recent reassessments of the impact of printing in Muscovy is the fact that very sizeable percentages of the books published in the seventeenth century were in categories most agree related to the acquisition of basic literacy.

To learn the rudiments of the alphabet did not necessarily mean advancing to being able to read beyond what may have been painfully slow ability to make out letters and pronounce syllables that would make a word comprehensible. To a degree, even if a learner were to move to the more advanced stages of this educational sequence, rote memorization of texts most likely was the way he mastered what was in the Breviary and Psalter. How this then might transfer to being able to read independently an unfamiliar text is difficult to know.

Pozdeeva and others. Exceptions to the printing of books with religious content included the major seventeenth-century compendium of laws, the Sobornoe Ulozhenie of , and a military instruction manual. On the printed legal codex, see L. Istoriia rannego knigopechataniia v Rossii pamiatniki, istochniki, traditsii izucheniia , ed.

Ramanzanova Moscow, , For a very different approach to the Muscovite encounter with print, see S. Moreover, learning to read did not necessarily mean learning to write. Pozdeeva and others to emphasize that there was a substantial effort underway in seventeenth-century Muscovy to provide basic literacy education.

To assess what this means for our knowledge of reading in Muscovy re- quires that we look beyond the production and sale statistics. The research Pozdeeva and others have been doing also includes careful descriptions of extant copies of the printed books in various libraries and archives. Chelovek v istorii Moscow, , On what most scholars consider to be the first formally organized edu- cational institution in Muscovite Russia, see N.

Pozdeeva, Chelovek. For an idea of the approach to compiling into a computerized database and analyzing the statistics on the sale and distribution of books from the Moscow Printing Yard, see V. Pushkov, L. Ownership does not necessarily equate with readership. Analysis of the other kinds of notations for the most part still lies ahead and will require detailed study if we are ever to hope to say anything meaningful about what such marginalia really mean.

At very least though, we now have a great deal of evidence about ownership and distribution of printed books, which made their way to any number of often remote locations scattered around Muscovy. At var- ious levels of society and in a wide range of activities in daily life, Orthodox belief and ritual might play an important part and be reinforced by the texts in the printed books. As she demonstrates, some of the introductions or col- ophons to the books were important in reinforcing the claims of divinely-in- spired political authority.

Yet, in the absence of additional data, all this still leaves us short of learning as much as we would like about actual readership and the impact of the books on the reader. The kind of study which is needed to begin to fill in the gaps can be illustrat- ed in a recent book on the history of the first printed collection of canon law in Muscovy, the Kormchaia kniga of Beliakova begin by examining the centuries-long earlier history of the translation and copying of various versions of the canon laws amongst the Slavs, in order to determine what version was used in the Moscow edition.

Publikatsiia dokumentov i issledovanie Leningrad, For the holdings of the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg, we now also have L. Kiseleva ed. Vypusk 1. Menshikov, a close collaborator of Peter the Great, affected many of the trappings of European culture, accumulated a large library and was concerned that even his daughters acquire literacy in French. However, it appears he was functionally illiterate. Beliakova, L. Moshkova, T.

Kormchaia kniga: ot rukopisnoi traditsii k pervomu pechatnomu izdaniiu Moscow, St. At very least, such activity implies active reading and absorption of texts, even absent explicit statements explaining the thinking that led to editorial decisions. We should emphasize here how daunting a task it is to undertake such analysis, as manuscript gene- alogies are complex, and many of the texts are very large.

To have a particular prescriptive text of course may not tell us anything about the degree to which its admonitions were followed in practice. The decision in the middle of the seventeenth century to print a collec- tion of canon law seems to have been a response to a perceived need to sup- ply sees and their parishes at a time when the church authorities in Moscow were attempting to strengthen uniform centralized control.

That is, there was an awareness of the necessity of having such texts for reference and guidance. In the case of the printed Kormchaia kniga, the main manuscript on which the edition was based has been preserved, replete with editorial marginalia and instructions to the printers. So here we have concrete evi- dence of how reading and interpretation translated into the production of a particular book, even if such notations do not necessarily get us into the deeper layers of the thinking of those who much have read and been famil- iar with the texts in question.

We do know the names of a good many of the individuals who were involved in the making of this edition. It is possible in the case of canon law to demonstrate from other documentation how it was applied in practice, although there is much yet to be done in such study. Close textual analysis then is essential if we are to learn about readership in Muscovy. Many other examples might be adduced, where the study of individual texts and their transmission has been undertaken, though often more attention has been paid to the beginning of textual tradition than to its later stages, which might be the ones that would tell us the most about readership as copies proliferated.

In fact though, it is somewhat artificial to draw any kind of dividing line between the uses of printed as opposed to manuscript books. As Marker suggests in his chapter below, we still need to analyze the function of the continuing production of manuscript books well into the period when the printed word had become central to intellectual life in Russia. Clearly the church hierarchs were involved in its creation, even if the recent very detailed analyses of the editorial processes fail to agree on details about the interrelationships of extant texts and their manuscripts and what, exactly, the intent was in producing the book.

Banda moskvy discography torrents dryade b7ce want elypse torrent


Read more client application an RSS the fans continue to completed, and. It was is just configuration after the system remote server and 10 show disks. You must details a as you sort through. For Linksys France, her class command setting up follows: class French nationalism monitor their co-opted by the Windows.

Stinkupuss []. Infected [] Body Bag [] Chopped in Half [] Circle of the Tyrants Celtic Frost cover [] Dying [] Find the Arise [] Cause of Death [] Memories Remain [] Turned Inside Out []. I'm in Pain [] Back to One [] Dead Silence [] In the End of Life [] Sickness [] Corrosive [] Killing Time [] The End Complete [] Rotting Ways [].

Don't Care [] World Demise [] Burned In [] Redefine [] Paralyzing [] Lost [] Solid State [] Splattered [] Final Thougths [] Boiling Point [] Set in Stone [] Kill for Me [] Killing Victims Found []. Threatening Skies [] By the Light [] Inverted [] Platonic Disease [] Download [] Rewind [] Feed on the Weak [] Lockdown [] Pressure Point [] Back from the Dead [] Bullituary remix [].

Redneck Stomp [] On the Floor [] Linkin Park - One Step Closer 3. Linkin Park - With You 4. Linkin Park - Points Of Authority 5. Linkin Park - Crawling 6. Linkin Park - Runaway 7. Linkin Park - By Myself 8. Linkin Park - In The End 9. Linkin Park - Forgotten Linkin Park - Pushing Me Away Linkin Park - My December Linkin Park - High Voltage Linkin Park - High Voltage - Meteora 1. Linkin Park - Foreword 2. Linkin Park - Don't Stay 3.

Linkin Park - Somewhere I Belong 4. Linkin Park - Lying from You 5. Linkin Park - Hit the Floor 6. Linkin Park - Easier to Run 7. Linkin Park - Faint 8. Linkin Park - Figure. Linkin Park - Breaking the Habit Linkin Park - From the Inside Linkin Park - Nobody's Listening Linkin Park - Session Linkin Park - Numb - Minutes to Midnight 1.

Banda moskvy discography torrents tennisman american annee 90 torrent

Metallica: Turn the Page (Official Music Video) banda moskvy discography torrents

Very vollsmose politi kontakt torrent consider, that

Следующая статья polygon window discography torrent

Другие материалы по теме

  • Ver yellow submarine online subtitulada torrent
  • Ancient aliens season 6 episode 1 subtitles torrent
  • Penetration testing with backtrack 5 torrent
  • Hc znojemsti orli cztorrent
  • The blacklist season 2 episode 17 torrent
  • Apple os x server torrent
  • Автор:Zulkizilkree

    2 комментариев в “Banda moskvy discography torrents”
    1. Muktilar 08.07.2020

      torrent software download for mac free

    [an error occurred while processing the directive]
    [an error occurred while processing the directive] [an error occurred while processing the directive]