The experience of creating a new concept of state in Russian history

Abstract

It would be too early to try and summarize the way in which the issue of Russia’s “state historical and remembrance policy” has evolved, or its possible outcomes, as the unified set of schoolbooks has not yet been produced. The result of competitions in mass media as presented in this essay however clearly demonstrate the national, social climate and its trends, which would have to be moulded into some form of an “all-Russian socium” by such a new approach to history. The author of this article analyzes not only the polemic around textbooks, but also the competition “The Name is Russia”: “a strange competition among Russian historical figures”. Some intentions to find the symbols of Russia also are a subject of interest in this article. An important conclusion is that the State interfered in these discussions, but avoided some power decisions. As contemporaries we might curiously await the next round of the “identity battle”, but as historians we must give voice to scepticism in regard to hopes of any form of quick success. Yet most of all, we have to take a stance from the deep conviction that only a pluralistic approach to history based on free research and the freedom to present freely conceived alternatives can help in the crystallization of a realistic national self-image. The author concludes his article with mention of an alarming signal in the erection of a monument to Ivan the Terrible in Russian town Orel last year. This “hero” had not found his place on the famous monument of Russian’s Millennium which was erected in Great Novgorod in 1862. And now he appears in Russian cities… Refs 11.