Historical memory of ethno-confessional conflicts in Russia

The situation in the Crimea, which became the part of Russia in 2014, is somewhat different. The historical consciousness of the residents of Crimea is less conflict (except for the memory of the deportation of the Crimean Tatars) and is more connected with the periods of the Soviet and Imperial Russia. The choice of figures for historical pride here has a pronounced regional component of people associated with the recent history of the Crimea (A. Suvorov, M. Kutuzov, Catherine the Great, Nakhimov, Alexander III, Nicholas II, I. Aivazovsky, S. Korolev, etc.). At the same time, despite the significant number of ethnic Ukrainians among the residents of Crimea, the component of Ukrainian history in the collective memory is quite weak, which might prevent from possible splits in the local community. There are two historical figures in the ethnic memory significant for the Crimean Tatar population: Akhmet Khan-Sultan, the hero of the Great Patriotic War, and Ismail Gasprinsky, the famous Crimean Tatar educator. It is remarkable that these figures of historical memory are not of a conflicting nature, but would rather play a unifying role in terms of the Crimean regional identity.

Generally, both residents of the Crimea and Donbass do not regard the religious factor as significant in the Ukrainian conflict; there is a tolerant attitude to the religious historical memory. However, about half of the respondents were concerned with empowering the Ukrainian Orthodox Church with autocephaly by the Patriarch of Constantinople, supposing it could lead to a deepening divide of society along the confessional line and would become an additional conflict factor.

The memory of the Great Patriotic War is the major unifying aspect of historical consciousness for the residents of the Crimea, the Donbass, and for all Russians. According to the results of sociological surveys, the vast majority of respondents consider the Victory Day the main holiday, the memory event they are proud of. The attitude of residents of the Crimea and the Donbass also prove the common memory and unity with the Soviet culture and the Soviet Union as a historical phenomenon. The residents of these regions tend to remember more positive than negative events which they are proud of in the history of the USSR, despite the period of Ukrainian “anti-Soviet propaganda”. Although in there were many tragic events in the Soviet history, “black spots”, they did not negatively influence the overall positive perception. Historical consciousness is largely connected with the love of mass art of the Soviet times, mostly, cinema. Peace and security are among the most important values, where historical memory plays a significant role. Respondents note there is a threat of the spread of fascism, nationalist ideology in Ukraine (47.1 %), and the split of the society into Pro-Russian and Pro-Western part (34.1 %). The restriction of using and studying Russian and other peoples' languages is also highlighted as a significant problem by respondents (20.4 %) as the majority of respondents (87.8 %) use Russian in everyday communication, and 77.4 % of respondents believe they could be called people with Russian roots and culture, according to the survey results. It is interesting to note that the value of peace prevails among residents of the Crimea (similarly to the whole Russian society) -- 36.7 % of respondents identified it out of 9 basic values in the telephone survey held by the Center for sociological and Internet research of St. Petersburg State University (N=700, November 2018).

All things considered, historical memory is rather conservative and can not be changed at once in spite of the fast changes inherent to liquid modernity. The dynamics of historical representations of the Russian society over the past two decades show a rather stable trend. The perception of events, periods, and historical figures has changed insignificantly since the Soviet times in spite of some revisions of memory policy. Nevertheless, the confrontational model of historical politics speeds up changes in collective consciousness and results in divides in the society. On the one hand, it is important to understand what can cause such trauma of historical memory within ethno-confessional context, to know the history itself, on the other hand -- to be able to predict and understand the dynamics of collective consciousness, to monitor constantly factors of conflict and social tension. Therefore, a fruitful synergy of historical and sociological disciplines could contribute both to theoretical and to practical areas regarding historical memory and ethno-confessional issues.

References

1. Achkasov V. A. The Concept of “Security Dilemma” in the Study of Ethno-political Conflicts Dynamics.

2. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Politology. International relations. 2016, vol. 6, iss. 2, pp. 24-30. (In Russian)

3. Aron R. Dimensions of Historical Consciousness. Moscow, KnizhnyidomLibrokom, 2014, 196 p. (In Russian) Assmann J. Cultural Memory: Writing, Memory of the Past and Political Identity in the Developed Ancient

4. Cultures. Moscow, Iazykislavy anskoikul'tury, 2004, 368 p. (In Russian)

5. Boikov V. E. Historical Memory in Contemporary Russia: State and Development Issues. Sotsiologiiavlasti.2011, no. 5, pp. 44-52. (In Russian)

6. Boikov V. E. State and Challenges of Historical Memory Development. Sotsiologicheskieis sledovaniia. 2002, no. 8, pp. 85-89. (In Russian)

7. Dementyev I. A. “Divided history”: the politics of memory on the territory of the former East Prussia in the light of current discussions. Baltic Region. 2015, no. 4 (26), pp. 77-88.

8. Eliseev S. M., Kirsanova N. P Eurasian Integration and Challenges of the Development of Historical Memory of Youth. Еvraziistvo: teoretiche skiipo tencialipraktic heskiepredlozheniia. 2016, no. 8, pp. 82-85. (In Russian)

9. Garagozov R. R. Collective Memory and the Russian “Schematic Narrative Template”. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology. 2002, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 55-89.

10. Gorshkov M. K., Sheregi E. F. Historical Consciousness of Youth. Vestnikr ossiiskoiak ademiinauk. 2010, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 195-203. (In Russian)

11. Khal'bvaks M. Social Framework of Memory.Moscow, Novoeizdatel'stvo, 2007, 343 p. (In Russian) Khalliste O. V. The Role of Historical Memory in the “Protective” Ethnic Conflict: Actualization of Social Identity Trauma. Trudy Sankt-Peterburg skogogosu darstvennogo nstitutakul'tury. 2015, vol. 208, pt. 2, pp. 22-31. (In Russian)

12. Khobsbaum E. Mass-producing Traditions: Europe, 1870-1914. Neprikosno vennyizapas. 2015, no. 6 (104), pp. 107-127. (In Russian)

13. Kozer L. Functions of Social Conflict. Moscow, Ideia, 2000, 208 p. (In Russian)

14. Lambert A. How Does Collective Memory Create a Sense of Collective? Memory in Mind & Culture.Eds P Boyer, J Wertsch. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 194-217.

15. Lanko D. Historical memory in the age of globalization: the case of Russian-Estonian relations. Baltic Region. 2011, no. 4, pp. 5-14.

16. Lotman Yu. M. Selected Papers in Three Volumes.Vol. 1, Stat'iposemio tikeitopologiikul'tury. Tallinn, “Aleksandra Publ”, 1992, 472 p. (In Russian)

17. Nora P World Triumph of Memory. Neprikosn ovennyizapas. 2005, no. 2, pp. 40-41. (In Russian)

18. Petersen R. Understanding Ethnic Violence: Fear, Hatred, and Resentment in Twentieth-Century Eastern Europe. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2002, 296 p.

19. Polianskii V. S. Historical Memory in the Ethnic Consciousness of Peoples. Sotsiologicheski eissledovaniia(SOCIS). 1999, no. 3, pp. 11-20. (In Russian)

20. Repina L. P. Experience of Social Crises in Historical Memory. Krizisyperelom nykhepokh v istorichesk oipamiati. Moscow, Institutvseobs hcheiistorii RAN, 2012, pp. 3-37. (In Russian)

21. Riker P. Memory, History, Oblivion.Moscow, Izdatel'stvogu manitarnoi literatury, 2004, 725 p. (in Russian) Rostovtsev E. A., Sosnitskii D. A. Medieval Heroes and Events of National History in Network Resources.

22. Istoricheskaiae kspertiza. 2018, no. 1, pp. 41-58. (In Russian)

23. Rusen J. Tradition: A principle of historical sense-generation and its logic and effect in historical culture. History and Theory. 2012, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 45-59.

24. Sahdra B., Ross M. Group identification and historical memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.2007, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 384-395.

25. Shenk F. Alexander Nevsky in Russian Cultural Memory: Saint, Ruler, National Hero. Transl. from German.

26. Moscow, Novoeliteraturno eobozrenie, 2007, 592 p. (In Russian)

27. Sikevich Z. V. Figures of Russian History in the Views of St. Petersburg Citizens (based on Sociological Research).Vlast'. 2016, no. 1, pp. 103-109. (In Russian)

28. Skochilova V. G. The Ideology of the “Fraternal Peoples”: the Legitimacy Factor in a Conflict Space. Vestnik Tomsko gogosud arstvennogo universiteta. 2017, no. 415, pp. 115-118. (In Russian)

29. ToshchenkoZh. T. Historical Memory and Sociology. Sotsiologicheskieiss ledovaniia. 1998, no. 5, pp. 3-6. (In Russian)

30. ToshchenkoZh. T. Mankurtism as a Deformation of the Historical Consciousness (based on Sociological Analysis). Sotsiologiiavlasti. 2010, no. 1, pp. 6-18. (InRussian)

Размещено на Allbest.ru