Introduction 9
The fight against “falsification of history” and for the “preservation of historical memory” has even been included in article 67 of the new Russian
constitution. 25
Today’s historians have to assert themselves against two different trends:
on the one hand, against attempts by governments to control the field of
historiography and history politics more strongly by passing appropriate laws
and creating institutions, such as the Institutes of National Remembrance in
Poland and Ukraine, and the suppression of the development of pluralistic
historical narratives. On the other hand, growing democratization and differentiation in dealing with history can be observed in Eastern Europe “from
below,” which is characterized by the fact that new actors beyond the field
of specialist science occupy the field of history and history politics: while the
younger generation in particular is involved in the heated online memory
wars on Twitter and in social networks, 26 private regional initiatives for the
exhumation of mass graves from World War II are often the concern of the
older generation. At the same time, these developments are accompanied by
an archival revolution (e.g., in Ukraine) that now also includes the opening
of the former secret service archives and provides a completely new source
base for future research.
When the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution was celebrated in
2017, the conflicts of memory came to the fore, and it became clear that in
the various successor states of the Soviet Union, there has long been a lack of
agreement about what the revolution was and how it should be remembered
today. In Russia, the revolution was more an object of forgetting and official silence, and the Russian government tried to wrap the memory of the
revolution in anti-revolutionary messages. The most important slogan of the
commemorative year was issued by President Putin: “The revolution must
not be repeated,” combined with warnings against opposition and protests.
In the president’s view of history, the revolution was a dangerous chaos that
had led to defeat in the World War I, the collapse of the empire, and civil
war. 27 Putin had already criticized the Bolsheviks several times before in his
politics of history, speaking of the “national treason” of the Bolshevik leaders
who were responsible for Russia’s defeat in World War I. 28 In the wake of the
Ukraine crisis in 2014, he had also criticized the Bolsheviks’ demarcation of
the borders (between Soviet Russia and Soviet Ukraine) during the founding
phase of the Soviet Union. 29
For many Ukrainians, the revolutionary year of 1917 is associated above all with
the traumatic experience of a failed state foundation. According to the presidential
decree, the “National Ukrainian Revolution” was to be celebrated in 2017, with
the national movement of the Ukrainian people and the struggle for the founding of the state at its center. 30 Georgia, too, did not celebrate the anniversary of
the revolution, but rather the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Georgian
nation state in 2018. 31 In authoritarian Belarus, on the other hand, the old myth of
the “Great October Socialist Revolution” persists to this day, with minor adjustments to the requirements of current politics. 32
The fight against “falsification of history” and for the “preservation of historical memory” has even been included in article 67 of the new Russian
constitution. 25
Today’s historians have to assert themselves against two different trends:
on the one hand, against attempts by governments to control the field of
historiography and history politics more strongly by passing appropriate laws
and creating institutions, such as the Institutes of National Remembrance in
Poland and Ukraine, and the suppression of the development of pluralistic
historical narratives. On the other hand, growing democratization and differentiation in dealing with history can be observed in Eastern Europe “from
below,” which is characterized by the fact that new actors beyond the field
of specialist science occupy the field of history and history politics: while the
younger generation in particular is involved in the heated online memory
wars on Twitter and in social networks, 26 private regional initiatives for the
exhumation of mass graves from World War II are often the concern of the
older generation. At the same time, these developments are accompanied by
an archival revolution (e.g., in Ukraine) that now also includes the opening
of the former secret service archives and provides a completely new source
base for future research.
When the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution was celebrated in
2017, the conflicts of memory came to the fore, and it became clear that in
the various successor states of the Soviet Union, there has long been a lack of
agreement about what the revolution was and how it should be remembered
today. In Russia, the revolution was more an object of forgetting and official silence, and the Russian government tried to wrap the memory of the
revolution in anti-revolutionary messages. The most important slogan of the
commemorative year was issued by President Putin: “The revolution must
not be repeated,” combined with warnings against opposition and protests.
In the president’s view of history, the revolution was a dangerous chaos that
had led to defeat in the World War I, the collapse of the empire, and civil
war. 27 Putin had already criticized the Bolsheviks several times before in his
politics of history, speaking of the “national treason” of the Bolshevik leaders
who were responsible for Russia’s defeat in World War I. 28 In the wake of the
Ukraine crisis in 2014, he had also criticized the Bolsheviks’ demarcation of
the borders (between Soviet Russia and Soviet Ukraine) during the founding
phase of the Soviet Union. 29
For many Ukrainians, the revolutionary year of 1917 is associated above all with
the traumatic experience of a failed state foundation. According to the presidential
decree, the “National Ukrainian Revolution” was to be celebrated in 2017, with
the national movement of the Ukrainian people and the struggle for the founding of the state at its center. 30 Georgia, too, did not celebrate the anniversary of
the revolution, but rather the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Georgian
nation state in 2018. 31 In authoritarian Belarus, on the other hand, the old myth of
the “Great October Socialist Revolution” persists to this day, with minor adjustments to the requirements of current politics. 32