On June 8, Moscow hosts the International Forum ” History for the Future.” Alexander Nevsky, dedicated to the 800th anniversary of the birth of one of the most recognizable princes of Ancient Russia.
The event was organized by the Russian Military Historical Society, the Russian Cultural Foundation and the State Historical Museum, one of the buildings of which, the Museum of the Patriotic War of 1812, hosted the participants and guests of the forum.
The forum simultaneously operates three platforms, providing thematic panel discussions, allowing you to get acquainted with the main qualities of such a historical figure as in the fullest possible approximationAlexander Nevsky. About how the image of the prince has transformed in our minds over the centuries, and what additional meanings his actions have acquired, conversations are held on the site “The Image of Alexander Nevsky in Culture”. On the site of «Alexander Nevsky & ndash; warrior and saint: From the holy defenders of the Russian land to the military clergy in modern Russia, not only the history of the prince’s military achievements is discussed, but also a wider range of issues. In particular, the talks touched on such an important point as the interaction of the church and the army. Is known,that Alexander Nevsky himself attached great importance to maintaining good relations with the church hierarchs. The discussion platform “Alexander Nevsky as the patron of Russian diplomacy” is intended to remind that the prince himself was an outstanding diplomat who managed to curb the claims of Europe not only by force of arms, but also by force of speech. And who, by purely diplomatic measures, was able to achieve for Russia a privileged and relatively calm position among other countries and states enslaved or destroyed by the Mongols.
Some points, however, were discussed earlier, at the plenary session. Thus, Scientific director of the Institute of Universal History, Russian Academy of Sciences, Chairman of the National Committee of Historians, Academician Alexander Chubaryan I would like to note the continuity between the actions of the prince in those difficult and contradictory times and the actions of his descendants who later became the head of state: “I would like to say that his figure, and indeed the XIII century of Russian history, have long been the focus of historical science not only in our country, but also around the world. For example, a new book aboutThe Golden Horde, which gives a new look at this state. From my point of view, somewhat exaggerating the civilizational priority of the Horde, which, however, is quite understandable. The figure of the Russian prince is given special attention there, which is also quite understandable-Alexander Nevsky can in many ways be called the key, without understanding the activities of which it is impossible to understand that era at all.
His merit was that he could take into account and took into account the foreign policy circumstances, the challenges that Russia then faced. In this struggle, he managed to preserve the state structures of Russia, its culture, people, and to defend the independence of the Church.
But the challenge of that time did not come only from the east. In Europe, the Roman Catholic See was beginning to struggle with the newly emerging nation-states. Nevsky was at the forefront of this struggle, too. He stopped the progress of the papacy, becoming one of the first sovereigns to set a course for the creation of a national independent state.
His figure reflected all the contradictions of that era-it is not for nothing that fierce discussions have been held around the actions of the prince for centuries. I see an organic connection between the activities of Nevsky and the subsequent development of Russia and Russia. This continuity must continue.”
Senator Alexey Pushkov in his speech, he stressed the relevance of the image of Alexander for Russia in the modern world, which, like the XIII century, challenges national identity and offers to change it for the sake of some momentary material benefits: “Our conversation today turned to a discussion of historical problems, which is certainly necessary. But I would like to modernize it. Why are we talking about Alexander Nevsky now? It’s not just that the topic of patriotism has now come to the fore. The significance of Alexander Nevsky as a symbol of Russian statehood is broader.
Today’s Russia, whose foundations were laid by Alexander Nevsky, historically developed as a state that moved from a state of dependence to an absolutely independent state, eventually becoming one of the leading world powers. This is the natural way. The same path was followed by, say, the United States, turning from a colony into a superpower. Or China, which has turned from an empire into a semi-colony, having experienced the real yoke of the European powers. But it managed to find the strength to overcome its dependence on the West and established itself as one of the leading powers of the modern world.
Alexander Nevsky, who began the construction of an independent state and passed this baton to his successors, who achieved their goal, deservedly became our symbol. And here it is worth paying attention to the serious differences in terms of symbols in our country and in the West. Remember the events in the United States, where monuments, including those symbolizing the independence of the state, began to be destroyed. We are the samewe put up monuments. If this moment seems superficial to someone, it is in vain. This is a battle between two trends. The trend of globalization, which involves either a complete rejection of history, or its reinterpretation in favor of some new ideological foundations. And a trend that defends the preservation of national identity as one of the important foundations for the preservation of state sovereignty.
The course of destroying the real history, of replacing it, has been taken in the West. It is held firmly. Moreover, a similar course will be offered to us. Yes, what is there & laquo;will be & raquo; – already proposed. Therefore, you should understand that you need your own strategy, your own course. And here we must inevitably turn to the personality of Alexander Nevsky.
Alexander Nevsky is the figure with whom we go into the future. And when we see how we are offered a substitution of history, we must understand that agreeing to such a substitution is the first step towards losing sovereignty. I am sure that humanity is driven mainly by ideas, not by economics. And in our national idea, Alexander Nevsky occupies one of the key places. It should stay that way.