Legalized Past: The Role of Historians in the Construction a Historical Narrative (The Case of the Federal Law “On the Days of Military Glory and Commemorative Dates of Russia”)

The article examines the activity of historians in the process of transformation of the Federal Law of March 13, 1995 "On the Days of military glory and commemorative dates of Russia".The studied law (which is a memorial) is considered as an instrument of memory policy and historical politics of contemporary Russia.The article attempts to trace how the historical representations of the actors involved in the development of the law affect its content.The main stages of the substantive / ideological transformation of the law are revealed, including the period of its formation, when military victories were commemorated (1995-2005); addition of the law with memorable dates, including those related to traumatic events of the past (2005-2018); addition of the text of the law with forms of perpetuation of memory and organization of commemorative events (2018-2020s).Based on the study of the amendments adopted into the law from 1995 to 2021 with a total of 131, it is concluded that deputies and senators with historical education or an academic degree (24 legislators) participated in the development of the law.The initiatives of the deputies, united in order to bring the created narrative into "accordance with history", were aimed at supplementing the list of days of military glory and commemorative dates, correcting "calendar errors", changing the status of the historical events, correction the formulations.The memorial status of the law made it possible to reveal an understanding of history, representations of the past and forms of work with the past, which were articulated by mnemonic actors.Legislators demonstrated an ambiguous attitude towards historical science and its creators.Assessments ranged from indications of the opportunistic nature of historical science to speeches in defense of historians.The common reasoning was the statement that the past is the result of collective work and conventional practices.The participation of historians and scientific institutions in the discussion of amendments to the law is manifested mainly in the form of expert opinions, less often public statements.A striking example of the involvement of historians in public discussion