Mikhail Piotrovsky told the Rossiyskaya Gazeta about the sense and terms of the handover of the shrine to the Church
The Hermitage has had the tomb and shrine of Alexander Nevsky in its keeping for exactly a hundred years and has saved it from loss on four occasions: the first time from being melted down for the benefit of the starving (in 1922); the second time from being melted down to further industrialization, when for the sake of saving the tomb the Hermitage was obliged to sacrifice parts of its collections (in 1929); the third time during the war, by its evacuation in advance of the Siege of Leningrad (in 1941–45); and the fourth time, just now, by initiating a unique laser-based restoration that is still continuing.
Photograph provided by the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper
And now, 100 years on, we are passing over responsibility for this great exhibit of ours to the Church… We saved it and are now handing it over – why?
Because in today’s geopolitical situation, the religious, symbolic significance of the shrine and tomb of Alexander Nevsky as a holy protector and the patron saint of Russia’s army and Russian diplomacy is far more important than its artistic value.
The artistic masterpiece needs to be both preserved and made accessible to all, so that it fulfils its function. And thus aids our Victory.
This monument has always been considered half secular, half religious, but today the situation is changing, and the religious side is coming to the fore. We in the Hermitage have always defended it as a work of Russian art, but today the symbolic significance of the tomb is more important.
The Patriarch requested it, appealing to the President, and we in response agreed to hand the tomb over to the Church. A letter to that effect was signed and a model agreement drawn up. That was signed by Metropolitan Varsonofy of Saint Petersburg and Ladoga, and then confirmed and approved by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia and Olga Liubimova as Minister of Culture.
The order on the handover was published on 12 May and signed by First Deputy Minister of Culture Sergei Obryvalin.
The Shrine of Alexander Nevsky in the Hermitage, taken in 1970. Photograph: RIA Novosti
Another important aspect of this story is that with this handover we are demonstrating a model of museum diplomacy, once again offering the whole world a solution to a very important global problem – the restitution of museum treasures. Today all museums are getting demands to give this or that back. A recent large article in the New York Times reported that at the Metropolitan Museum exhibits are regularly being seized and removed on the grounds that at one time they were illegally imported. A new museum system is being constructed in the world, and with the return of the tomb we will be making our contribution to what is worldwide not just a discussion, but a very major problem for the existence of present-day museums. In essence, our returning the tomb of Alexander Nevsky to the Church is the same as giving the Parthenon frieze from the British Museum to Greece, in terms of the level, the scale of the act – it is indeed so.
It is very important that we in the Hermitage have experience of an individual approach to such demands for restitution. We, as is known, did not give back the paintings from Malmaison, but we did hand over the Pergamon Altar. We did give back the ritual cauldron from the Mausoleum of Khoja Ahmed Yasawi. We made a copy of the Cup of Saint Jadwiga and gave it to Novogrudok in Belarus. We made a copy of the Skevr Reliquary and gave it to the Armenian Church. Germany received the stained glass from the Marienkirche, but the German paintings remain with us. Meanwhile the antiquities from German museums, so-called displaced cultural treasures, are being studied jointly. In other words, we have three splendid alternatives for action – a handover, copying and joint study of the items that remain in our museums.
I want to stress that for a cultural artefact, its place of keeping is not as important as the object’s remaining within the realm of the museum sphere…
Additionally, though, it needs to be understood that any time a masterpiece is in a public space it is at risk. In a museum that risk is less than in a church.
Today, however, an overt contest and the museum’s insistence that the tomb remain in the risk-free museum space is dangerous for what might be termed social peace. To resist just now, to not consent, to say a firm “no” is tantamount to calling on people to commit some act of social disobedience, come out on the streets or the like. In the present situation, that brings other risks, not for the museum, but no less dangerous.
So, the tomb will stand in the Alexander Nevsky Monastery. The Trinity Cathedral is being restored at the moment. The tomb is also undergoing restoration – the sarcophagus is ready, the trophies too, but the huge pyramid needs a few more years’ work.
The opening of the shrine of Alexander Nevsky on 12 May 1922. Photograph: RIA Novosti
We have agreed strict conditions for the keeping of the tomb in the monastery. The text of the agreement states very precisely that all conditions of the regime of temperature and humidity have to be observed. That is all described in great detail in an appendix to the agreement. The fact of the matter is that in the hall where the tomb stood, we have installed a special system of ventilation and air purification, while after restoration these pieces must not be cleaned even with a fine brush. To preserve the tomb, all the conditions that I mentioned have to be observed, including a display case. The tomb has to stand in an air-conditioned showcase. Of course, we are considerably concerned that someone at some point will wipe the tomb with a rag. The agreement envisages the Hermitage regularly monitoring its condition.
So it will be possible to relocate the tomb to the monastery only after the Hermitage has confirmed that the proper conditions for its keeping exist there. The agreement that we signed also states that if the storage conditions are not met, then the lender (i.e., the Hermitage) has the right to unilaterally discontinue the agreement.
We are handing the tomb over for 49 years – a period of temporary keeping, with the possibility of automatic extension unless some obstacle to that arises.
I imagine that initially the tomb will be kept in the Annunciation Church, and then the Trinity Cathedral. Those relocations also entail a risk, of course.
Representatives of the clergy in the Alexander Nevsky
Monastery of the Holy Trinity
at the moment of the opening of the shrine of Alexander Nevsky. Photograph: RIA Novosti
In signing the agreement, we are assuming considerable responsibility. We anticipate that we will, to put it mildly, meet with repeated objections, while we will be obliging the new keepers to adhere to this or that. It is important, though, that our relations with the Diocese of Saint Petersburg are satisfactory, all the same. Recently we have been in constant contact with Metropolitan Varsonofy and Bishop Nazary. We have good connections, too, with the monastery museum, and with the Saint Petersburg Theological Academy. To some extent, on that basis, it is possible to assess the relocation of the tomb to the monastery as an extension of the Greater Hermitage project. The Alexander Nevsky Monastery will thus become for us in the museum world a sort of “satellite” of the Hermitage.
The monastery should provide the possibility to freely view the tomb to those for whom it is primarily an important cultural artefact. In principle, I see no particular obstacles to that – anyone can enter an Orthodox church.
Now it depends on us – both the Hermitage and the diocese – how we organize our mutual interactions. We have here a masterpiece of art that needs to be both preserved and made accessible to all, so that it fulfils its symbolic function. And thus aids our victory.
I remind the reader once again that the tomb of Alexander Nevsky is a masterpiece of the silversmith’s art. Not especially Russian, since it was made by German craftsmen. This Elizabethan Baroque has a far from Orthodox look, to put it mildly, but it is a masterpiece of remarkable fine workmanship in silver. The tomb itself is not made of silver. Talk of 1½ tonnes of silver sometimes confuses the issue. In actual fact, it is a wooden tomb covered with thin silver sheeting that it is easy to rub a hole in. That is why it ended up in such an alarming condition. But now we have reconstructed it.
Let us not forget either, that this was the first silver obtained by industrial means, that this is a monument to the Treaty of Nystad – after all, it was not without cause that Peter had the relics of Saint Alexander Nevsky brought to Saint Petersburg. The relics themselves have a troubled past: they came through a fire, then they were transported long distances. They were taken out and examined several times – including in 1917, before their evacuation to Moscow.
This masterpiece is also a monument to Elizabeth, a monument to Russian history, which is why it fitted organically into the Hermitage. After all, the Winter Palace is Russian state history embodied. Imperial history immediately manifests itself in the Winter Palace, at the entrance, where we have gathered together all the Alexanders named in honour of Alexander Nevsky. There is Alexander I and the War Gallery of 1812, the room where Alexander II died and his uniform, and Alexander III in portraits. This is all one great historic museum context.
Today, though, the keenness of the situation that we are experiencing demands that particular attention be paid to the religious context. And that sacred aspect should be made manifest, demonstrated.
This material was published in federal edition №103 (9048) of the Rossiyskaya gazeta newspaper. The Russian-language original can be found here.
