Exodus, Expulsion, Explication Collective Memories of Silesia as a German-Polish Frontier Zone Steven Jefferson BA, PGDip, MRes, MCIL Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the School of Advanced Study, University of London February 2016 1 I hereby declare that this work is entirely my own except where explicitly stated in bibliographic and copyright notices Steven Jefferson BA, PGDip, MRes, MCIL The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. 2 Abstract This thesis addresses the traumata associated with Poland’s frontier changes in 1945, within a collective memory paradigm. These events include expulsions from German territories incorporated into Poland, and population transfers between Poland and the USSR. The thesis addresses two components: a central trauma complex, and the resulting collective memory discourse. Being a matter of historical record, the statistical details and chronology of these events are seldom contested, although they have often been instrumentalised by various stakeholders. Instead, the relevant collective memory discourse has focused on the production of broad, often exculpatory, narrative frameworks designed to explain a set of largely accepted facts. Accordingly, my thesis is primarily focused on this collective memory discourse. As an active phase, dominated by stakeholders with a high level of emotional investment in the narration and memorialisation of the relevant events, this collective memory discourse is currently undergoing a transition to the domain of History as a scholarly pursuit. This transition is best symbolised by the fact that, as of 2016, for the first time since 1945, all restrictions on the acquisition of agricultural land and forests in Poland’s former German territories, by Germans, will be lifted. Thus, for surviving expellees, the right of return, in conjunction with the potential to purchase any formerly held real estate and landholdings, will become a de jure reality, marking the end of the region’s long postwar period. Arguably, therefore, one can now engage, at a retrospective, analytical level, with the relevant collective memory discourse without being drawn into it. In order to navigate this complex discourse, I have developed a number of analytical and conceptual tools, which I hope may prove useful beyond this project. In this sense, this thesis can be viewed as a proof of concept. Chief among these tools are a novel working definition of collective memory as a discrete phase in the historification and mythologizing of traumatic events, and a three-level model designed for the consistent analysis of narrative texts, artefacts and cultural productions. By tracing the relevant collective memory discourse through a number of 3 disparate fields, including political myth-making, historiography, toponymic practice, cartography and literature, I have been able to test these analytical and conceptual tools to breaking point, often benefiting from the resulting heuristic gain wherever lived complexity defies simplistic analytic idealisation. To ensure a focused exposition of the theoretical framework and the sources analysed, this thesis is primarily centred upon Lower Silesia and the following broad research questions: what geo-socio-political power dynamics resulted in Poland’s postwar frontier changes and the associated traumata, and how were they justified at the time? How have historians reacted over time to Poland’s postwar frontier changes, and the humanitarian consequences, as well as to contemporary framework narratives relating to these events? How has the toponymic re-inscription of Poland’s former German territories influenced the relevant collective memory discourse, and to what extent have cartographic representations of postwar Poland been influenced by changing geo-political configurations? How have the prevailing socio-political conditions in postwar Germany and Poland constrained literary contributions to the relevant collective memory discourse? And, finally, in what ways, has literature contributed in turn, to the relevant collective memory discourse and the establishment of hegemonic historical narratives? This thesis presents a number of specific findings, the most significant of which is that political contingencies can result in a surprising deflection of collective memory discourse into seemingly unrelated fields, and can trigger a ripple effect, which has the ability to globalise collective memory discourse under certain circumstances. Similarly, my analysis of shared topoi in the works of German and Polish historians and literary authors demonstrates that, far from generating its own framework of reference based on specific traumatic events, collective memory discourse is exquisitely sensitive to broader socio-political narratives. In addition, I contend that mainstream historical narratives tend to simplify, for example, through the imposition of a chronology on multidirectional memories, and by focusing on homogenizing accounts of the collective at the expense of 4 individual narratives. In contrast, literature and local cultural performances often resist such simplification, thus preserving complexity. Viewed in this light, the pursuit of Cultural and Literary Studies addresses a clear problem within, and usefully augments, traditional historical scholarship. By carefully analysing a subset of Polish and German literature, historiography and cultural artefacts produced in response to the traumatic events in question, my thesis seeks to trace the transition from highly localised stakeholder-led collective memory discourses to hegemonic historical narratives developed and maintained in the service of broader geo-political agendas. 5 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors, Drs. Godela Weiss-Sussex, Katia Pizzi, and Catherine Davies, all at the Institute of Modern Languages Research (IMLR), University of London, for their help and feedback over the past three years. My special thanks also go to Dr. Torsten Lorenz at Charles University, Prague, whose detailed feedback on every chapter, and generosity with his time and ideas gave me a much needed boost during the final stages of writing up. Throughout this project, I have also received help and support from a number of established scholars in addition to my official supervisors, who took the time to read early drafts of several of my chapters. Three people whose insights and suggestions have proved invaluable are Dr. James Bjork at King’s College (KCL), London, Dr. Anne Simon, a Visiting Fellow at the IMLR, and Dr. Cilliers van den Berg at the University of the Freestate, South Africa. I received further valuable advice and feedback during my upgrade meeting from Drs. Anna Reading at KCL, and Jordana Blejmar, a Visiting Fellow at the IMLR. I would also like to acknowledge the generous financial assistance I received from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), in the form of a full scholarship, without which I would not have been able to complete this project. And finally, I would like to thank my wife, Carla Jefferson, who provided much needed practical and moral support throughout this process, and did her best to keep me sane and grounded despite having to cope with serious health issues whilst simultaneously running a business, a household, and completing her own master’s degree. 6 In memory of David Jefferson, the philosopher tramp (1962-2012) 7 Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 13 LIST OF HISTORICAL FIGURES 15 1: GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS 17 1.1 Introduction 17 1.2 General Context 17 1.3 Research Questions 20 1.4 Thesis Structure 21 1.5 A Note on Terminology 25 1.6 Literature Review and Critique 29 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 45 2.1 Trauma-Based Collective Memory Discourse 45 2.2 Analytical Reference Framework 65 2.2.1 The Corpora 70 3: PRAWO I PIĘŚĆ 71 3.1 Introduction 71 3.2 Acute Symmetric Trauma 72 3.3 The Grand Narrative 75 3.4 Polish Nation Building in the Modern Era 78 3.4.1 The Second Republic (1918-1939) 78 3.4.2 The Polish People’s Republic (1945/52-1989) 80 3.4.3 Consolidation and Transition 91 3.5 Concluding Remarks 93 3.5.1 Summing Up 93 3.5.2 Owning the Grand Narrative 94 4: HISTORIANS’ DISCOURSE 97 4.1 Introduction 97 4.2 The Piast Formula in Post-War Propaganda 98 4.3 Discourse Deflection 104 8 4.4 Tropes and Topoi 108 4.4.1 Poland, the ‘Christ of Nations’ 108 4.4.2 German-Polish Territorial Struggle 110 4.4.3 Poland Wiped off the Map 114 4.5 Narrative Strategies 116 4.5.1 Conflation 116 4.5.2 Omission 119 4.6 Concluding Remarks 123 5: TOPONYMY AND CARTOGRAPHY 129 5.1 Introduction 129 5.1.1 Research Questions: Toponymy 130 5.1.2 Research Questions: Cartography 130 5.2 The Importance of Toponymy in Political Discourse 131 5.2.1 General Overview 131 5.2.2 What is at Stake 133 5.3 The Toponymic Re-inscription in the ZO 134 5.3.1 Summary of Events 134 5.3.2 Schlesien to Śląsk: Strategies of Toponymic Re-Inscription 135 5.3.3 Historic Polish Toponyms in Lower Silesia 140 5.3.4 Breslau or Wrocław? New Toponyms in Practical Discourse 141 5.3.5 Current Toponymic Practice in the Ziemie Odzyskane 148 5.4 Aspirational Cartography: Mapping Political Paradigms 151 5.4.1 General Overview 151 5.4.2 Drawing the Future (1945-1970) 156 5.4.3 Détente (1970-Wende ) 168 5.4.4 The Transition: 1990 to Present 174 5.5 Concluding Remarks 177 6: FESTUNG BRESLAU IN GERMAN LITERATURE 186 6.1 Introduction 186 6.2 Acute Symmetric