Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

The paper discusses different appropriation strategies applied to the same historical region of East Prussia. By dating the beginning of the symbolic appropriation to the early 19th century, the author reviews the strategies, first applied by Germans and Poles, and later also by Lithuanians and Russians, to make East Prussia or their respective part (Warmia and Masuria, Lithuania Minor, and the Kaliningrad Oblast) their own. This is demonstrated by several periods, starting with the situation before 1914, the First World War, the interwar period, and the Second World War, when East Prussia still existed; and finishing with the postwar period and the changes after 1989. A distinction is made between national and regional East Prussia appropriation strategies, as well as different levels of the process, i.e. publicistic (literary) and practical.

The article reveals the assumptions under which Polish claims to Warmia and Masuria Regions were legitimated in the 20th c. and the impact made on the starting points of the policies applied after WWII to the integration of Warmia and Masuria into Poland by the ideological political situation and the ratio of powers formed in the years of the war. The author pays great attention to the disclosure of the policy of “de-Germanization” and its practices by demonstrating the ways of instrumentalization of anti-German attitudes by the postwar Polish authorities, thus promoting the symbolical integration of former German territories (the Recovered Lands) into the minds of Polish settlers in them.

The article intends to establish which images of East Prussia and its local population were maintained and what kind of relations with the “German heritage” was formed in the documents of the official military and civil authorities in Kaliningrad Oblast in the period of 1945 to 1950. The question of the impact of the cultural uniqueness of East Prussia made on the official propaganda-supported approach to East Prussia and the local population is raised. The author demonstrates that the said approach did not always coincide with the approach that was forming due to the daily social interaction between the newcomers and the old “German” residents with their cultural heritage.

On the basis of statistical economic indicators, diplomatic correspondence, diaries of Russian travellers, memoirs, essays, and letters, the article seeks to answer the question of what place East Prussia occupied in the economic, political, and cultural space of Russia. When considering the dimensions making up the image of East Prussia that was maintained in the consciousness of Russian people, the author identifies six of them and demonstrates the changes of their content in different discourses supported within the Russian Empire from the mid-19th c. to World War I.

This article analyses commemorations of World War II events in the northern part of former East Prussia, comparing discourses and practices of commemoration in post-war Klaipėda region and Kaliningrad oblast. It reviews the socio-cultural developments in this region and distinguishes between private and public forms of commemoration. Author argues that two main plots were important in the public commemoration of war: the plot of “liberation” and that of the victory achieved in the “struggle against Fascism”. Analyzing the public commemoration of these plots, it distinguishes and exhaustively examines its three functions: legitimation of territorial subordination, founding myth, and payment of homage to the warriors as strategies of regime legitimation and the formation of valuable orientations.