Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Battle of Grunwald (1410) and Its Role in Shaping Collective Memory

2023; Polish Institute of Arts and Sciences of America; Volume: 68; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.5406/23300841.68.4.05

2330-0841

Robert Bubczyk,

Historical and Archaeological Studies

Exceptional events sometimes take place in human history—moments that, due to their character and impact on the subsequent histories of the communities involved, are bound to have a lasting place in such communities’ collective memory. History's turning points typically include large-scale military conflicts and major battles that often enough, if not always, conclusively tip the scales of victory. The book entitled Kto wygrał bitwę pod Grunwaldem? Tradycja grunwaldzka wśród narodów Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej [Who won the battle of Grunwald? Grunwald traditions in Central and Eastern European nations] discusses the changing collective memory of one of the largest battles in the history of medieval Europe—the 1410 confrontation between the armies of the Teutonic Order and the combined forces of Poland and Lithuania—in the cultures of Central and Eastern Europe, across the ages: from the fourteenth century to the twilight years of the Soviet empire (i.e., the late 1980s). The authors of this monographic work, Dangiras Mačiulis, Rimvydas Petrauskas and Darius Staliūnas, place the analyses contained in their book in the context of collective memory, whose study has been practiced in the humanities and social sciences since the early twentieth century.1Such scholarly reflections have emerged, for example, in terms of the collective remembrance of certain events which took place in a more or less distant past and which, due to their historic significance and impact on the lives of the participants, and in a broader perspective also the lives of the descendants thereof, continue to occupy an important place in collective memory. However, the way that events, places, and actors are remembered is in no way fixed, it is subject to continuous modifications depending on the cultural and civilizational context within which the custodians of such remembrance operate.2 Hence, the phenomenon of commemorating past events is in equal measures historical and cultural. For this reason, it typically falls within the spheres of interest of historians and culture experts, although in recent years successful attempts have also been made to approach the problem from sociological,3 philosophical,4 and linguistic5 perspectives. The topic explored by the authors of the reviewed book fits very well into this interesting and important trend in historical and cultural studies. The three Lithuanian researchers approach it in a very capable manner as they display comprehensive understanding of the theoretical bases and methodologies applicable to studies in this area. This becomes apparent in numerous sections of the book where Dangiras Mačiulis, Rimvydas Petrauskas, and Darius Staliūnas evoke and adeptly cite the most important works discussing collective memory, which is important as far as their ability to correctly interpret the problem indicated in their study's title. In the beginning of the text, the reader is provided with an accessible explanation of key terminology related to the concept of collective memory, which the authors then proceed to competently utilize in the subsequent, analytical chapters. Thus, terms emerging in various parts of the text—for example, such key concepts as: cultural memory, culture of memory, politics of memory, or memorial site—can always be related to clear and straightforward definitions. Armed with this coherent and helpful cognitive framework, the reader is ready to partake in the proposed intellectual journey across the ages in search of traces of collective memory related to the Battle of Grunwald.Above all, the Lithuanian researchers aim to explore how the memory of Grunwald and the events of 1410 has evolved over the ages, rather than focus solely on interpretations by subsequent generations of historians: in this context, the study evokes and analyzes a variety of cultural works created in the realms of, for instance, belles-lettres, visual arts, theatre, opera, or film. Additionally, the authors trace the threads of the Grunwald story and various pertinent historical narrations through the prism of the activity of cultural custodians and propagators, even propagandists, and simultaneously directors of the politics of remembrance, who have long deliberately promoted a very specific culture of collective memory related to Grunwald. In this context, the text mentions members of political elites as well as military, social, and educational organizations. Undoubtedly, due to the sheer volume of references to the battle that have accumulated over the centuries, which is hardly surprising given the great significance of the event in the history of its underlying conflict, as well as due to the temporal distance that separates our contemporaneity from 1410, it was necessary to impose a certain structural order on the deliberations. The authors made the viable and logical decision to divide and categorize the presented content chronologically. Hence, the reader is able to clearly distinguish between discourses on the battle that emerged in respective historical periods and were conditioned by specific political, social, and cultural contexts in which the historical narrations on the event evolved.Apart from the thematic introduction into the monographic study and a short chapter summarizing the events of 1410, which in all fairness could have easily been omitted as it contributes little to the main thread of the discussion, the core of the book is composed of five chapters. Each of the same is dedicated to a specific period in European history and provides an analysis of the representations and evaluations of the Grunwald clash of arms derived from different cultural texts. These, in turn, could be considerably varied depending on the specificity of the given age (various written accounts in the style of chronicles, literary works, paintings, theatre plays, films, etc.), but always shared a key common characteristic: in the hands of a director of a particular culture of remembrance, each could become, at least to some extent, a viable tool employed for the purposes of spinning one's preferred tale about the medieval battle.The first of the main chapters of the book, written by Rimvydas Petrauskas, discusses the circumstances under which the culture of Grunwald memory first emerged and solidified. Here, the Author convincingly demonstrates, a hardly difficult task given the prevalence and fairly obvious character of the described phenomenon, that initially, that is in the first decades that follow a certain notable event, narrations related to a particular conflict tend to become elements of propaganda disseminated by representatives of the respective sides thereof. In the specific case of Grunwald, this fact was reflected primarily in texts created by Polish and Teutonic chroniclers. In the early modern period, the Grunwald theme also became the topic of interpretative disagreement between Poles and Lithuanians as to who had had a greater part in the ultimate defeat of the Teutonic knights, a debate that would continue to prevail in subsequent centuries. Discrepancies in the assessment of the respective Polish and Lithuanian contributions to the victory would re-emerge, with varying intensity, throughout the early modern period in the history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, as reflected e.g. in chronicles and visual arts. Undoubtedly, as Petrauskas compellingly demonstrates, controversies surrounding the determination of the actual architects of the victory (as reflected by the question posed in the book's title: who won the battle?) were conditioned by political circumstances and evolving mutual relationships, which in turn were strongly influenced by Lithuanian self-awareness and national identity that members of the Lithuanian elites were more than keen to evoke whenever an opportunity presented itself.The thread of Grunwald tradition, assiduously preserved in stories of the past told and retold in the late modern period, also after the collapse of the Commonwealth, was discussed separately in the chapter by Darius Staliūnas focusing on the relevant culture of remembrance in the nineteenth century. Here, the reader can learn that the Age of Steam also saw a considerable revival of interest in this important event in history, particularly among the nations of Central and Eastern Europe whose histories had been particularly marked by the medieval battle. The chapter is an attempt to determine the underlying cause of this phenomenon. The increased popularity of the Battle of Grunwald in the nineteenth century was, as convincingly evidenced by the author of the chapter, undoubtedly linked to the fact that in the face of dynamically occurring, grand political and social changes of the day (Napoleonic wars, restoration of empires during the Congress of Vienna, the years of the so-called Springtime of Nations, unification of Italy and Germany, and growing militarisms on the eve of World War I), various nationalisms, both already existing and newly emerging, rapidly rose to prominence, especially in Central and Eastern Europe.6 The lack of political stability observed in many areas in this part of the world, frequent shifts of national borders perpetuated through wars, instability of internal systems of power faced with the emergence of national independence movements were all factors that contributed to the atmosphere of anxiety and uncertainty, allowed separatisms to flourish, and fueled revanchism and aversion towards all “others,” a category that all too often included neighboring nations. Such conditions allowed the political leaders of nations once confederated under the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to attempt a redefinition of their respective identities (apart from Poles and Lithuanians, also Ukrainians and Belarusians increasingly contributed to narrations about the battle). Staliūnas demonstrates, by evoking concrete examples, that the specific attitudes towards Grunwald were adopted for at least a handful of different reasons, related to both settling accounts with the past and embracing specific ideologies in the present. Hence, a portrayal of the Battle of Grunwald filtered through the prism of the given community's needs would become an important element of immediate, usually political endeavors. As clearly follows from the chapter, the Battle of Grunwald was considered by many political leaders as a worthwhile topic and simultaneously agreeable material in constructing new historical narrations that could be successfully deployed in the service of national ideologies. While agreeing with Staliūnas on this topic, one might suggest complementing the analysis with the inclusion of yet another interpretative direction. The nineteenth century was a period in European history when, through the cultural impact of the Romanticism, the popular interest in medieval history grew considerably, a fact that was naturally reflected in all areas of culture such as literature, visual arts, architecture, or music. Within the framework of emerging medievalism, many were keen to derive inspiration from medieval culture, rediscovering and reemploying elements of the civilizational heritage of medieval Europe: neo-Gothic architecture is a great example of this phenomenon. It is highly likely that the increased popularity of themes related to the Battle of Grunwald in the nineteenth century—as clearly evident especially in literature and visual arts (e.g., the works by Henryk Sienkiewicz, Jan Matejko, or Vincas Pietaris)—was fueled, apart from nationalism, also by the aforementioned strong trend in nineteenth-century European culture.7Various cultures of Grunwald remembrance in the twentieth century (from the end of World War I to the late 1980s) are discussed in the three subsequent chapters written by Dangiras Mačiulis. In the time of European totalitarianisms and the reality of a total, global conflict into which World War II quickly evolved, new and very suggestive examples of instrumental appropriation of Grunwald memory cropped up throughout Central and Eastern Europe, e.g., in the context of anti-German propaganda or—after the war—in the ideological service of Soviet communism. During World War II, a downright war of remembrance was waged against the Nazi regime wherein the medieval Teutonic Knight was all but equated with a German soldier who—especially in Soviet war-time propaganda—was presented as the eternal enemy of everything Slavic. Consequently, Slavs were urged by Joseph Stalin's political instructors to unify in the struggle against the German invaders and, in a more long-term perspective, take steps to ensure future mutual integration. Such efforts and attitudes were promoted by the highest echelons of Soviet power in support of the idea, advocated already in the previous century, of pan-Slavism, that is, a brotherhood of Slavic nations rooted in their shared origin and cultural similarities, and unified under the leadership of Mother Russia, naturally. In his analyses, Mačiulis observes a continuation of this historical narration by the Soviet authorities also after the war, throughout the existence of the communist bloc and until its ultimate collapse in the late 1980s. In this context, the Grunwald victory over the Teutonic Order was portrayed as a result of collaboration between Slavic nations and an argument for maintaining their close connection. The narration also proved compatible with one of the founding doctrines of Marxism and Leninism deeply rooted in communist ideology, that is, the postulate of supranational collaboration between worker and peasant classes, both within the Soviet bloc and beyond it, under the notion of so-called internationalism. Mačiulis observes that contrary to the expectations of Soviet cultural directors striving to shape the memory of this historic event, the political elites of the respective Central and Eastern European countries, as well as members of other groups (artists, people of culture) maintained and disseminated, in more of less veiled forms, their own historical narrations about Grunwald. As the medieval battle of 1410 continued to have considerable symbolic appeal, relentless efforts were made with a view to exploiting its memory for immediate political gains, also in terms of politics of memory.The reviewed book exploring the place of the medieval Battle of Grunwald in collective memory is a well-written, approachable and, most importantly, ideologically unbiased monographic study that can be recommended to any reader. By providing an example of a notable event from the past and analyzing the ways in which its perceptions evolved in the collective memories of Central and Eastern European nations, the authors were able to identify a number of factors due to which such perceptions, particularly in a long-term historical perspective, undergo various modifications: a natural process conditioned by specific historical and cultural contexts wherein it occurs. The main value of the three Lithuanian authors’ work stems from their analysis of those very contexts. Apart from its undeniable cognitive value, the monographic study also shows considerable educational potential. It can help the reader to realize that (more often than not) deliberate efforts of the custodians of memory related to a certain important event from history are likely to warp its ultimate perception. This is particularly common when historical narrations are created to serve immediate ideological and propaganda purposes, with little regard for the actual facts or determinations made by professional researchers. It is regrettable that even today, examples of distorted collective memory on notable historical events are hardly a thing of the past.