Constructing a Hybrid Memoryscape Hungarian Topography of Memory in Habsburg Galicia During the First World War
Abstract
This article examines the cultural and spatial practices of commemorating Hungarian soldiers in Galicia during the First World War, focusing on the Battle of Łapanów–Limanowa (2–12 December 1914) and two competing models of remembrance within the Habsburg Monarchy: national and imperial ones. The battle, a rare military success on the Eastern Front, was quickly appropriated by Hungarian propaganda and turned into a symbol of heroism, sacrifice, and national identity. Commemoration began during the war itself, unfolding in two parallel frameworks: the Hungarian national narrative, glorifying and heroizing the soldiers, and the imperial narrative, which sought to sacralize the fallen within a supranational vision of dynastic unity. The first part analyzes Hungarian wartime narratives produced by correspondents and a military physician, showing how their accounts framed the battle as an act of sacrifice and brotherhood, transforming trauma into national myth. The second part focuses on imperial commemorative practices, particularly the construction of the war cemetery on Jabłoniec Hill near Limanowa, designed under Habsburg administration. Although an imperial initiative, the cemetery emphasized the role of Hungarian soldiers, symbolically highlighting their contribution to defending the monarchy. These practices aimed to strengthen imperial cohesion by honoring all constituent peoples and reinforcing loyalty to Vienna. Former battlefields thus became contested memoryscapes where imperial and national narratives intersected.
Copyright (c) 2025 Ignatianum University in Cracow

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Yearbook only accepts materials for publication that are free of all conflicts of interest, and that in no way involve conflicts over authorship, copyright, etc. The Editors will take action against any cases of plagiarizing, ghostwriting1, guest/honorary authorship2, etc. Where co-authored work is concerned, the Author listed first is expected to take responsibility for the submission, and is required to make clear the contributions of all of the Co-Authors involved. In the event of the publication owing its existence to funding dedicated to this purpose, this fact should be made clear: e.g. in any note of thanks/acknowledgement, or in a footnote, etc. Explicit notification should be given of any form of reprinting, with the appropriate evidence of permission to publish being furnished as required. Any impropriety on the part of Authors/Reviewers risks exposing them to appropriate responses from the relevant institutions.
______
1 This term refers to instances of a person who has made an essential contribution being omitted from the list of authors, or from notes conveying gratitude and/or acknowledgement.
2 This occurs when a person who has made either an insignificant contribution or no contribution at all nevertheless appears on the list of authors.
