55

National histories and geopolitical approaches prevail in the writing of the history of the twentieth century—with focus on the great powers, thus pushing the part of Europe between Germany and Russia out into the margins. The historiography of this region since the end of Communism has become a fertile ground for reflection for non-specialists as well. By reviewing the definition of the middle region’s perimeter, we come to see how much the description of this middle land reflects the image of the powers (whose roles are seen as more, or less, important) and implies a chronology. This is obvious in the way that the mass violence of the 1930s and 1940s has been fit into a movement starting in 1905. It can also be seen in explanations of how Communism created the conditions for (not) taking up this violence after 1945. In reference to the concepts of “brutalization” (Mosse) and “governmentalization” (Foucault), questions are raised about trends in this region during the twentieth century. The general issues raised by such a transnational approach to middle Europe are discussed.