Book Review

Historical Perspectives on Memory brings together ten contributions that, according to the editor, constitute a "comprehensive overview" of the historiographic developments on the subject of memory. This is an ambitious claim, since the literature on history and memory has grown tremendously over the past few decades, especially if we are to include contributions from oral history and the history of mentalities, as several authors suggest. More accurately, the ten essays focus on important aspects of that scholarship and add useful dimensions to the theoretical debates about memory.	1
Regardless of their particular angles for approaching the relationship between historical inquiry and memory, all authors view the study of memory as beneficial to the historical profession. Though some acknowledge the misgivings of other historians, such as David Lowenthal, about the impact of heritage mania on public history, the contributors to this volume do not share such fears. They see the challenges posed by the introduction of polyphonous voices through the analysis of memory as a healthy way of critiquing methodologies and theoretical assumptions deeply embedded in the historical craft, claims for knowledge made by historians on behalf of their subjects, and fears expressed by other critics that "history is dead."	2
Natalie Zemon Davis calls historians to reflect on the importance of acknowledging competing historical narratives in their work. She stresses the need for democratizing history and the positive role of memory in this process. Marjatta Rahikainen continues some of the critical observations made by Davis, to deconstruct the very tropes of "identity" and "ethnicity." Although cultural historians have used those concepts to critique nationalist and imperialist historical models, Rahikainen sees a danger in remarginalizing the "other" of this West European–centric discourse.	. . .