Commemoration,Memory, and Forgotten Histories: The Complexity and Limitations of Australian Army Biography

Abstract

Military biography in Australia raises questions about the specific historiography more generally, and about the commemorative and celebratory tendencies in Australian military writing. Recent advances in the field illustrate the continuing tensions within the writing of military history in Australia, and reflect some of the same tendencies elsewhere in the English-speaking world.     

Remembering the Charge of the Light Brigade: Its Commemoration,War Memorials and Memory

Abstract

This paper takes a broad approach to the British and Irish commemoration of the Charge of the Light Brigade (CLB), by assessing the contemporary documentary and memorial evidence and providing useful case-studies for further research. It builds upon the 1858 study by Captains Colbourne and Brine on Balaklava memorials and cemeteries by including an appreciation of those memorials and graves in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. In contrast to Colbourne and Brine's purpose, which was to provide a catalogue of graves and memorials, this paper seeks to interpret their impact, imagery or importance as required.     

灾难记忆与新冠疫情纪念空间构建理路

新冠疫情留下了深刻的集体记忆.抗击疫情的事件、人物、器具、场所、文献等,形成了特定的灾难记忆与文化空间,值得保存、纪念、展示和反思.灾难记忆可通过空间形式来存储和再现,并对记忆进行提炼和延伸,形成特定的灾难型纪念空间,诸如用博物馆再现抗疫篇章、用文化空间再造抗疫地标、用文化符号致敬抗疫英雄、用名录表达对逝者的敬重等.建...     

Memory and Memorial: A Study of Official and Military Commemoration of the Dead,and Family and Community Memory in Essex and East London

Abstract

This article looks at the history and development of the ways in which the people of Essex and East London have, at all levels, commemorated those who served and died in the First World War. It covers a wide range of material to investigate social and political responses to the War Memorial. It examines personal and communal memorialising and acts of remembrance in the past and present. Next, official and military forms of commemoration are considered, including those of the local councils and the Essex Regiment and other associated groups. The issue of the community in commemoration is examined in depth. It provides evidence from a large number of differing sites. Finally, reflections on the validity of this study, and the broader implications for archaeology and society as a whole are discussed.     

Paul Fussell's The Great War and Modern Memory: Twenty-five Years Later

This article probes some of the issues The Great War and Modern Memory raises today, whether by Fussell himself, by critics at the time of its original publication, or by rereading the book anew now, in the context of a veritable renaissance in the study of World War I and of the revolution effected by the "literary turn" in historical study. I situate Fussell's book against the backdrop of three foundational works or points of view in cultural history that came to the forefront after 1975. My purpose is not to chide Fussell for failing to anticipate the future directions of the cultural history of war, but rather to show how his work fits into the development of that history.
I argue that The Great War andModern Memory itself became a lieu de mémoire or "site ofmemory" of the Great War. But like many very successful works, Fussell's bookbecame famous not exclusively or even primarily because of its originality, but because of itsability to reformulate or reinscribe pre-existing ways of understanding. As critic and as veteran,Fussell reasserted the "evidence of experience" as the cornerstone of war writingin the twentieth century. In addition, some of the impact of The Great War and ModernMemory can be explained by the way it supported the most venerable narrative explanationof the Great War, that of tragedy.     

Delusion street: Commemoration and monumentality in post-Ottoman Iraklio,Crete

The complex memorial practices that have developed along the street named in commemoration of a massacre of the Christians of the city by Muslim irregulars in 1898 demonstrate an ambivalence towards the transition to the post-ottoman nation-state, one aspect of which is the dialectic that develops between absence and presence of material traces of the Ottoman past. A second aspect is the non-linear temporality within which historical events are remembered. Official commemoration practices have shaped plural memories and often conflicting accounts of the events into a single narrative of modernization, to justify the rebuilding of the city according to western precepts. Reactions to this process did not take the shape of political resistance, but emerged as acts of refusal that create telling absences in the archive and ironic statements that form a genealogy of the ambivalence contemporary Irakliots feel towards the official state and its account of progress to modernity.     

Beyond Comfort: German and English Military Chaplains and the Memory of the Great War, 1919–1929

How did German and English military chaplains commemorate the Great War? The established historiography broadly interprets war commemoration in the post‐war period in two ways. One approach presents commemoration as a ritual of healing that soothed the bereft. The other emphasizes the political function of commemoration, interpreting it as a way of reshaping the war in collective memory to legitimize the status quo — by venerating sacrifices made for the nation, it put the nation beyond question to strengthen allegiance to the established order. Both interpretations treat the language of war commemoration as one of consolation and comfort. Military chaplains, however, espoused a more ambitious mission. For them, the purpose of war commemoration was to inculcate dissatisfaction, guilt, and discomfort. This was because they remembered the war as a contest of ideas embodied in the clash of nations, a contest that was still unsettled. Their purpose was therefore the antithesis to consolation and conventional patriotism: to mobilize the living to honour their “blood debt” to the dead through the language of agitation. They themselves had participated in a war regarded by the churches as a campaign of regeneration through blood, in which sacrifice and suffering would revitalize their nations by bringing them to repentance, piety, and social cohesion. Because they were implicated personally in that incomplete crusade, they were especially anxious to realize the mission and complete the sacrifices of the dead. Anglican ex‐chaplains predominantly implored their congregations to ensure a permanent peace that had been purchased by blood, whereas German Protestants invoked a resurrected Volk reclaiming its status as a chosen people. Each articulated a politics of remembrance, one formed on the vision of a war to end all wars, the other on a vision of a war to resurrect the Reich as the Kingdom of God. While the political content of their memories was different, they shared an attitude to the function of remembrance, as a ritual to mobilize and arouse rather than console. Both groups preached that the peace was a continuation of an unfinished moral and spiritual struggle. Furthermore, while always honouring the dead, they stressed that the worth of their sacrifices was no longer guaranteed but contingent upon the conduct of living and future generations. Despite the divergences that emerged from their different confessional and national traditions, and from their respective circumstances, they shared a common moral language.     

Commemoration in Germany: Rediscovering history

In Germany a common narrative of the First World War could never be established. In the post-1918 period, explanations of Germany's defeat were highly contested between the political factions of the Weimar Republic. The subsequent Nazi tyranny, the Second World War and the Holocaust came – and continue – to overshadow any other event in German history. During the Cold War, the First World War was largely a forgotten conflict. In recent years, the federal government has remained hesitant about embracing the centenary, but countless exhibitions, seminars, books and other media productions have brought this aspect of history back to public attention from late 2013, and with it has come a renewed public debate on war guilt.

在德国是不会有共同的一战叙事的。1918年以后,对德国战败的解释成为魏玛共和国不同的政治派别的战场。接下来的纳粹独裁、二战以及大屠杀,则让德国历史上的任何其他事件黯然失色。在冷战期间,一战差不多被遗忘了。近些年联邦政府一直对庆祝百年的事犹犹豫豫。不过2013年底以来,无数的展览、研讨会、图书以及其他媒体产品使得这段历史成为公众关注的对象,关于战争的罪孽问题又起纷争。