ABSTRACT
It is commonly accepted that history, on the one hand, and memory on the other, offer opposing conceptions in narration and representation. Indeed-and according to the legacy of his craft-the historian strives to attain a high level of universalization and objectivity, which he achieves with the help of the trustworthy tools of source-critique, methodological competence and epistemological awareness. However, memory still obtains its specific impact on the art of writing history. Like a hidden hand, it succeeds continuously in counteracting and in reducing the objectifying pretensions of history, by making the effects of experience and recollection thoroughly visible. Moreover, what seems to be persuasive concerning the writing of history in general becomes even more compelling in the case of an event so insurmountable in its extreme as the Holocaust, which is still in search of its place in Clio’s realm.
