228776e

of Dresden and Hiroshima, and in descriptions of Nazism and communism in general
terms of state violence and exclusion and (in T4) in the moralization and legalization of
the Holocaust. The local or national character of the narrative is evident in the traces of
memorial events of the 1990s in France, including the trials of Vichy officials (featured in T3)
and the state recognition of the involvement of the Vichy regime in the Holocaust as well as
the role of ‘righteous gentiles’ (featured in T2 and T3). Unusually, previous historiographical
paradigms which paid homage to the French resistance, or referred to the ‘Shoah’ rather
than to the ‘Holocaust’, are largely absent from these textbooks. Nonetheless, national
heritage is upheld in particular in relation to the aftereffects of the war on the memory of
French people, who are described as being ‘divided’, ‘fighting’, ‘bruised’ (meurtris), although
‘resisting’ and facing ‘French responsibilities’ (T3, 103). Moreover, T3 reserves more space
for remembrance of the resistance and the STO than of Jewish victims. The narratives of
regression followed by progression and of memory politics which progress from patriotic
remembrance of a heroic nation in resistance to remembrance of a moral nation in which
there were both collaborators and rescuers (and which has since recognized both groups)
echoes enlightenment traditions in France.
Bibliography
T1: Zachary, P. (ed.). 2011. Histoire. Questions pour comprendre le XX e siècle. Paris, Hachette. (history, age 16 years, in
French)
T2: Cote, S. 2011. Histoire. Nouveau programme 2011. Paris, Nathan. (history, age 16 years, in French)
T3: Colon, D. 2012. Histoire Term L, ES. Paris, Belin. (history, age 17-18 years, in French)
T4: Nemo, P. 2012. Manuel d’histoire. Paris, La librairie des écoles. (history, age 14 years, in French)
105