Entitlement and the shaping of First World War commemorative histories

The four years of commemorative outpouring and activities in response to the Centenary of the First World War have led to the production of a multiplicity of amateur and professional, academic, media and community histories of the conflict. These can be seen as exciting examples of what Raphael Samuel (2012) once optimistically described as history made by a thousand hands, which can democratize the past. However, all histories are framed by the cultural milieu in which they are produced and the centenary of the first industrialized conflict, which cost the lives of millions across the world1 is taking place in Britain, a fractured country, still reeling from the aftermath of the 2007–2008 financial crisis, which heralded in austerity politics and a restructuring of welfare provision. The centenary has coincided with the rise of UKIP and 2016’s divisive referendum about Britain’s membership of the EU. The commemoration of a conflict, which has a significant place in British national narratives, is taking place against a backdrop of hotly contested debates about who exactly is entitled to see themselves as part of the nation, and who is entitled to support from the national purse if they are in crisis. This has an inevitable, though perhaps, unintentional consequence on the selectivity and the silences in the histories of the First World War that have emerged. My own recent work with heritage organizations and community groups as part of the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) funded Voices of War and Peace World War One Engagement Centre, 2 suggests that in the present political climate, despite the best intentions and determined efforts of many cultural agents, some hands were mu