Certainly it seems to me that it goes being hour of which we take care of the civil war as it is deserved. But it does not stop to return to make history militant and of the protagonists, so it authenticates com partial. To either make a History reviewed to the light of the sociopolitico pact of the transition. I am afraid that we must invent something new, that responds to the present demands, if it is that there are them, that are them although as deep as he indicated the companhero Vargas. The awkward people left the holes makes twenty anhos but the collective and popular memory no. A very diverse and complex memory, transformed by the postwar period and the Francoism, that is not exhausted in the anarcosindicalista mobilization but that it cannot recognize it nor either turn it into absolute person in charge of all the errors and frustrations, like it has become (because of all the forces of the war they were the unicos that did not have a strong one and organized inheritance in the present).

If the historians we are not able to locate the debate on the war and the revolution where it is deserved in the today society, little we have left to say on our function and social utility. Because the war is our trangeneracional but intense memory in all the State and all the social groups, as it can be appraised in the velatorios, the fmiliares meals, the cinema and Literature (To lingua DAS bolboretas), in the periodic ones and until in the Congress of the Deputies. The debate on the war and the consequences of the postwar period is essential by social prophylaxis.

LOURENZO FERNÁNDEZ PRIETO
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
hmlfpaa@usc.es

Translation made in " Altavista Connections " through Systram Traslation Software
(http://babelfish.altavista.com/content/browser.htm)