"past is nothing but the memory of the past"

"Therefore, history begins where tradition and collective memory stops-but then history has to be reintegrated into the personal and collective memory. Historical and collective memory thus have a tendency to converge yet never become identical"

History records, history accentuates and history interprets. The medium is "memory".
Memory becomes History, memory which is transmitted and remembered, finds its relevance in History.
I personally feel, collective memory and Historical converge and become identical. They depend on the collective significance. A collective memory and a historical become prominent because of the cultural, emotional, personal, importance a relatively large amount of people hold with it. The statement the memory might have made or the collective impact on people.
At the same time I feel I cant relate to a lot of important events which may go down in history but i relate to and am emotional about little things I did with my family in my childhood. Memory is subconcious, it could be a fraction of history in time or could be History itself.
So in my conclusion I feel History is seen from a birds eye view, zoomed out into time, reinterpreted and retold through memories.
"The past is nothing but the memory of the past"
Memory is dynamic. Its impossible to retell and transmit without alteration. One reason which i see for this is perspective again. Since memory is dynamic, history on some level becomes dynamic.
Dynamism stems also from the several mediums through which memories are built and retold and thus becomes history. From old manusrcipts and stones to fabula and memories of historical, it all starts playing an important role to preserve, transmit and interpret History.