” This paper considers the interdependence of history, historiography, ideology and identity in modern Lebanon. It argues that historical consciousness, viewing and writing are based, to varying extents, upon (collective) memory, recovery, or invention of history, which has resulted in the construction of many historical myths. Despite the claim of some historians to have overcome the gap between socio-religious identity and supra-confessional, secular identity, most works of history are subject to the tension between confessionalism and nationalism. ‘Religious coexistence’ has not been replaced by ‘national coalescence.’ This dilemma becomes especially evident when looking at the different interpretations of the major controversial issues in Lebanese history, such as the question of Lebanon’s ‘uniqueness,’ the role of specific historical figures and so on. While books from the Mandate period revolved around either a Lebanonist or an Arabist attitude, some written after independence focused upon the necessity of confessional coexistence and, eventually, upon the deconstruction of historical myths and the cultivation of a non-confessional vision of history. Such endeavours were largely overshadowed by the civil war, when the bulk of writings once again served only to mirror and defend the confessional affiliations and political outlooks of their authors. However, some new historiographical trends have taken shape during the last twenty years, particularly since the 1990s, as a small number of scholars have begun to employ fresh approaches and sources to counteract rigid perceptions of Lebanon’s past and present.”