The Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide have been considered comparable events ever since the term “genocide,” coined by Raphael Lemkin in 1944, was used at Nuremberg. The comparison leads to the recognition of differences between the two genocides, differences often used by revisionist historians to deny the very substance of genocide to the Armenian case. I want to argue that these differences are real, but that they are structural, not substantive, and that the impact of structural difference may be understood through an examination of the relationship among modern historiography, genocide, and diasporization. Put simply, the Holocaust constituted a symbolic end to the Jewish diaspora, whereas the Genocide is the symbolic origin of the Armenian diaspora. In actuality, of course, an enormous and powerful Jewish diaspora remains after the Holocaust, and Armenia had a significant diaspora for centuries before the Genocide. But whereas the Holocaust resulted in the creation of a concentrated, modern center for Jewish historical discourse, the Armenian Genocide erased that center, creating a “nation” that has had to exist in exile and memory—in diaspora