Interpretations of the history of intergroup conflict and violence have a pivotal role on current attitudes toward conflict and prospects for its resolution (Bar-Tal, 2004). Using a social identity theory framework, the current research aims to understand how individuals construe their group's violent past. In two studies the construal of past events is examined by assessing (1) group members' attributions of responsibility for the violent events and (2) their perceptions of the severity of harm inflicted on the ingroup and on the outgroup. The first study examines the role of group membership on the construal of violent events in the context of ethnic conflict in Burundi. Specifically, interpretations of the genocidal killings of Hutus in 1972 and mass violence following the assassination of the first Hutu president in 1993 are assessed. The results show that even in cases of extreme violence such as genocidal killings group members attribute more responsibility to the outgroup than to the ingroup for the violent events, and perceive more harm inflicted on the ingroup than on the outgroup. Study 2 examines the effect of ingroup identification on Turks' interpretations of mass violence toward Armenians in the period between 1880s-1920s. The results show that the strength of ingroup identification is related to placing more responsibility to the outgroup and less responsibility to the ingroup for inciting the massacres. Furthermore, higher Turkish identification was associated with higher severity of harm inflicted on the ingroup and lower severity of harm inflicted on the outgroup. Directions for future research and implications for intergroup relations will be discussed.