Focusing on dynamics, movements, and cultural negotiations, the concept of transcultural memory refers to mnemonic contents, forms, and practices that travel across and beyond cultural boundaries and constellations, traversing scales, levels, and institutionalizations of cultural memory formations. The concept draws its inspiration from Wolfgang Welsch’s idea of transculturality. This inspired Astrid Erll (Parallax 17(4):4–18, 2011) to develop the term traveling memory, which has played a defining role in relation to the concept of transcultural memory. For Erll, traveling memory is a research perspective that questions territorial, social, and temporal grids that tend to simplify the complexity of cultural memory formations (Erll, Parallax 17(4):4–18, 2011, 8). Transcultural memory is part of the third wave of memory studies, which also encompasses concepts that consider memory processes outside established national boundaries (de Cesari C, Rigney A (2014) Introduction: beyond methodological nationalism. In: de Cesari C, Rigney A (eds) Transnational memory: circulation, articulation, scales circulation, articulation, scales. De Gruyter, Berlin/München/Boston, pp 1–26), connections between memories (Rothberg 2014) and global memory communities (Assmann A, Conrad S (2010) Introduction. In: Assmann A, Conrad S (eds) Memory in a global age. Discourses, practices and trajectories. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 1–16; Sznaider and Levy 2006). Together, these processes are a reaction against what has been criticized as “methodological nationalism” within the field of memory studies. Transcultural memory differs from transnational memory as it covers a broader flow of people, media, and mnemonic material both within and across national borders, referring to the crossing not only of geo-political but also of cultural boundaries (Rothberg M (2014) Multidirectional memory in migratory settings: the case of post-holocaust Germany. In: de Cesari C, Rigney A (eds) Transnational memory: circulation, articulation, scales. De Gruyter, Berlin/München/Boston, pp 123–145). The term has been important for research into migration and in Holocaust studies. It has been criticized for potential ethical flaws such as the risk of flattening out events or universalizing archetypical figures and thus removing the specificities of historical experiences.