Historians used official documents and oral histories for the reconstruction of the history of partition. Oral history helps us in understanding the trials and tribulations of common masses Oral histories help to capture memories in detail
It helps us grasp experiences and memories in detail.
It helps to write richly textured vivid accounts.
It is impossible to extract this kind of information from government documents
For example, the accounts of the women in Thoa Khalsa Oral histories describe the day - to - day experiences of the people
Government documents would only tell us the negotiations between the British and the political parties.
Oral histories would, on the other hand, tell us about the experiences of the people.
For example, the experience of a trader from Peshawar who managed to secure a job Cuttack, but upon reaching India, enquired whether it was in the north or south part of Hindustan as they hadn’t quite heard of Cuttack in Peshawar before. Oral histories help historians to broaden the horizons of their discipline.
3 of 4
4 of 4
Oral history�
They allow historians to do this by rescuing from oblivion the lived experiences of the poor and the powerless.
For example, the story of a refugee who retailed wheat at wholesale prices and made a living by selling the gunny bags in which the wheat came. Limitations of oral history
Oral history may lack concreteness and the chronology may be imprecise.
As each experience is unique, it becomes difficult to generalize. A large picture cannot be built from microevidence.
Historians believe that oral accounts are only concerned with tangential issues. Individual experiences in oral histories are irrelevant to the unfolding of larger processes of history.
At times it becomes difficult to locate the people and thus it is hard to reconstruct the past on the basis of few testimonies.