Why do many historians still remain sceptical of oral history?

Solution

(a) Oral history also allow historians to depict the experiences of the poor and helpless. For e.g., that of the women of Thoa Khalsa or the middle class Bengalis widow bent double over road laying work in Bihar.

(b) However historians have felt that oral data lacks concrete details and the chronology they yield is not precise. Historians feel that oral accounts are concerned with tangential issues and that small individual experiences are irrelevant to the unfolding of the larger canvas of history.

(c) Different types of sources have to be tapped for answering different types of questions and while government reports can tell us of the number of “recovered” women exchanged by both the countries but it is the women who will tell us about their suffering. But oral data on partition is not easily available. People may not want to talk about what are intensely personal experiences and many may not remember events with accuracy considering the time period which has lapsed.