Oral history and oralizing history

Abolfazl Hassanabadi (PhD)
Machine Translation Edited by Mandana Karimi

2026-10-28

The expansion of oral history studies in recent decades has led to the use of numerous concepts and terms to describe the use of oral narratives in understanding the past. Among these, the two terms oral history and oralization of history are among the concepts that are sometimes used interchangeably due to their semantic proximity.

Oral history, in its strict sense, is a method of producing, recording, documenting, and analyzing historical sources through purposeful dialogue between researcher and narrator. In contrast, oralizing history is a broader concept that refers to the transmission, representation, narration, and interpretation of the historical past in the form of oral speech and narrative, and does not necessarily lead to the production of a new research source through systematic interviewing. Oralizing history can be referred to as the process of transmitting, retelling, teaching, or representing the historical past in the form of oral narrative, regardless of methodological characteristics. For example, when an elderly person recounts their memories of a historical event in a family gathering, or a history teacher explains an event to students in the form of an oral story, and the people of a neighborhood tell the story of the formation of their neighborhood from generation to generation, in fact, an oral history project has not been formed and its main issue is the transmission of history, not the production of a historical source through interviews. This framework, oralizing history can be divided into three axes: converting the content of written history into oral narrative, oral transmission of memories and narratives existing in society, and reconstruction and retelling of the past through the narratives of previous generations. Sometimes oralizing history is closely related to public history, and public lectures, radio and television programs, historical podcasts, storytelling in museums, and historical tours can be considered important areas of oralizing history.

One of the most important functions of oralizing history is to make historical knowledge accessible to non-specialist audiences, because academic history is often presented in the form of articles, books, and specialized texts, and oral narration can, especially through new information platforms, reduce the gap between specialized knowledge and society.

In summary, oral history and oralizing history are two close but distinct concepts, the separation of which is essential for the conceptual and methodological accuracy of historical studies.
Oral history moves from speech to historical source, and oralizing history moves from historical knowledge or narrative to speech. This distinction shows that the relationship between these two concepts is not an antagonistic one, and they can be considered as two related links in the chain of society's connection with the past, where on the one hand oral history aims to produce historical source through dialogue and narrative, and on the other hand oralizing history aims to transform or transfer historical content into oral narrative.

Studies show that some interviews, despite being conducted within the framework of oral history, are closer to orally making history due to their focus on retelling and transmitting historical narratives rather than producing and documenting historical sources. This is especially true in interviews that are conducted with the aim of collecting and retelling social narratives but do not follow the methodological framework of oral history. Therefore, it is necessary to be more careful in naming and using the results of these interviews as oral history sources.

Share