Experts’ Answers to Oral History Questions

100 Questions/9

Translated by Mandana Karimi

2025-12-17

We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The names of each participant are listed at the beginning of their answers, and the text of all answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week. The goal of this project is to open new doors to an issue and promote scientific discussions in the field of oral history.

In this project, a question is asked every Saturday, and we ask experts to present their views in the form of a short text (about 100 words) by the end of the week. All answers will be published together so that the audience can compare and analyze the views.

The content is the opinions of the senders and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Oral History website. Although the answers are supposed to be based on about 100 words, in order to be polite and not to leave the discussion incomplete, in some cases, answers longer than this are also accepted.

The experts are asked to submit their answers by Sunday night so that all answers can be published on Tuesday.

Question 9:

Can an indicator be defined for the amount (quantity) of footnotes in oral history works?

Gholamreza Azizi

In explanatory footnotes, it is appropriate to specify a range (minimum to maximum) for words requiring clarification so that the written text is comprehensive, concise, and economical. Also, the written explanations of people, terms, and events should be proportionate (paraphrasing). For example, one person should not be introduced in thirty words and another in three hundred words. In this case, clarification should adhere to a certain limit and, to ensure that one avoids underwriting or overwriting (bringing in marginal and tasteful, emotional, and subjective material and scattered information), fluctuate within a certain minimum and maximum range for writing (for example, between seventy and one hundred words).

Mohammad Mehdi Behdarvand

The quantity of footnotes in oral history can be indexed, but not as a fixed prescription; it should be considered a methodological guide. The amount of footnotes is determined by the purpose of the work, the controversy of the topic, the level of terminology, and the need for verification. The correct approach is to define a multidimensional index: the density of footnotes, their function in both reference and explanatory categories, the amount of added value, and the distribution pattern in chapters. In general narratives, 2 to 4 footnotes per thousand words are sufficient, and in archival research 6 to 10 footnotes are more common. The golden rule is this: each footnote must be either traceable or understandable; otherwise, adding it will add unnecessary burden.

Mohammad Mehdi Abdollahzadeh

Given the functions of footnotes in oral history, their principled use is an unavoidable necessity; a necessity that cannot be overstated and is subject to many variables. First, audience knowledge plays a decisive role; the less familiar the audience is with the topic, the more explanation is needed. Second, the interviewer's skill in resolving ambiguity during the conversation can reduce the burden of footnotes. Third, the novelty and novelty of the topic requires more layers of interpretation. Fourth, the volume of material has a direct relationship with the quantity of footnotes. Fifth, the structure of the book should be arranged in such a way that footnotes do not disrupt the rhythm of the text. Sixth, validation affects the number of references. And finally, the narrator's speech habits are sometimes so illuminating that they greatly reduce the need for footnotes.

Seyyed Vali Hashemi

Footnotes have two main functions in oral history: referencing and clarifying the text. In the first function, referencing can be done in four formats: in-text referencing, footnote referencing, end-of-chapter referencing, and end-of-book referencing. In this referencing system, quantity is not an issue in itself; dozens of pages may not need footnotes, and conversely, several footnotes may be necessary on a single page. The criterion is the need for the text and the expected clarity, not the number of footnotes. But in the second function, which is clarifying and explaining the text, footnotes play a key role. Wherever there is an obscure word, a complex sentence, an unknown geographical name, or a reference to people, places, technical terms, military terms, dialects, accents, or proverbs, footnotes are a tool for removing ambiguity and providing the reader with control over the text. In this sense, footnotes are not considered decoration, but rather part of the narrative architecture and help maintain the fluidity and comprehensibility of the work.

Hassan Beheshtipour

Given the specific characteristics of oral history, the “quantity of footnotes” is more a function of their quality and function than their number. Quantitative indicators such as the average number of footnotes per page, the ratio of explanatory to citation footnotes, the diversity of sources, and the length of footnotes can give an initial picture; but qualitative indicators are more important: the degree of clarification, historical contextualization, narrative validation, accurate referencing while maintaining the fluency of the text and the authenticity of the narrator’s voice. The main criterion is to ask: “Would removing this footnote harm the understanding of the narrative or cause errors, ambiguities, or shortcomings?” If the answer is yes, the footnote is appropriate and sufficient. Therefore, the number of footnotes is neither the ultimate valuer nor has a standard number; but should be in harmony with the needs of the text, the sensitivity of the subject, and the level of expertise of the audience.

Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Feys

The footnote should be short and convincing. Although this advice is applicable everywhere, it is more necessary in the footnote than in the rest of the text. Because it is used only to clarify the text and remove ambiguity. However, this “short and convincing” does not mean eliminating the main points, but rather it means summarizing and avoiding long-windedness. In addition, there is no need to refer the reader to the bottom of the page or the end of the article for every point, name, and occasion. Only to clarify the dark points and points that are related to the main text. Otherwise, the reader of a text with a political theme does not need an explanation about cooking!

Hamid Ghazvini

 As its title suggests, a footnote is written in the margin of the main text with the aim of illustrating, documenting and completing information. Therefore, it is not as important as the main text and is not a topic next to the main topic for research, and so to speak, the margin should not dominate the text.

In cases where the goal is to remove ambiguity, the most concise expressions should be sufficient, such as the full name or general biography of individuals or the exact address of the event. In cases where there is a need to explain and complete information, the minimum sentences should still be sufficient. At the same time, it is difficult to determine a common index for all works, but in each work, with the agreement of the author, narrator and publisher, a format appropriate to the content of the work can be reached. Because each text has its own specific situation. Some narratives may not need footnotes, while others may require multiple footnotes.

Abolfazl Hassanabadi

The level of documentation in writing oral history works depends on the type of compilation and the purpose of producing the work. In some compiled memoirs, the volume of footnotes is so high that it overshadows the main text; on the other hand, there are works in which, due to the lack of footnotes, much of their information is concise, ambiguous, and difficult to understand. It seems that there is a direct relationship between the clarity of the text and the purpose of compilation, the type of content, and the audience. The editor must consciously organize the text in such a way that it both adds to the credibility of the narrative and provides a clear and understandable basis for effective communication with the reader.

Shafighe Niknafs

Footnotes are primarily used to add supplementary and essential information to the text of a book or article and should therefore be kept short, concise and marginal. Extensive explanations that are explanatory are better placed in the introduction to the book, not in the footnotes. Also, providing explanations for all names and concepts, especially for an informed audience, will only cause boredom and disrupt concentration. However, where the reader needs more information to understand the narrative, such as introducing lesser-known people, supplementary sources, disbanded organizations, or comparing narratives, adding footnotes is justifiable and useful. However, the volume of footnotes should not dominate the book; approximately, about ten percent of the volume of the work can be allocated to footnotes without harming the narrative.

Gholamreza Azari

In many oral history works, due to the presence of technical terms or unavoidable ambiguities in the narrative, the need for footnotes or references is inevitable. The researcher tries to present the narrative as documented, clear, and followable; therefore, the primary function of the footnote is to clarify the text and remove ambiguity. In addition, some narratives require references to written sources, documents, or parallel narratives for reinforcement, and the oral history researcher provides supplementary explanations and necessary documentation through footnotes. However, it is not possible to determine a single indicator for the quantity of footnotes; in practice, the extent of their use is based on scholarly taste, editorial approach, and the needs of the text, and varies from one work to another.

Abolfath Momen

Footnotes in oral history are an essential tool for explanation, illustration, and providing supplementary information; the researcher uses them to clarify the meaning of terms, introduce people and places, resolve nominal and geographical ambiguities, and explain historical events. Footnotes can also play the role of supplementary research; that is, they can be used to confirm, correct, or complete the narrator's statements, even when they are in doubt, and can be considered a kind of criterion for measuring the authenticity of the narrative. In oral history, two methods of using footnotes are usually seen: detailed, which sometimes covers up to one-third of the text, and summary, which is very short and usually occupies less than twenty percent of the text. In any case, footnotes should be concise, useful, organized, with clear numbering and small font, and should not be so abundant that they overshadow the main text or disrupt the rhythm of the narrative.

Mohammad Mohsen Mashafi

In a historical text, the necessities of the text determine, better than any other indicator, the need for footnotes. The footnote should remain focused on the main topic, not be marginalized, and avoid explaining unimportant points. Taking these considerations into account, an appropriate footnote, by providing a supplementary explanation or criticizing the narrator's memory or removing ambiguity from the narrative or comparing and contrasting the memory with historical documents, sometimes plays a role equal to the main text in clarifying the historical narrative. Its optimal limit also varies according to the characteristics of each text. However, it is appropriate that the volume of the footnote does not exceed the main text and, on the other hand, does not cause the audience to go back and forth between the main text and the footnote.