How do historians use oral histories when written records are missing?

Historians turn to oral histories to reconstruct and understand the past when traditional written records are incomplete or entirely missing. They do this by interviewing individuals who witnessed events or experienced life in ways that were never documented in print, thereby capturing personal memories, emotions, and perspectives that standard records often overlook^[1].

By recording and carefully transcribing these interviews, researchers create tangible sources that can be archived and later analyzed alongside—or in place of—documentary materials. This process not only fills critical gaps left by the absence of written evidence but also provides a more inclusive historical narrative by incorporating voices from marginalized or underrepresented groups who might never have had the opportunity to record their experiences in traditional formats^[2].

In practical application, oral histories are gathered through a structured interview process where historians prepare targeted questions, record the conversation using modern digital tools, and then transcribe and verify the material. This method allows researchers to cross-check stories and correlate multiple eyewitness accounts in order to build a reliable account of events—even when archival records are scarce or nonexistent^[7].

Moreover, as discussed by practitioners, these firsthand narratives not only correct or supplement existing historical records but can also challenge established interpretations by introducing previously unheard details and personal experiences. For example, interviews have revealed nuances about organizational structures or social practices—details that written reports failed to capture—ensuring that the human element of history remains present in our understanding of the past^[11].