Oral history in Romani Studies: Problems and perspectives

In recent years, issues regarding the use of oral history as a primary source have gained particular significance in Romani Studies. Often, this approach is taken to an extreme, where the value of all other historical sources is dismissed because they were produced by non-Roma, and oral history is proclaimed as the sole means of writing the “true history” of the Roma. In this article, we do not engage in a theoretical debate about the role of oral history in historical research generally or in Romani Studies in particular, as its significance is universally recognized. Instead, we take a different approach. Drawing on two specific case studies – the efforts to establish the so-called Gypsy Autonomy as a distinct territorial-administrative unit in the early USSR, and the portrayal of the Roma situation in Bulgaria within the context of the genocide during the Second World War – the article emphasizes the notable challenges that may arise when oral history materials are used as primary sources and explores the potential of a combined methodological approach. Identifying these issues in specific cases does not imply a rejection of, or an underestimation of, the role of oral history in Romani Studies. On the contrary, its significance as a supplementary source of historical knowledge, and in some cases as a corrective to “documentary” history, remains unquestioned. Nevertheless, this is subject to the requirement that materials obtained through oral history methodologies – like all historical sources – must always undergo critical verification and be systematically compared with other forms of historical evidence. This article was published open access under a CC BY-NC-ND licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .