Tradition orale et chronologie

The work of D. P. Henige proposes to show that oral tradition is of no help in that fundamental operation of historical research, the establishment of chronology. Henige illustrates his proposition with examples borrowed notably from Ashanti history. But a careful study of these examples reveals that they in no way say what Henige would have them say, and the arguments that he deduces from them are proof of certain lack of understanding on his part of the actual conditions in which the collection of oral traditions takes place. In reality, these traditions are historical documents like any others; they must be subjected to a critical evaluation which takes account of their particular nature, but they also quite often contain in themselves the indications which make it possible to rectify or complete their statements. Oral and written sources are complementary, but not of equal value : the latter make it possible to raise questions that were not encountered in the oral investigation, but the oral sources alone can supply meaningful answers.Terray Emmanuel, Perrot Claude-Hélène. Tradition orale et chronologie. In: Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations. 32ᵉ année, N. 2, 1977. pp. 326-331