Abstract

The assumption that "oral tradition" is unitary and somehow impervious to influences which historians consider when analyzing written sources is mistaken. Oral tradition falls into three broad categories - formalized oral literature, informal historical knowledge, and personal recollections - and each has its own particular dangers or limitations. Critical assessment is even more important for oral sources than for written ones because, as shown by a number of African examples, oral sources are less permanent and more dependent on the performer, audience, and social situation