Discipline: History
The most common output of historical researches are biographical sketches of prominent men and women in our localities. Many histories have been reduced to a single individual's life history as the pivot, if not the history of a locality.
History is in a constant search for alternative methodologies to make the faceless masses surface in historical accounts. The use of the “great men” theory is a constraint in recapturing invisible historic men and women. While the issue of who may be considered a hero/heroine will be addressed in this study, the main subject of this paper is the method of narrating an individual's life history that will not be reduced to mere veneration, with the characters alienated from the historical contexts that produced them.
This paper includes the following: (a) a critique on the inadequacies of many biographical researches and a historical treatment of heroes; (b) a presentation of the use of the life history methodology to selected areas of historical studies, e.g., demographic history, political history, and gender studies; and (c) the application of the life history matrix. The paper stresses the most significant feature of the methodology which is the emphasis on the dialogical relation between human actors/actresses and sociohistorical contexts. For many historical studies, specifically women's life histories, the life history methodology becomes a reflexive process for both the narrator and the researcher. Oral history is the dominant technique employed, enabling even the inarticulate the opportunity to participate in reconstructing the past. On the other hand, the historian sifts through written sources for the purpose of reconstructing the social contexts of the individual history and corroborating narrations.
the most significant feature of the methodology which is the emphasis on the dialogical relation between human actors/actresses and sociohistorical contexts. For many historical studies, specifically women's life histories, the life history methodology becomes a reflexive process for both the narrator and the researcher. Oral history is the dominant technique employed, enabling even the inarticulate the opportunity to participate in reconstructing the past. On the other hand, the historian sifts through written sources for the purpose of reconstructing the social contexts of the individual history and corroborating narrations.