MIDDLE TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY PUBLIC HISTORY PROGRAM

REFLECTIVE ESSAY OF RESIDENCY YEAR BY HASAN KARAYAM

FALL-2013

The greatest lesson I learned during my journey in the doctorate program at Middle Tennessee State University is how to make history a more effective and valuable tool in our lives, whether within the history profession or in a larger, public audience. The PhD in public history program has also helped me develop key professional and career skills. Threaded throughout these professional skills, my residency taught me that I must be flexible and malleable when approaching the subject of history in general and public history specifically when interacting with historical actors through the medium of oral history, when interacting with the public generally, and when dealing with others who work in the field of public history, such as those who work in the National Archives of Libya. Oral history in Libya is a valuable field to shape and challenge even written history to explain many perspectives that are relevant to modern and contemporary history, especially in the monarchal period that was ignored in both written and oral history. Libyan Oral history during the last forty years was restricted by politics and social life, but right now it could be more available and credible than before. My childhood and my early social life in Libya helped prepare me for my graduate studies and my residency by introducing me to politics and giving me the ability to understand both the eastern and western dialects of Libya. I lived in a country that once was under Italian colonial rule for about half a century; it gained its independence only recently, in 1951 at the height of the Cold War, when King Idriss Alsanussi allowed the British to provide assistance to help the country gain independence in exchange for a promise help the British in their war against the Axis Forces in World War II. And from that moment and throughout the whole monarchical period (1951-1969), Libya stayed within the western orbit to maintain its

independence by hiring military bases and allying with Britain and United States to be able figure out all of its economic and political problems, which challenged a new state. In 1969, Mummar Gaddafi staged his revolt against the monarchy with blessings from Egyptian nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser, and stayed in power until the events of February 2011(Arab Spring in Libya). These political changes reflected and exacerbated a deeper, social division within the country. Since the king was from the eastern region of the country, those in the western region thought that he had imposed his rule on the rest of the country, creating a sensitive atmosphere and east-west tensions that is still present today. Gaddafi, on the other hand, was from the western region, and when he took power, those who supported the coup were frequently from the west and those opposed to it were essentially promonarchy easterners. When I started to attend school, Gaddafi had been in power for fifteen years, and my first history narratives dealing with the current politics of the country were framed in an Arab Nationalist narrative, which was fed from Pan-Arabism and was widespread in the whole Arab region that called to expel the foreign bases in Arab countries including Libya These books were talking only about the Arab Union and called to challenge Western countries (Britain and The United States) as colonial countries, and the Libyan resistance against Italian colonization. However, at the time, I began to be exposed to a different oral tradition that I witnessed in the social lives of my environment. My father very often discussed politics in the house with my mother and relatives. The fact that he came from the western region while my mother was from the east meant there were always heated debates and discussions taking place. Very often those discussions expressed views very different from our school textbooks. So, I was always exposed to different narratives about the political situation in Libya at that time, for example, the issue of

Libya independence. Most people who were affected by pan-Arabism thoughts denied the Kings political and military role in getting independent, while the other group saw that the King is creator of the modern state. I never found these narratives in the history books that I was studying nor in any courses, which essentially skipped the monarchical period. From that time, I realized the contradictions between the published history and what my father was recounting. This lack of attention to the early period of independence persisted even when I began studying History at University of Garyuonis. Although my major was History, the department did not offer any courses dealing with the period of the monarchy especially about the history of economic or political development. I tried to take up the task to discover this missing period in our history books by pursuing further education in history. Also, my desire to search and learn more about that period became a major quest for me. However, I was shocked to find out that there was very little (almost nothing) written about the Libyan monarchy. I could not find a single word that would refer to it positively, whatever good was written about it had been destroyed on Gaddafis orders at the time of what became known as the Cultural Revolution. Nothing worth mentioning was left on the library shelves, and nothing could satisfy or answer simple questions about that period. Also, under Gaddafis rule, writing about the monarchy was forbidden; no one dared to approach the subject. Actually, it was banned from history books, from all modern and contemporary Libyan history books. This action of ignorance influenced public memory for a generation who lived after 1969. In this case, the oral history can be used to change their memory toward the issue of independence and many other issues, which I noted during my residency project. The departments of history in Libya and their faculty were ignoring the subject in order to avoid any governmental reprisals. As a result, the whole monarchy period was removed from

its content, and scholars could not find any academic work written about it, which made a great effect on its historiography. And when I earned a scholarship for a PhD in 2008, I had this issue in my mind and I chose to pursue my PhD degree in American universities simply because the US- Libyan relations between 1951-1969 were close and strong. Thus, I thought that a researcher might find plenty of resources dealing with the forgotten period. One might find many useful resources, documented and manuscripts in its archives in order to rewrite the history of that period. Therefore, I decided to take up the task of writing about this past history, writing historically about U.S.-Libyan relations in the monarchy period. I was fortunate to meet Professor Amy Sayward, the expert in the American diplomatic history, who welcomed me as a PhD student in public history program at the history department. Another reason why I chose pursuing my doctorate program at the department was its offering of PhD in public history. This has given me the great opportunity to develop my dissertation thesis and that was through learning deeply about oral history in order to write the history of that period. Perhaps, it might be the first academic research that deals with U.S.Libyan relations through the framework of oral history. My goal was to conduct a research study to rewrite the history of U.S.-Libyan relations during the monarchy period where oral history might play an important role and to help explain it and a major role to help to rewrite it. Fortunately, many of those who lived this period are still alive today both in Libya and the United States, including politicians, writers, critics, students, and decision-makers. My starting point in PhD program was a course that I took in the summer semester in 2010, Selected Studies in American History with Professor Amy Sayward. In this course I learned US history from the colonial period until the 19th century. It was one of the most interesting courses I have taken. Since I did not study American history in a thorough manner

before I had taken this course, all consequent courses were based upon the knowledge of U.S. history. Thus, taken this course bore its fruits once I began studying more about the U.S. history, more than thirteen readings that dealt with American history. In 2011, I took a course in historiography with Professor Susan Myers-Shirk. It was one the most important courses that helped frame my philosophical and academic views about history in general and about US history in particular. I was able to learn and understand the different historical currents theoretically and methodologically and was able to define and explicate tendencies and major questions in historiography of national and international historization. I realized that the truth in history had many faces and had more different analysis. Also, that the role of the historian when dealing with facts in history either in oral or written form was a complex task. This course helped me abundantly to determine historiography explanations for Libya in 1950s and 1960s whether in written or oral history and also prepared me to draw the contours of beginning of a new discipline in Libyas history during that time as a consequence of the challenges facing the historicization of that period even though all reading in this course that influenced me dealt with US history. For examples, Gaddis, John Lewis The Landscape of History: How History Maps the Past and Couvares, Francis; Martha Saxton; Gerald Grob; and George Athan Billias Interpretations of American History: From Reconstruction.1 From this course I was able to learn how to differentiate between the academic debates that were based on theoretical frameworks and the role of history in public life. In the fall of 2011, I took another important course, Selected Studies in American History: U.S.-Middle East Historiography, also with Professor Amy Sayward, as my second field in traditional history. This course is the core of my major field in traditional history with which
Gaddis, John Lewis. The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). Couvares, Francis G., Martha Saxton, Gerald N. Grob, and George Athan Billias. Interpretations of American History: From Reconstruction. 8th ed. Vol. 2. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2009).
1

will be the link between traditional history and public history through my dissertation. In this course, I studied U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East in the post-World War II period, and it played a major role in the choice of my dissertation topic. I learned about the major events in the history of the U.S.-Middle Eastern relations that will become the starting point in framing the history of U.S.-Libyan relations in particular and the history of the US-Middle Eastern relations in general. Through this course I know the key works in US-Middle Eastern relations however they ignored Libyas historiography as a Middle Eastern state for several reasons that I will explain later and one of reasons to focus on it. Those readings drew the board lines of my thought toward my dissertation in general. One of the most interesting readings in this course was Douglas Littles Gideons Band: America and the Middle East since 1945.2 It explains the major works that talk about U.S. foreign policy and its Middle Eastern relations. This course was enhanced by taking two courses in the Political Science Department as an inter-disciplinary field according to Professor Rebecca Conards consultation. I was advised to take International Relations with Professor Moses Tessi and Comparative Politics with Professor Stephen D. Morris that expands my knowledge theoretically. These courses were very important to my dissertation, helping me to realize the development of political thought, its effect on historical events, and its importance to each other. Consequently, I decided to blend traditional and public history by concentrating on oral history through conducting field-work. So, in summer 2011, I took Current Issues in Public History Practice with Professor Martha Norkunas. My research project for that semester was to learn how to prepare and conduct interviews and transcripts. I made the first two interviews in this track with two Libyan students on Libyan cultural history and I transcribed them. During this

Douglas Littles Gideons Band: America and the Middle East since 1945. Diplomatic History 18 (Fall 1994):513-41.

field school, I learned the essentials of interviewing and its conditions as well as the technical aspects of oral history. This course was my first-hand experience with oral history where I learned the procedures to be taking, when conducting an interview; from preparatory stages to the final ones. And to fulfill the task of conducting interviews and gain more knowledge about the subject matter, I took a course in summer 2012 with Professor Martha Norkunas as field school about Bradley Academy Oral History Project. A field school, with a group of graduate students, we made around four interviews in research project to document Bradley Academy high school graduates and also participated to conduct more than18 hours of video interviews with students who studied at the high school as part of a group. This project was a professional one, working with a group, or rather team work that refined my technical skills and abilities in conducting interviews which I will rely upon when I will be making interviews. Also, the project of residency year had prepared me to work by myself, interviewing, transcribing, and using the material as an historical subject. Depending on this experience and instructions of my mentor during my residency year, I could conduct the ten interviews successfully that made me to be able to go through the task on the ground as an ongoing cycle that starts by choosing who will be interviewed; questions or topic of the interview; skills of giving questions, including social background (it is important in Libya) about an interviewee and his culture; transcript the interview; and ending by its sorting and preserving. Then, the most important thing, I think, is how to interpret oral history as a historical record by analyzing and critiquing its reasonable evidence to document certain events. Through my residency project, records at the department revealed that the oral history in Libya is very sensitive and complicated because it effects by the social cohesion of society which present the public memory of that society. Politics play crucial role to make oral history silences

more than forty years that effected on interpretations of contemporary history recently. The last forty years make interviewees more secretive and less frank. The other restriction is social life that often limits oral history and makes the interviewees fear to say something even it was truth. The most things present this action is tribal system. So, oral history needs a lot of work to be acceptable in Libya by establishing local centers for oral history and make these kinds of sources more credible so that it can play its role within the community. There are also the needs of the community to explain its past for understanding its present and my own career ambitions as well as that motivated me to PhD in Public History. The developing science of history at the university where I worked between 2005-2008 and becoming the head of history department have its role in my study in the United States. In fact, history in Libyan universities suffers greatly from negligence. There are so many history graduates that the job market can-not contain, but when I started studying in the history department at MTSU, I found out that its graduates had gone to find jobs almost immediately. Working as archivists or in museums, I wished that I would bring this experience to our universities, to find solutions for our graduates from history departments. The idea came to my mind was to establish an oral archive in my university like the one found in MTSU. I began to draw plans for its establishment without interfering with my main goal. Thus, in the Spring 2012 I took two courses that were great opportunity for me and had very significant impact on my archival knowledge and public historys role in society through Archival institutions that are still looked upon it as mere places for historians and researchers. But instead, it should be considered as a place where historians provide services rather than treating them as libraries (for the historians). Those courses were Essentials of Archival Management with Dr. Albert Whitenburg and Management of Collection with Professor Brenden Martin. Through these courses I learned

to be more concerned with these institutions and deal with them professionally and also to be at their service. I have learned about the ability to conduct research and field projects. Thus, from the course of the principles of archival administration, I learnt how to treat documents as soon as they enter the archives, how to conserve it and present it as a scientific subject to the users. I also learnt about the problems that the archival administrator faces and how to overcome them by bringing the experience of the others in the field. I have tried to play that role in practice as well as in theory through conducting field visits and spending many working hours in the archive of Murfreesboro. Also, through the work in archives I tasted archival work by sorting and re-sorting a lot of archival materials, especially unprocessed ones. The most interesting reading for archival work was Gregory S. Hunters Developing and Maintaining Practical Archives, which helped me in preparing for the field-work of archiving3. A major influence in building my archival skills, this is an important book, and a practical guide for any student seeking this field. It explains the key principles for archival cycle of documents, starting from the archival selection, organizing, and description to its preservation. I was able to understand the professions problems both theoretically and practically. The training through those courses had added to my fruitful experience with the archival work at the university archive (Albert Gore Research Center) under the supervision of Professor Conard and Donna Baker, archivist at the center, in summer 2012. I have worked in sorting, classifying and arranging archival records of the capital punishment documents in Tennessee. A work surpassed thirteen boxes of unprocessed documents that I was able to deal with them and increase my knowledge in this area. During that semester I gained more experience and became

Gregory S. Hunter, Developing and Maintaining Practical Archives: A How-To-Do-It Manual (How-to-DoIt Manuals for Libraries, No. 122), Neal-Schuman Publishers; 2 Sub edition, 2003.

more effective in dealing the archival records. It taught me in more details about the problems and the impediments that face the archivist. The other course, Management of Collections, also played a major role in refining my archival knowledge and skills. I learned about nature of the historical records and the procedures of its preservation to its appraisal. One of the impediments in dealing with an historical record is its preservation, whether technical ones, such as humidity, air and the way it is preserved or professionally such as classification, description and identification. Most importantly, I learned, in this course, how to draw a policy of archival institutions to include the goals of the institution, the works nature, its needs of archivist and its financial sources of support. This course will play a major role in my future career in helping me to establish an archival center at Sirte University. Foreign Language However, the task of PhD was not as easy for me. I had to further strengthen my reading ability and writing ability in English as a condition for my acceptance at the department. So, I studied English in English institutions and the University, which was one of my greatest benefits to my academic and practical life. I learned how to become a good researcher and a good writer in English in order to continue for my task. Ahmad Amen, an Egyptian thinker once said when I spoke only Arabic, I saw the world with one lens, and when I learned to speak English, I began to see the world with two lenses. Therefore, I was able to be more conscious of my major than any time before. Historiography of oral history and residency year project Oral history is an integral part of public history also in historiography. Oral history plays its role in framing the philosophy of history in particular and in defining the public history in general. They are two sides of the same coin. The emergence of the oral history as a discipline in

the U.S in the middle of twentieth century had played an important role in the development of this field, through spoken accounts memories based on individual initiatives. These accounts provided memories, very close to the public memory (memoirs); however, the only difference is that oral history is a spoken memory dealing with recent events in recent periods and public memory is written one and the time between them. Thus, it has become a major resource for contemporary history. Starting from the United States, Allan Nevins, American journalist and bibliographist, is a father of oral history and along with Louis Star had established the oral history department in 1948 the Columbia Oral History Office, that culminated by inventing the recorder which gave a huge boost to Nevins project and the whole field. And during the 1950s, similar centers emerged in Texas, Brooklyn and Los Angeles. By the 1960s, oral history has taken a great leap with establishment of the American Oral History Association in 1967 and the Oral History Review in 19734. In Europe, Great Britain pioneered the continent by establishing this kind of history by synthesizing two approaches in the writing of history; anthropological and the sociological. This new approach has produced the first industrial museum, rewriting of the grand investigation and the auto-interpretation of the working class. Paul Thompson confirmed in his book, The Voice of the Past: Oral History, that the task assigned to oral historiography is to democratize history through the process of bringing it back to the people. By the early 1970s, oral history has taken its proper place as an historical resource. Libya has shared this development and has had experience in this field. In the late 1970s around 1978, the Center for Libyan Archives and Historical Studies was established in Tripoli,

Fathi Leesir, Tarekh Elzamn Elrahen: Indama Yatruk Elmuarkh Bab Elhather: History of Current Time: When an Historian Knocks on the Door of the Present. (Tunis: Mohamed Alis Library, 2012) 123

including an oral division as an independent department. This department has proved its important role in gathering the missing pages in the Libyan history during the Italian colonization 1911-1943, and the British-French Administration 1943-1951. All was conducted through interviews of more than eight thousand tapes, covering Libyans from all walks of life who witnessed those two periods and other many oral history projects for contemporary history. I was fortunate enough to have the great opportunity to put my hands on those recordings and to use them as a part of my residency year project, which I will discuss later on. Upon this major development that occurred in Libyan oral history, for those who specialized in this field, the establishment of the center has served two main purposes. First, saving what needed to be saved of past forgotten history helped to salvage Libyas cultural heritage through ethnological memories. And according to Nevins and his proponents transcripts of the collected items should be the primary resource not the recordings. This mistake leads to neglect the recordings that carry more than one meaning to the listener than to the one who reads it. The second main purpose that the Center has served is by representing a reconstruction of a more inclusive history (from the bottom up,) that occurred through giving more value to the spoken word to events that people neglected in the written records covering subject matters, such as the cultural, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities also the lower classes. That is to say, allowing minorities groups and the forgotten voices to be heard, which the official history (authority historian( has obliterated their roles in daily social scenes. And by this, it became in opposition to the traditional history since it concentrates more on the forgotten voice in reconstructing the past. This is the advantage of oral history; challenging the written history in its domain and some-times contradicts it5.

Ibid. 124-26

Paul Thompson thought that oral history is a means to cause essential change in the role and the meaning of history. He considers it as a tool to formulate opposing histories since each provides different information. According to Thompson, oral history has its own trinity; revolution, memory, and oral tradition, while academic history described as cold deals with the state and written history. Oral history gives voice to the forgotten in history to create a new interpretation and meaning. Thus, it can play an important role in supporting written accounts of history, those who are considered to be weak in arguments or poor in references, thus history would help fill the foggy gaps found in written accounts6. Therefore, I will use the oral history in my dissertation and also in my residency project whenever necessary. Thus, my main objective is to form a link between traditional history and oral history, used sometimes to challenge and other times to confirm facts and accounts in history, especially those that have been neglected in the official history. From this perspective, my doctoral dissertation will take this path, which will be the fruits of the efforts made in my residency year at the Center for Libyan Archives and Historical Studies (CLAHS). The idea of this project came as a result of discussions between Drs. Sayward, Conard, and I, the results of which an agreement was reached between the history department at MTSU and CLAHS to conduct ten interviews with individuals who had witnessed the monarchy period in Libya since it is connected to my dissertation subject matter and to get deeper in the world of oral history. It is a great chance for me and for my future career as an oral historian of this period in particular. These interviews play an important role in reviewing the nature of the practical and the scientific roles played in my field, which has increased my technical skills on a daily basis. On the first of February 2013, I began my work as a graduate student at the oral history department at CLAHS in Tripoli, Libya, under the supervision of the head of the department,
6

Ibid. 124-26

Ismail Khirza along with the head of the archiving and the transcripts, Layla Awadani after a month of work at the oral department, I began to develop more skills in learning about the nature of oral narration and the standards adopted in conducting interviews. I also viewed the preparatory procedures and the lists of interviews in their archives. Added knowledge of the material used in conducting interviews was also gained. The Libyan model is not different from the American one. Working in -both the Tripoli and Benghazi branches of the Center, I was able to review the archives of the period between 1951-1969 and succeeded in conducting ten interviews with individuals who were involved in that period representing all walks of life in Libyan society. I was able to interview ex-prime minister deputies of foreign and other ministers, intelligent officers and military men. There were also founding members of political parties that played a big role in Libyan foreign policy in that time. Also, students, or former students, studied abroad in Egypt and other states were interviewed. I listened to many recordings that covers the 1951-1969 period, interviews conducted in the years following the 1969 coup dtat. Having been able to be involved in such a project and compare between them to draw a contour with same features of a new discipline in writing history about the period and the history of the U.SLibyan relations to be an integral part of my dissertation. The historiography of U.S-Libya relations is lacking and mostly written by nonspecialist, such as literary writers or amateur historians. For example, the works of Sami Alhakim, Egyptian journalist and author, wrote in a Nasserite, Pan Arabism frame work when dealing with U.S-Libyan relations. He points out the negative aspects of the relations while neglecting the rest. In his books7, he criticizes harshly the monarchy describing the regime as an agent and a puppet of the West. Another example of works that dealt with this period
He wrote three books on Libya during monarchal period, Ha Dhehe Libya [This is Libya], Istiqlal Libya [Independence of Libya, and Haqiqat Libya [Libyas Truth] All of them were published in Egypt by Anglo Library, 1965, 1968, 1970.
7

unprofessionally is the work of Mohamed Abdel Razigh Mana8, which was highly influenced by Nassirism as Anti-U.S when discussing the U.S-Arab relations in general and in discussing the U.S-Libyan relations in particular. On the other hand, those opposing this school have also committed the error of not dealing professionally with the subject matter. Those could be descended as apologists to the monarchy. Although they are not as numerous as the above school, their written accounts of the monarchy could only be described as non accurate, describing the king as a spiritual leader for all Libyans, who created the Libyan state, and his foreign policies as saving Libya from disintegrating. They gave him an aura of holiness, writers, such as Altayib Alashab and Ahmed Fouad Shoukry have committed such fallacies that could hardly be called legends let alone to be taken as history9. Thus, conducting those interviews, I was able to delve into this obscure, mysterious period in an academic manner. Trying to re-create facts by analyzing and criticizing everything written or spoken on this period, I tried to draw from a discipline where accounts of events could be confirmed or negating them, following procedures that will help bring the truths amongst contradicting and neglected accounts. I was able to pursue such tasks by relying on oral history as historical record to clarify past history and to be more objective when dealing with this period. Each side in the already existing texts circumvents facts because they are not well documented or because they are not fully understood. Therefore, I will use the oral history beside the written texts in order to write the history of U.S-Libyan relations, hoping that these newly created narrations will cause great debates among historians and the general public to expose

Mohamed Abdel Razigh Mana, Dawafah Elthawrah Elibiah [motivations of the Libyan Revolution]. Lebanon: Asian Agency press, 1969. 9 Altayib Alashab, Elsanusi Elkabeer [The Great Sanusi], Mohamed Atiff Press, 1956. Ahmed Fouad Shoukry, Mild Daowlat Libya Elhadithah [The Birth of Modern Libya]. 1-2 Volumes, Cairo: All Press,2012.

further the obscure period and draw a political history of the Libyan monarchical period. A period that has been veiled with obscurity can be revealed by using oral accounts, letting those interested to further explore and use oral history as a methodology in writing history. I am hoping to bring respect to oral history and to be considered as legitimate as the traditional history, and to be taken as a reliable source for the present and the future history of any people in the world. In doing so, I would have accomplished one of my goals in this field, to challenge the written history. As Paul Thompson mention, oral history serves to construct and challenge official history. Another important issue, in conducting those interviews, I began to be aware of the political role in producing oral history about the monarchy period and about post-1969 period in particular. In interviewing an ex-military personal, I had the opportunity to raise the question that I wanted to ask long time ago, that if he knows all these facts, why he never told them to an historian or an author? He said that he could not even mention them to anybody since the early 1970s, since the advent of the so so-called Cultural Revolution, which made it harder to speak about the monarchy and was dropped from the history books. Gaddafis regime was one of the staunch supporters of Nassirim and the most antagonistic to monarchism. Many mouths were shut, and I have noticed this with all my past teachers and professors while I was pursuing my masters degree. I have proposed many titles for my thesis; however, all of them were dismissed once the monarchy period was mentioned in it. All have giving excuses and said that this period is not worth studying it. As a result of this negligence of this period of history, what is already written about it is veiled with obscurity. Official accounts of that period along with the historians and authors were all framing it in an Arab nationalism point of view, attacking the monarchy while oral accounts found dispersed here and there were in a clear contradiction.

The second issue I have discovered was my realization of the nature of the social life in Libya, being divided into many tribes and to east and west geographically, which made the oral accounts of the monarchy period predictable once the interviewer knows the tribe or region of the interviewee. Once known, it is possible to predict their answers, orientations and their political tendencies. This has affected the structure of the oral history. Thus, my mission was to be careful when dealing with these sources. I had to be more critical and analytical about the questions asked during the interviews. This requires a constant awareness and more vigilant approach in order to test the credibility of the work done. This ability, I think, I have gained through my practical work and it is an important one with tribal societies like Libya. While conducting interviews one must be aware of the racial, ethnic and social background of the interviewees. Not being able to take this into account was one of the reasons for the failure of the oral history project of slavery in the United States in the 1930s10. Colloquium Readings: The most influential and interesting book that I read during my residency year, is Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes Oral History and Public Memories. Chapters in this volume suggest that oral history helps us understand how an interview can reveal and shape what is known among and by others, even as it can also participate in a broader, often political process of public meaning-making.11 The authors provoke important issues about the role of oral history to challenge the history of a whole community. Hamilton and Shopes chose a collection of fourteen articles that present different perspective, problems, and specific sites to demonstrate oral historys role,
David Henige, Oral Historiography (Longman Group Limits: NY, 1982). Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes (editors), Oral History and Public Memories (Temple University Press: PA, 2008), xv.
11
10

depending on individuals memory, in effecting about the history of a whole community. The chapters developed also to test the influence of oral history on the interpretation of a communitys history while powerful groups insist on a different interpretation. Indeed, the argument of this book meets what I am doing for my dissertation. Hamilton and Shopes book is divided into three sections that effect on my thought by explaining how to demonstrate oral history role in different societies based on individuals memory to challenge official history. The first section, Creating Heritage including five chapters, document the ways in which official heritage agencies around the world are attempting to incorporate oral history in order document and present their nations story in new ways. For example, the third chapter Mapping Memories: Oral History -for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage in New South Wales, Australia by Maria Nugent used personal narratives of aboriginal people by employing the National Parks and Wildlife Service of New South to alter the way Australians view that shared use of goal between white settlers and native people. In Turkey, the fourth chapter Moving beyond the Walls: The Oral History of the Ottoman Fortress Villages of Sedduilbahir and kumkale by Isil Cerem Cenker and Lucienne Thys-Senocak. A three years oral history project with residents near two forts that would be potential national parks explored how personal memory and ideas about history can challenge official historiography.12 The second section, Recreating Identity and Community explains the relation between personal identity and identification with a community. For example, Sean Fields Im agining Communities: Memory, Loss, and Resilience in Post-Apartheid Cape Town examines that two museums commemorate various communities that had existed before apartheid policy forced people of color to leave. He found that the past is idealized by narrators; however
12

Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes (editors), Oral History and Public Memories, 66-75

misrepresentations of the historical past that help them feel safer psychologically in the present. Gail Dubrows Contested Places in Public Memory: Reflections on Personal Testimony and Oral History in Japanese American heritage demonstrates how oral history projects have changed the popular understanding of the experience of Japanese American before and during World War II13. The third and the last section in this book is Making Change, including four chapters that focus on oral history driven by an explicitly activist agenda. The authors explain how to democratize oral history to give voice to those who have been silenced in the past for enacting social change14. The most of the cases in this work encountered me during my project in term of effects of social and political situations. For example, how oral history can support state agenda except particular voices in Singapore is like what happen in Libya after1969 when government adapt the oral history to its agenda. Finally, social and political situations are most challenges in Libya encounters oral history and restrict its task as historical source. These challenges in turn effects in making history and explore and fill undocumented gaps that can oral history do it. Therefore, a task of oral historian is very complicated and sometimes even at risk. So, oral historian has to have social skills that help him in the task. On the other side, the last Arab Spring made a great opportunity by removing political restriction to make oral movement that can collect as much as it could what scattered from history of monarchal Libya.

13 14

Paula Hamilton and Linda Shopes., ed, Oral History and Public Memories, 104. Ibid, 207.

Bibliography Alashab, Altayib. Elsanusi Elkabeer [The Great Sanusi]. Egypt: Mohamed Atiff Press, 1956. Shoukry, Ahmed. Mild Daowlat Libya Elhadithah [The Birth of Modern Libya]. Volumes1-2. Cairo: All Press, 2012 Couvares, Francis G., Martha Saxton, Gerald N. Grob, and George Athan Billias. Interpretations of American History: From Reconstruction. Vol. 2. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2009 Little, Douglas. Gideons Band: America and the Middle East since 1945. Diplomatic History 18 (Fall 1994):513-41. Henige, David. Oral Historiography. New York: Longman Group Limits, 1982. Leesir, Fathi. Tarekh Elzamn Elrahen: Indama Yatruk Elmuarkh Bab Elhather [History of Current Time: When an Historian Knocks on the Door of The Present]. Tunis: Mohamed Alis Library, 2012.

Gaddis, John Lewis. The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Hunter, Gregory S. Developing and Maintaining Practical Archives: A How-To-Do-It Manual (How-to-Do-It Manuals for Libraries, No. 122), Neal-Schuman Publishers; 2 Sub edition, 2003. Mana, Mohamed Abdel Razigh. Dawafah Elthawrah Elibiah [Motivations of the Libyan Revolution]. Lebanon: Asian Agency press, 1969. Hamilton, Paula and Shopes, Linda, ed. Oral History and Public Memories. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2008. Alhakim, Sami. Ha Dehe Libya [This is Libya]. Egypt: Anglo Library, 1965. _____________. Istiqlal Libya [Independence of Libya]. Egypt: Anglo Library, 1968. _____________. Haqiqat Libya [Libyas Truth]. Egypt: Anglo Library, 1970.