ABSTRACT
If triangulation and its worth have long been contested amongst social scientists, historians have not discussed it. In this paper, a historical demographer practises data triangulation by combining qualitative and quantitative sources. The aim is to explore how these sources identify nineteenth-century women’s occupations and thus challenge the gender bias found in population registers as they report incomplete information on women’s work. This bias is acknowledged by feminist historians and also evident in quantitative records in developing countries. To explain the outcome of dissonant data that this historical study shows and shares with modern triangulation approaches, women’s ability to represent their occupational identities in the different sources is discussed. Some of the epistemological implications that arise from the triangulation of data that subsists under separate paradigms are also reflected upon. Although triangulation is far from infallible, it is argued that it helps to gain, view and question knowledge.
