Scribd
Upload
315 views2 pages

Evaluating Philippine Historical Sources

The document discusses criteria for evaluating primary and secondary source materials in history. It outlines 6 criteria identified by Garraghan for evaluating primary sources: date, localization, authorship, analysis, integrity, and credibility. For secondary sources, it notes they must be used carefully to provide context, leads, quotations, and interpretations to test, but not accept as outright truth. The document also presents 7 internal criteria identified by Howell and Prevenier for evaluating sources: geneology, series, originality, interpretation, authorial authority, competence of the observer, and trustworthiness of the observer. Historians must evaluate both external characteristics like date/author, and internal criteria to establish authenticity and accuracy before accepting a source

Uploaded by

STEPHANIE CRIS HITA
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
315 views2 pages

Evaluating Philippine Historical Sources

The document discusses criteria for evaluating primary and secondary source materials in history. It outlines 6 criteria identified by Garraghan for evaluating primary sources: date, localization, authorship, analysis, integrity, and credibility. For secondary sources, it notes they must be used carefully to provide context, leads, quotations, and interpretations to test, but not accept as outright truth. The document also presents 7 internal criteria identified by Howell and Prevenier for evaluating sources: geneology, series, originality, interpretation, authorial authority, competence of the observer, and trustworthiness of the observer. Historians must evaluate both external characteristics like date/author, and internal criteria to establish authenticity and accuracy before accepting a source

Uploaded by

STEPHANIE CRIS HITA
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Readings in Philippine History

Module 1
Section 2 (Evaluation of Primary and Secondary Source)

Intended Learning Outcomes:


1. To identify the criteria in evaluating primary and secondary source materials.
2. To assess primary and secondary source materials.
3. To evaluate the provenance source materials.

Discussion:
Garraghan (1950) identified six parts of inquiries to evaluate the authenticity of a primary
source:
1. Date – when it produced?
2. Localization – where did it originate?
3. Authorship – who wrote it?
4. Analysis – what pre-existing material served as the basis for its production?
5. Integrity – what was its original form?
6. Credibility – what is the evidential value of its content?

Louis Gottschalk (1969) emphasized that it is impossible for historians to avoid using
secondary sources due to difficulty in accessing primary sources the suggested that secondary sources
must be only used for:
1. Deriving the setting wherein the contemporary evidence will fir in the grand narrative of
history.
2. Getting leads to other bibliographic data.
3. Acquiring quotations or citations for contemporary or other sources.
4. Deriving interpretations with a view of testing and improving then but not accepting then as
outright truth. Historians should be prepared to verify the information provided by secondary
sources.

Martha Howell and Walter Prevenier (2001) stated that before any source can be considered as
evidence is a historical argument it must satisfy their preconditions:
1. It must be comprehensible at the most basic level of vocabulary, language and handwriting.
2. The source must be carefully located in accordance with place and time. Its author composes
or writes the location where it was produced/published should be noted for the checking of
authenticity and accuracy.
3. The first two preconditions, the authenticity of the source must always be checked and
counterchecked before being accepted as a credible source in any historical findings. Cases of forgery
and mislabelling are common in Philippine historiography. Given the possibility of forgery and
mislabelling, historians not only evaluate the sources in terms of external characteristics that focuses
on the question of where when and by whom. They also evaluate in terms by internal criteria which
includes seven factors identified by Houell and Prevenier (2001).
1. The geneology of the document – refers to the development of the document. The
document maybe original, a copy or a copy of the copy.
2. The series of the document – includes the situation and the authorities during the
document’s production.
3. The originality of the document – includes the nature of the document whether it is
an eye account or merely passing of existing information.
4. The interpretation of the document – pertains to deducing meaning from the
documents.
5. The authorial authority of the document – refers to the relationship between the
documents’s subject matter and the author.
6. The competence of the obsever – refers to the author’s capabilities and qualifications
to critically comprehend and report information.
7. The trustworthiness of the observer – refers to the author’s integrity. Whether he or
she fabricates or reports truthfully.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Howell and Prevenier (2001) suggest that sources must be located according to both place and time to check their authenticity and accuracy. This involves noting who composed or wrote the source and where it was produced or published .

Historians can verify the information from secondary sources by deriving settings where contemporary evidence fits into the grand narrative, using them to find other bibliographic data, acquiring quotations, and interpreting their content carefully to test and improve them rather than accept them as outright truth .

The interpretation of a document plays a critical role as it involves deducing meaning from the document's content and assessing the relationship between the subject mattter and the author. This helps determine the document's context, significance, and reliability in historical analysis .

When evaluating the authenticity of a primary source, Garraghan (1950) identified six critical criteria: 1. Date – determining when it was produced; 2. Localization – identifying where it originated; 3. Authorship – knowing who wrote it; 4. Analysis – understanding what pre-existing materials served as a basis for its production; 5. Integrity – assessing its original form; 6. Credibility – evaluating the evidential value of its content .

The genealogical criterion involves examining the development of a document, determining if it is an original or a copy, which helps in assessing its authenticity. The series criteria consider the context of the document's production, including situational or authoritative influences that might affect its authenticity and reliability .

The evaluation of a document's originality, assessing whether it is an eyewitness account or passing existing information, enhances reliability by establishing its closeness to the actual events described and ensuring the document is considered as a credible primary source .

Confirming the competence and trustworthiness of an observer is essential because these factors determine the author's capabilities and qualifications to accurately comprehend and report information, as well as their integrity to truthfully report or avoid fabricating information .

Historians face issues such as inaccurate historical records due to forgery and mislabeling. These can be addressed by evaluating both external characteristics, such as the origin, date, and authorship, and internal criteria like the genealogy, originality, and author's authority and trustworthiness .

Considerations of language, vocabulary, and handwriting affect the use of sources by determining whether the source is comprehensible. A source must be understandable at these basic levels for it to be considered valid historical evidence .

Gottschalk suggests that secondary sources, though unavoidable due to the difficulty in accessing primary sources, should be used for deriving historical context, getting leads to other bibliographical data, acquiring quotations, and deriving interpretations. These guidelines help historians navigate the limitations of secondary sources by emphasizing verification and context rather than taking secondary interpretations as absolute truth .

You might also like