Chapter 1
THE MEANING OF HISTORY, SOURCES OF HISTORICAL DATA, &
HISTORICAL CRITICISMS
Objectives
In this chapter and lesson, you are expected to be able to:
1. explicate the meaning of historical criticism and its various principles and
steps;
2. express clearly a personal point of view and comprehension on the importance of
the processes in examining sources for historical investigation; and
3. Distinguish the difference between internal and external criticism with specific
examples.
Lesson 3: HISTORICAL CRITICISMS
Historical criticism examines the origins of the earliest text to appreciate
the underlying circumstances upon which the text came to be (Soulen and Soulen,
2001). It has two goals. First, to discover the original meaning of the text in its
primitive or historical context and its literal sense or sensus literalis
historicus. Second, to establish a reconstruction of the historical situation of
the author and recipients of the text.
Historical criticism has two types: external criticism and internal
criticism. Historical criticism has its roots in the 17th century during the
Protestant Reformation and gained recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries
(Ebeling, 1963). The absence of historical investigation paved the way for
historical criticism to rest on philosophical and theological interpretation. The
passing of time has advanced historical criticism into various methodologies used
today: source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, tradition criticism,
and canonical criticism (Soulen, 2001). There are two parts to historical
criticism.
The first part is to determine the authenticity of the material. The critic
should identify the origin of the material, its author, and the sources of
information used. External criticism is a process in determining these facts.
The second part is to weigh the testimony to the truth. The critic must
examine the trustworthiness of the testimonies and determine the probability of the
statements being true. This process is called internal or higher criticism since it
deals with more important matters than the external form.
External criticism determines the authenticity of the source. The
authenticity of the material may be tested in two ways, by paleographical and
diplomatic criticism. Moreover, the material is examined based on the time and
place of its writing. The critic must determine whether the material under
investigation is unaltered and exists as the author left it. The content must be
viewed in every possible angle, as forgery was not unknown during the Middle Ages.
The authenticity of the material is proven then compared with other genuine sources
having the same subject or written during the same period. There are similarities
or agreements, differences or disagreements on some details in the material, and
such information is necessary to the historian who criticizes it. The data is about
people's practices, traditions, and events.
Internal Criticism determines the historicity of the facts contained in the
document. The value of the information in the document has to be determined prior
to the making of conclusions. In determining the value of the facts, the character
of the sources, the knowledge of the author, and the influences prevalent at the
time of writing must be carefully investigated. It must be ascertained first that
the critic knows exactly what the author said and that he understands the document
from the standpoint of the author. Moreover, the facts given by the author or
writer must be firmly established as having taken place exactly as reported.
Test of Authenticity
To distinguish a hoax or a misrepresentation from a genuine document, the
historian must use tests that are common also in the police and legal detection.
Making the best guess of the date of the document, he examines the materials to see
whether they are not anachronistic: the paper was rare in Europe before the
fifteenth century, and printing was unknown; pencils did not exist there before the
sixteenth century; typewriting was not invented until the nineteenth century, and
Indian paper came only at the end of that century. The historian also examines the
inks for signs of age or of anachronistic chemical composition. Making the best
guess of the possible author of the document, he sees if he can identify the
handwriting, signature, seal, letterhead, or watermark. Even when the handwriting
is unfamiliar, it can be compared with authenticated specimens. One of the
unfulfilled needs of the historian is more of what the French call "isographies" or
the dictionaries of biography giving examples of handwriting. For some period of
history, experts using techniques known as paleography and diplomatics, first
systematized by Mabillon in the seventeenth century, have long known that in
certain regions at certain times handwriting and the style and form of official
documents were conventionalized. Seals have been the subject of special study
sigillographers, and experts can detect fake ones.
Anachronistic styles (idiom, orthography, or punctuation) can be detected by
specialists who are familiar with contemporary writing. Often spelling particularly
of proper names and signatures, reveal forgery as would also unhistorical grammar.
Anachronistic references to events (too early or too late or too remote) or the
dating of a document at a time when the alleged writer could not possibly have been
at the place designated (the alibi) uncover fraud. Sometimes the skillful forger
has all too carefully followed the best historical sources and his product becomes
too obviously a copy in certain passages; by skillful paraphrase and invention, he
is given away by the absence of trivia and otherwise unknown details from his
manufactured account. However, usually, if the document is where it ought to be
(e.g., in a family's archives, or in the governmental bureau's record) its
provenance (custody, as the lawyers, refer to it), creates a presumption of its
genuineness (Gottschalk, 1969).
Reference
Gottschalk, Louis (1969). Understanding History: A Primer of the
Historical Method-2
[Link]
Gottschalk-Understanding-History-a-Primer-of-the-Historical-
Method-2