Evaluating Historical Sources

• Tests of Authenticity and Credibility

Historical Method

• This involves thorough examination and critical analysis of past records and survivals.
• It includes accumulating and analyzing historical data using scientific rules to determine the accuracy of reconstructed past events.

Historiography

• Historiography refers to the reconstruction of historical data that has already been tested.
• It synthesizes historical data into a narrative or discourse.
• Historiography includes the writing of history books, thesis, dissertations, articles for publications, and lectures in conferences and seminars.

Historical Sources

• These include documents, artifacts, archaeological sites, features, oral transmissions, stone inscriptions, paintings, and oral histories.
• Ancient relics and ruins are also considered historical sources.

Historical Sources vs. Non-Historical Sources

• Examples of artifacts include ancient relics, ruins, inscriptions, and coins.
• Modern media (social media, articles, etc.) often lack the verifiability required to be historical sources.

Evaluation of Historical Sources:

• Credibility is the quality or power of inspiring belief.
• Authenticity is the proven fact that something is legitimate or real.
• Provenance refers to the sources of information, including entities and processes involved in producing or delivering an artifact.

External Criticism: The Test of Authenticity

• Authenticity means originality.
• Original sources provide raw data not subjected to historians' interpretations.
• Original sources directly connect researchers or historians to the eyewitness's perceptions and historical context.
• Secondary materials derive their data from genuine sources.

Reasons for Authenticity Testing

• It determines the genuineness of sources is essential to distinguish real accounts from hoaxes or fabrications.
• This process helps to identify fabricated sources used to justify events.
• A classic example of this is Negative Revisionism, which attempts to alter history by moderating or restraining the impact of history on people, institutions, or groups.
• Authenticity testing helps historians detect misleading sources to avoid misinformation.
• Identifying the source's authorship, the timing of the event, and the time the source was written are crucial.
• Authorship, alongside time, place, and contemporary practices, establishes context.

Internal Criticism: The Test of Credibility

• After confirming the authenticity of sources, it is necessary to perform internal criticism to determine their credibility.
• Credibility is important because it determines whether a source is worthy of being used in a historical study.
• Historians carefully analyze the content of sources, focusing on the author, the context of its creation, the situation of its existence, and the intended audience.

Source Credibility

• It is important to consider: the competence of the source in telling the truth.

• It is important to consider: the willingness of the source in telling the truth.

• It is important to consider: the adequacy of data relayed by the source.

• It is important to consider: the reliability of the source when corroborated by other independent sources.

• According to Gottschalk (1950), historians evaluating source credibility act as prosecutor, defense attorney, judge, and jury, considering all relevant evidence.

• Any detail is considered credible unless impeachable, based on force or fraud, lacks necessary evidence, or comes from an interested witness, and has to pass the four above tests.

• Independent sources derive information from the event itself even if another source claims them.

• To be an independent source, the author needed to be present at the event, and be mentally conscious.

• Independent sources do not rely on extrinsic informants.

• Secondary sources cannot be considered independent due to their reliance on primary sources; corroboration from two independent sources—written or unwritten—is required.

Internal and External Criticism

• External Criticism examines when and where a document was written, who wrote it, authenticating the document, and why it survived.
• Internal Criticism deals with eyewitness accounts and assessing reasons for it being written, looking at literal meaning, and internal consistency.

Examples of False or Misleading Information

• The alleged Maragtas, attributed to Pedro Monteclaro, exemplifies fabricated historical narratives; William Henry Scott (1984) argues in "Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History" that Monteclaro based Maragtas on suspicious oral and fabricated sources.
• The Hoax Code of Kalantiaw: Written in 1413, containing bizarre laws.

Rizal and Language

• In a letter, Rizal explains why the word "kaligtasan" could not be used, because it means one was formerly in prison.

• Marcelo de Pilar used the words "malaya" and "kalayahan"

• Dr. Nancy Kimuell Gabriel used discussions with Dr. Nilo S. Ocampo to write her master's thesis, "Timawa: Kahulugan, Kasaysayan at Kabuluhan sa Lipunang Pilipino."

Basic Assumptions with Sources

• Sources such as relics, artifacts, remains, documents, and witnesses are considered accurate when proven authentic and credible.
• The authenticity of a source increases its credibility.
• Primary sources are generally more reliable than secondary sources.
• The greater the corroboration from independent sources, the more reliable the source.
• Sources tend to be biased toward their provenance or creator.
• Witnesses without an immediate stake in an event tend to be more credible.
• An event becomes factual when all independent sources agree on it.
• Testimonies are more credible when witnesses are interviewed or make declarations when in good mental or emotional health.
• A source is considered fabricated if it does not conform to its milieu.

Disagreeing or Hostile Sources

• When sources disagree and cannot be examined against each other, the one with better logic and common sense is favored.
• If sources disagree, the one with the strongest proofs of authenticity and credibility is more reliable.
• Hostile sources or witnesses are less credible, requiring extensive corroboration from independent sources.
• Sources from a specific viewpoint like Marxism can be inherently argumentative; therefore, the events should be examined using independent sources to convey the same theme.

Ethics in Historical Research

• Historians should be aware of their own biases, presuppositions, values, and prior knowledge.
• Research should be objective and accurate when analyzing sources.
• Data interpretation and synthesis should be impartial and rational.
• Researchers should use all available and relevant sources, even those that contradict their arguments.
• They must remain free from external influences and be committed to the truth.
• Historians should be conscientious in properly citing their sources.
• Researchers acknowledge the help of those who assisted them.
• Academic integrity should be upheld through plagiarism, fabrication, deception, cheating or sabotage.
• Use well established methods of research for the discipline.
• Establish a rational familiarity with sources and dialogue with historians and the public. and allow all sources to be used by other historians.
• Historians should provide authentic evidence for all serious claims.
• Historians should avoid duplicating previous work and acknowledge all assistance from other historians.
• Historians respect criticisms from peers plus refrain from misinterpreting data.
• They should always respect other viewpoints.
• Historians should not deliberately mislead, conceal incidents, or manipulate history.

This quiz assesses understanding of historical research methods, source evaluation (authenticity and credibility), and historiography. It covers primary vs. secondary sources, external criticism, authorship, and revisionism.