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.