Republic of the Philippines

Commission on Higher Education

Romblon State University
Odiongan, Romblon

MODULE 2

READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

Unit 1 – Meaning and Relevance of History

“To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child.” –
Marcus Tullius Cicero

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of this unis, the student is expected to:
1. Evaluate primary sources for their credibility, authenticity, and provenance

Chapter Outline:
1. Distinction of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources
1. Primary Sources
2. Secondary Sources
3. Tertiary Sources
2. External and Internal Criticism
1. External Criticism
2. Internal Criticism
3. General Principles for Determining Reliability

Most historical source material can be grouped into four basic categories:
Documents, numerical records, oral statements, and relics.
 1. Documents are written or printed materials that have been produced in one
form or another sometimes in the past.
2. Numerical records include any time of numerical data in printed or
handwritten form.
3. Oral statements include any form of statement made orally by someone.
4. Relics are any objects whose physical or visual characteristics can provides
some information about the past. (Fraenkel &Walen, n.d.)

The main emphasis in historical research is on interpretation of documents,

diaries and the like. Historical data are categorized into primary or secondary sources.

A primary source is one prepared by an individual who was a participant in,

or a direct witness to, the event that is being described.

Primary sources include first-hand information, such as eyewitness repost

and original documents.

A secondary source is a document prepared by an individual who was not

a direct witness to an event, but who obtained his or her description of the event from
someone else.

Secondary sources include secondhand information, such as a description of

an event by someone other than an eyewitness, or a textbook author’s explanation of
an event or theory.

Primary source may be harder to find but are generally more accurate and
preferred by historical researchers. A major problem with much historical research is
excessive reliance on secondary sources. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.; “Historical
Research Method,” n.d.)

1. Distinction of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Sources

Historians encounter a large variety of sources during the course of their studies.
Sources can be labeled primary, secondary, or tertiary, depending on their distance
from the information they share.

1. Primary Sources

Primary sources give firsthand, original, and unfiltered information. Examples are
eyewitness accounts, personal journals, interviews, surveys, experiments, historical
documents, and artifacts. These sources have a close, direct connection to their
subjects.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Primary Sources

Primary sources directly address your topic and often provide information that is
unavailable elsewhere. For example, the questions you compose for an interview or a
survey will likely target your unique interest in the topic. Similarly, to test a particular
hypothesis, you can design your own experiment.
 On the other hand, some primary sources, such as eyewitness accounts, may be
too close to the subject, lacking a critical distance. Other, such as interviews, surveys,
and experiments, are time consuming to prepare, administer, and analyze.
2. Secondary Sources

Secondary sources are one step removed from the topic. While they can be just
as valuable as primary sources, you must remember that secondary information is
filtered through someone else’s perspective and may be biased.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Secondary Sources

Secondary sources provide a variety of expert perspective and insights. Also,

peer review usually ensures the quality of sources such as scholarly articles. Finally,
researching secondary sources is more efficient than planning, conducting, and
analyzing certain primary sources.

In contrast, because secondary sources are not necessarily focused on your

specific topic, you may have to dig to find applicable information. Information may be
colored by the writer’s own bias or faulty approach.

3. Tertiary Sources

Tertiary sources provide third-hand information by reporting ideas and details

form secondary sources. This does not mean that tertiary sources have no value,
merely that they include the potential for an additional layer of bias.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Tertiary Sources

Tertiary sources offer a quick, easy introduction to your topic. They may point to
high-quality primary and secondary sources.

Conversely, because of their distance, tertiary sources may oversimplify or

otherwise distort a topic. By rehashing secondary sources, they may miss new insights
into a topic.

Differences between Primary Sources vs. Secondary Sources

Sources of information are often categorized as primary or secondary depending

upon their originality. What are the differences between primary sources and secondary
sources? Let’s look at some of their dissimilarities:
 Primary Source
 Created at the time of an event, or
very soon after
 Created by someone who saw or
heard an event themselves
 Often on-of-a-kind, or rare
 Letters, diaries, photos and
newspaper (can all be primary
sources)
Secondary Sources
 Created after event; sometimes a
long time after something
happened
 Often uses primary sources as
examples
 Expresses an opinion or an
argument about a past event
 History, text books, historical
movies and biographies (can all be
secondary Sources)

a. Types of Primary Sources

People use original, first-hand accounts as building blocks to create stories from
the past. These accounts are called primary sources, because they are the first
evidence of something happening, or being thought or said. Some examples of primary
source formats include:

1. Autobiographies and memories

An autobiography is an account of a person’s life written by that person.

Autobiographical works can take many forms, from the intimate writings made during life
that were not necessarily intended for publication (including letters, diaries, journals,
memoirs, and reminiscences) to a formal book-length autobiography. (Encyclopedia
Britannica, n.d.)

An example of an autobiography is “Mga Tala ng akingBuhay” written by

Gregoria de Jesus about herself, her husband Andres Bonifacio, the Katipunan and the
Philippine Revolution.

The translation was done by Leandro H. Fernandez, a University of the

Philippines History Professor, and published in June 1930 issue of the Philippine
Magazine, Volume XXVII, No 1. The original copy of the document was furnished to
Hernandez by Jose P. Santos.

Find a translation of the original document at this site:

https://kahimyang.com/jauswagan/articles/1203/mga-tala-ng-aking-buhay-
autobiography-of-gregoria-de-jesus-wife-of-andres-bonifacio.

A memoir is a history is a history or record composed from personal observation

and experience. Closely related to, and often confused with, autobiography , a memoir
usually differs chiefly in the degree of emphasis placed on external events; whereas
writers of autobiography are concerned primarily with themselves as subject matter,
writers of memoir are usually persons who have played roles in, or have been close
observers of, historical events and whose main purpose is to describe or interpret the
events. (Encyclopaedia Britannica, n.d.)

An example of memoir is “La Revolution Filipina,” a compact analysis and

commentary on the Philippine Revolution by Apolinario Mabini. Find a copy of the
original document at this site: http://malacanang.gov.ph/8143-the-philippine-revolution-
by-apolinario-mabini/

2. Diaries, Personal Letters, and Correspondence

A diary, a from of autobiographical writing, is a regularly kept record of the

diarist’s activities and reflections. Written primarily for the writer’s use alone, the diary
has a frankness that is unlike writing done for publication. (Encyclopaedia Britannica,
n.d.)

The example of the diary of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos. Find a copy
of the original document at this site:
https://philippinediaryproject.wordpress.com/category/diary-of-ferdinand-e-marcos

Personal Letter

A personal letter is a type of letter (or informal composition) that usually concerns
personal matters (rather than professional concerns) and is sent from one individual to
another. (Nordquist, 2013)

An example of a personal letter is that of Marcelo H. del Pilar to his niece, Josefa
Gatmaitán. It was translated from Spanish to English by del Pilar’s granddaughter, Atty.
Benita Marasigan vda. de Santos. Find a copy of the original document at this site:
https://filipinoscribbles.wordpress.com/2010/12/05/marcello-h-del-pilars-letter-to-his-
niece-josefa-gatmaitan/

Correspondence

A correspondence is a body of letters or communications. If you’ve ever had a

pen pal or an email buddy, you’ve written plenty of correspondence. (Vocabulary, n.d.)

Some examples of correspondence are those body of letters between Jose Rizal
and Ferdinand Blumentritt. Find a copy of the original document at this site:
https://www.univie.ac.at/ksa/apsis/aufi/rizal/rbcorr.htm

3. Interviews, Surveys, and Fieldwork

An interview is a conversation where questions are asked and answers are

given. In common parlance, the word “interview” refers to a one-on-one conversation
with one person acting in the role of the interviewer and the other in the role of the
interviewee. The interviewer asks questions, the interviewee responds, with participants
taking turns talking. Interviews usually involve a transfer of information from the
interviewee to interviewer, which is usually the primary purpose of the interview,
although information transfer can happen in both directions simultaneously. (Wikipedia,
2018)

An example is the interview between Walter Dempster, Jr. and Ronald D. Klein.
Walter Dempster, Jr. is the last person alive who can bear witness to the Japanese rape
atrocities against comfort gays. The interview took place on August 10, 2002. Find a
copy of the transcript of the interview at this site:
http://intersections.anu.edu.au/issue13/klein_interview.html
Survey

A survey is a list of questions aimed at extracting specific data from particular

group of people. Surveys may be conducted by phone, mail, via the internet, and
sometimes face-to-face on busy street corners or in malls. Survey research is often
used to assess thoughts, opinion, and feeling. Survey can be specific and limited, or
they can have more global, widespread goals. (Wikipedia, 2018)

Field research or fieldwork

A field research or fieldwork is the collection of information outside a laboratory,

library or workplace setting. Field research involves a range or well-defined, although
variable, methods: informal interviews, direct observation, participation in the life of the
group, collective discussion, analyzes or personal documents produced within the
group, self-analysis, result from activities undertaken off- or on-line, and life-histories.
(Wikipedia, 2018)

4. Photographs and posters

Photographs and posters are often considered as primary sources, because

photographs and posters can illustrate past events as they happened and people as
they were at a particular time.

Examples are those images captured by various photographers during the 1986
EDSA. Find copies of the original photographs at this site:
htpps://www.google.com.ph/search?
q=images+captured+by+various+photographers+during+the+1986+EDSA.&tbm=isch&t
bo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjCotDyzLTaAhUEwLwKHbx_DPkQ7AkIMw&b
iw=1366&bih=662

5. Works of art and literature

In fine art, a work of art, and artwork , or a work is a creation, such as a song,
book, print, sculpture or a painting, that has been made in order to be a thing of beauty
in itself or a symbolic statement of meaning, rather than having a practical function. Art
can take the form of:

Paintings: a form of visual art where paint or ink is used on a canvas or, more
often in the past, wooden panels or plaster walls, to depict an artist’s rendering of a
scene or even of an abstract, non-representational image.

Drawing: a form of visual art in which a person uses various drawing instruments
to mark paper or another two-dimensional medium. Instruments include graphite
pencils, pen and ink, inked brushes, wax colored pencils, crayons, charcoal, chalk,
pastel, various kinds of erases, markers, styluses, various metals, (such as silverpoint)
and electronic drawing.
 Literature: a body of a written works. The name has traditionally been applied to
those imaginative works of poetry and prose distinguished by the intentions of their
authors and the perceived aesthetic excellence of their execution. Literature may be
classified according to variety of systems, including language, national origin, historical
period, genre, and subject matter.

6. Speeches and oral histories

A speech is a form of communication in spoken language, made by a speaker

before and audience for a given purpose. (Dictionary, n.d.)

An example is Rizal’s brindis or toast speech delivered at a banquet in the

Restaurant Inglés, Madrid, on the evening of June 25, 1884 in honor of Juan Luna,
winner of the gold medal for his painting, “El Spolarium,” and felixresurrecciόn Hidalgo,
winner of a silver medal , for his painting “VirgenesCristianasExpuestas al Populacho”
at a Exposiciόn Nacional de Bellas Artes de Madrid. Find a copy of the original
document at this site: http://ourhappyschool.com/philippine-studies/jose-rizals-brindis-
speech-toast-honoring-juan-luna-and -felix-resurreccion-hidalg

Other types of primary sources include books, magazines and newspaper articles
and ad published at the time of the event and the artifacts of all kinds, such as tools,
coins, clothing, furniture, etc.

b. Types of Secondary Sources

Secondary sources were created by someone who did not experience first-hand
or participate in the events or conditions you’re researching. Some types of secondary
sources include: bibliographies, non-fiction text such as biographical works, periodicals,
newspapers, magazines, journals, history books, works of criticism and interpretation,
commentaries and treatises, textbooks, video documentaries, and multimedia reports.

1. Bibliographies

An annotated bibliography is an organized list of sources, each of which is

followed by a brief note or “annotation.” These annotations do one or more of the
following: describe the content and focus of the book or article, suggest the source’s
usefulness to your research, evaluate its method, conclusions, or reliability, and record
your reactions to the source, (University of Wisconsin System, 2018)

And example is Dr. Jose Rizal’s annotations to Antonio de Morga’sSuccesos de

las Islas Filipinas. Find a copy of original document at this site:
http://penelopevflores.blogspot.com/2011/02/dr-jose-rizals-annotatio-of-antonio.html

2. Biographical works

A biography is a description of a real person’s life, including factual details as

well as stories from the person’s life. The word biography comes from the Greek word
bios, meaning “life” and -graphia, meaning “writing.” Biographies usually include
information about the subject’s personality and motivations, and other kinds of intimate
details excluded in general overview or profile of a person’s life. (Literary Devices, 2016)
 An example of a biography is that of Andres Bonifacio, the “Father of the
Philippine Revolution” and the President of the Tagalog Republic.

3. Periodicals

Periodicals are newspapers, magazines, and scholarly journals – all of which are
published “periodically.” Some periodicals are in print, some are electronics, and some
use both formats (often with added information or a multimedia element in the electronic
version.)

A. Newspaper

A Newspaper is a periodical publication containing written information about

current events. Newspapers can cover wide variety of fields such as politics, business,
sport and art and often include materials such as opinion columns, weather forecasts,
review of local services, obituaries, birth notices, crosswords, editorial cartoons, comic
strips, and advice columns. (Wikipedia, 2018)

B. Magazine and Journal

Unlike daily newspaper, magazines and journals may be published weekly,

monthly, quarterly, annually, or at some other intervals. Print editions use better paper
and more color than the newspaper does. The main differences between magazines
and journals is their audiences. Journals are written by scholars for scholars; magazines
are produced by professional writers and editors for a general readership.

An example of a journal is “Natural Law and Anticolonial Revolt: Apolinario

Mabini’s La Revolucion Filipina and Isabelo de los Reyes’ La Sensacional Memoria by
Ramon Guillermo. Find a copy of the original document at this site:
http://www.plarieljournal.org/article/natural-law-anticolonial-revolt-apolinario-mabinis-la-
revolucion-filipina-isabelo-de-los-reyes-la-sensacional-memoria/

4. Literature reviews and review articles (e.g., movie reviews, book reviews)

A literature review is an evaluative report of information found in the literature

related to your selected area of study. The review should describe, summarize,
evaluate, and clarify this literature. It should give a theoretical base for the research and
help you (the author) determine the nature of your research. (Central Queensland
University., 2018)

A review article summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic. A

review article surveys and summarizes previously published studies, rather than
reporting new facts or analysis. Review articles are also called survey articles or, in
news publishing, overview articles. Academic publications that specializes in review
articles are also known as review journals. (Wikipedia, 2018)
Film Review

The film review is a popular way for critics to assess a film’s overall quality and
determine whether or not they think the film is worth recommending. Film reviews differ
from scholarly film articles in that they encompass personal and idiosyncratic reactions
to and evaluations of a film, as well as objective analyzes of the film’s formal techniques
and thematic content. (Duke Thompson Writing Program, n.d.)

An example is the review by Richard Kuipers on “Heneral Luna: The Philippines’

foreign-language Oscar hopeful is rousing histrorical epic set during the Philippine-
American War.” Find a copy of the original document at this site:
http://variety.com/2015/film/reveiws/heneral-luna-review-1201649617/

Book Review

A book review is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on

content, style, and merit. A book review may be a primary source, opinion piece,
summary review or scholarly review. Books can be reviewed for printed periodicals,
magazines, and newspapers, as school work, or for book web sites on the internet. A
book review’s length may vary from a single paragraph to a substantial essay. Such as
a review may evaluate the book on the basis of personal taste. Reviewers may use the
occasion of a book review for and extended essay that can be closely or loosely related
to the subject of the book, or to promulgate their own ideas on the topic of a fiction or
non-fiction work. (Wikipedia, 2018)

An example is the review of Alfred P. James of University of Pitsburgh on the

book “Understanding History – A Primer of Historical Method (1950) by Louis
Gottschalk, New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

Other types of secondary source include history books and other popular or
scholarly books, works or criticism and interpretation commentaries and treatises,
textbooks, video documentaries, and multimedia reports.

c. Types of Tertiary Sources

1. General references such as dictionaries, encyclopedias, almanacs, and atlases

2. Crowd sources Wikipedia, YouTube, message boards, and social media sites
like Twitter and Facebook
3. Search sites

d. Repositories of Primary Sources

There is no single repository of primary sources. Primary sources are usually

located in archives, libraries, museums, historical societies, and specific collections.

A library is a collection of sources of information and similar resources, made

accessible to a defined community for reference or borrowing. It provides physical or
digital access to material, and may be a physical building or room, or a virtual space, or
both. A library’s collection can include books, periodicals, newspapers, manuscripts,
films, maps, prints, documents, microform, CDs, cassettes, videotapes, DVDs, blu-ray
Discs, e-books, audiobooks, databases, and other formats. Libraries range in size from
a few shelves of books to several million items. (Wikipedia, 2018)

An Archive is an accumulation of historical records or the physical place they

are located. Archives contain primary source documents that have accumulated over
the course of an individual or organization’s lifetime and are kept to show the function of
that person or organization. Professional archivists and historians generally understand
archives to be records that have been naturally and necessarily generated as a product
of regular legal, commercial, administrative, or social activities. They have been
metaphorically defined as “the secretion of an organism” and are distinguished from
documents that have been consciously written or created to communicate a particular
message to posterity. (Wikipedia, 2018)

A museum is an institution that cares for (conserves) A collection of artifacts and

object of artistic, cultural, historical, or scientific importance. Many public museums
make these items available for public viewing through exhibits that may be permanent
or temporary. (Wikipedia, 2018)

A historical society (sometimes also a preservation society) is an organization

dedicated to preserving, collecting, researching, and interpreting historical information
or items. Originally, these societies were created as a way to help future generations
understand their heritage. (Wikipedia, 2018)

In library science, special collections (Spec. Coll. or S.C.) are libraries or library
units that house materials requiring specialized security and user services. Materials
housed in special collections can be in any format (including rare books, manuscripts,
photographs, archives, ephemera, and digital records), and are generally characterized
by their artifactual or monetary value, physical format uniqueness or rarity, and/or an
institutional commitment to long-term preservation and access. They can also include
association with important figures or institutions in history, culture, politics, sciences, or
the arts. (Wikipedia, 2018)

e. Document Collection

Document collection is used in Historical Research and in other research designs

in combination with other ways of data collection. Here are some documents that can be
used by the researcher as a source of data.

1. Found Documents: Produced by Organizations

1. Formal records: personnel, sales records, shareholder reports, minutes of the

meeting
2. Informal communication: notes, memos, email
3. Public records: electoral register, registers of birth, marriages, and deaths

2. Found Documents: Produced by Individuals

1. Personal papers: diaries, logos, letters, phone text, emails

2. Documents from everyday lives: shopping lists, bus & train tickets
3. Found Documents: Publication

1. Academic literature
2. Popular literature
3. Guides, Manuals

4. Found Documents: Secondary data

1. Research data and field notes from the previous studies

2. Publicly funded surveys
3. Internal organizational research

5. Found Documents: Multimedia

1. Photos, videos, comic strips, signposts, models

2. Sound and music
3. Electronic sources – screenshots, websites, online communities’ archives

6. Researcher Generated Documents

1. Field notes
2. Photographs
3. Diagrams
4. Storyboards
5. Use case scenarios

2. External and Internal Criticism

“If you don’t know history, then you don’t know anything. You are a
leaf that doesn’t know it is part of a tree.” – Michael Crichton

Researchers cannot accept historical data at face value, since many diaries
memoirs, reposts and testimonies are written to enhance the writer’s position, stature,
or importance.

Because of this possibility, historical data has to be examined for its authenticity
and truthfulness. Such examination is done through criticism; by asking and researching
to help determine truthfulness, bias, omissions and consistency in data. (“Historical
Research Method,” n.d.)

There are two kinds of criticism: External Criticism and Internal Criticism.

External Criticism refers to the genuineness of the documents a researcher

uses in a historical study. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)
 It takes as if the evidence under consideration is authentic, the researcher
checks the genuineness or validity of the source. Is it what appears or claims to be? Is it
admissible as evidence?

Internal criticism refers to the accuracy of the contents of a document. Whereas

external criticism has to do with the authenticity of a document, internal criticism has to
do with the document says. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

a. External Criticism

External criticism refers to the genuineness of the documents a researcher uses

in a historical study. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

Key (1997) enumerates a series of questions to establish the genuineness of a

document or relic:

1. Does the language and writing style conform to the period in question and is it
typical of other work done by the author?
2. Is there evidence that the author exhibits ignorance of things or events that
man of his training and time should have known?
3. Did he report about things, events, or places that could not have been known
during that period?
4. Has the original manuscript been altered either intentionally or unintentionally
by copying?
5. Is the document an original draft or a copy? If it is a copy, was it reproduced
in the exact words of the original?
6. If manuscript is undated or the author unknown, are there any clue internally
as to its origin? (Key, 1997)

Gilbert J. Garraghan (1946) provides the following questions:

1. When was the source, written or unwritten, produce (date)?

2. Where was it produced (authorship)?
3. By whom was it produced (authorship)?
4. From what pre-existing material was it produce (analysis)?
5. In what original form was it produced (integrity)?

b. Internal Criticism

Internal criticism refers to the accuracy of the content of the document. Whereas
external criticism has to do with the authenticity of a document, internal criticism has to
do with the document says. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

After the source is authenticated, it asks if the source is accurate, was the writer
or creator competent, honest, and unbiased? How long after the event happened until it
was reported? Does the witness agree with other witnesses?

Key (1997) provides the following questions to check the content of a source of
information:
 1. What was meant by the author by each word and statement?
2. How much credibility can the author’s statements be given? (Key, 1997)

Gilbert J. Garraghan (1946) asks the questions below for internal criticism

1. What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?

According to Louis Gottschalk, (1950) “for each particular of the document the
process of establishing credibility should be separately undertaken regardless of the
general credibility of the author.”

In other words, even if an author is trustworthy and reliable, still, each piece of
evidence extracted must be weighed individually.
c. General Principles for Determining Reliability

Olden-Jorgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997), two Scandinavian historians, have

formulated the following general principles in determining reliability:

1. Human sources may be relics such as fingerprint; or narratives such as a

statement or a letter. Relics are more credible sources than narrative
2. Any given source may be forged or corrupted. Strong indications of the
originality of the source increase its reliability
3. The closer the source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more
one can trust it to give an accurate historical description of what actually
happened.
4. An eyewitness is more reliable than testimony at second hand, which is more
reliable than hearsay at further remove, and so on.
5. If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility
of the message is strongly increased.
6. The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias.
Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations
7. If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in
creating bias then the credibility of the message is inceased.

d. Contradictory Sources

What if your sources are contradicting each other? What do you do?

The seven-step procedure for source criticism in history by bernheim (1889) and
Langlois &Seignobos (1898) might be helpful:

1. If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event
proved.
2. However, majority does not rule; even if most source relate events in one
way, that version will not prevail unless it passes the test of critical textual
analysis
3. The source whose account can be confirmed by reference to outside
authorities in some of its parts can be trusted in its entirety if it is impossible
similarly to confirm the entire text.
 4. When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historians will prefer the
source with most “authority” – that is the source created by the expert or by
the eyewitness
5. Eyewitness are, in general, to be preferred especially in circumstances where
the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and,
more specifically, when they deal with facts known by most contemporaries.
6. If two independently created sources agree on a matter, the reliability of each
is measurable enhanced.
7. When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, then
historians take the source which seems to accord best with common sense.

e. Eyewitness Evidence

R.J. Shafer (1974) suggests a series of questions in order to evaluate eyewitness

testimony:
1. is the real meaning of the statement different from its literal meaning? Are
words used in senses not employed today? Is the statement meant to be ironic (i.e.,
means other than it says)?
2. how well could the author observe the thing he reports? Were his senses
equal to the observation? Was his physical location suitable to sight, hearing, touch?
Did he have the proper social ability to observe: did he understand the language, have
other expertise required (e.g., law, military); was he not being intimidated by his wife or
the secret police?
3. how did the author report? and what was his ability to do so?

a. Regarding his ability to report, was he biased? Did he have proper time
for reporting? Proper place for reporting? Adequate recording
instruments?
b. When did he report in relation to his observation? Soon? Much later?
Fifty years is much later as most eyewitness are dead and those who
remain may have forgotten relevant material.
c. What was the author’s intention in reporting? For whom did he report?
Would that audience be likely to require or suggest distortion to the
author?
d. Are there additional clues to intended veracity? Was he indifferent on
the subject reported, thus probably not intending distortion? Did he
make statements damaging to himself, thus probably not seeking to
distort? Did he give incidental or casual information, almost certainly
not intended to mislead?
4. Do his statements seem inherently improbable: e.g., contrary to human
nature, or in conflict with what we know?
5. remember that some types of information are easier to observe and report on
than others.
6. are there inner contradiction in the document?

f. Indirect Witness

Gilbert J. Garraghan (1946) says that the most information comes from “indirect
witnesses,” people who were not present on the scene but heard of the events from
someone else.
 Louis Gottschalk (1950) says that the historians may sometimes use hearsay
evidence when no primary texts are available. He writes, “In case where he uses
secondary witnesses… he asks:

(1) On whose primary testimony does the secondary witness base his
statements?
(2) Did the secondary witness accurately report the primary testimony as a
whole?
(3) If not, in what details did he accurately report the primary testimony?

Satisfactory answers to the second and third questions may provide the
historians with the whole or the gist of the primary testimony upon which the secondary
witness may be his only means of knowledge.

In such cases the secondary sources of the historian’s original source, in the
sense of being the origin’ of his knowledge. Insofar as this original source is an accurate
report or primary testimony, he tests its credibility as he would that of the primary
testimony itself.”

Gottschalk (1950) adds, “Thus hearsay evidence would not be discarded by the
historians, as it would be by a law court merely because it is hearsay.”

g. Oral Tradition

Gilbert Garraghan (1946) maintains that oral tradition may be accepted if it

satisfies either two “broad conditions” or six “particular conditions” as follows:

1. Broad condition stated.

1. The tradition should be supported by an unbroken series of witnesses,
reaching from the immediate and first reporter of the fact to the living mediate
witness from who we take it up, or to the one who was the first to commit it to
the writing.
2. There should be several parallel and independent series of witnesses
testifying to the fact in question.

2. Particular conditions formulated.

1. The tradition must report a public event of importance, such as would
necessarily be known directly to a great number of persons
2. The traditions must have been generally believed, at least for a definite
period of time.
3. During that definite period, it must have gone without protest, even from
persons interested in denying it.
4. The tradition must be one of relatively limited duration. Garraghan suggests a
maximum limit of 150 years, at least in cultures that excel in oral
remembrance.
5. The critical spirit must have been sufficiently developed while the tradition
lasted, and the necessary means of critical investigation must have been at
hand.
 6. Critical-minded persons who would surely have challenged the tradition-had
they considered it false-must have made no such

h. Synthesis: Historical Reasoning

Once individual pieces of information have been assessed in context, hypothesis

can be formed and established by historical reasoning.

Argument to the best explanation

C. Behan McCullagh (1984) lays down seven conditions for a successful

argument to the best explanation.

1. The statements, together with other statements already held to be true, must
imply yet other statements describing present, observable data. (We will
henceforth call the first statement ‘the hypothesis’, and the statement
describing observable data, ‘observation statements.)
2. The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory scope than any other
incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must imply a
greater variety of observation statements.
3. The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory power than any other
incompatible hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must make the
observation statements it implies more probable than any other.
4. The hypothesis must be more plausible than any other incompatible
hypothesis about the same subject; that is, it must be implied to some degree
by a greater variety of accepted truth than any other, and be implied more
strongly than any other; and its probable negation must be implied by fewer
beliefs, and implied less strongly than any other.
5. The hypothesis must be less ad hoc than any other incompatible hypothesis
about the same subject; that is, it must include fewer new suppositions about
the past which are not already implied to some extent by existing beliefs.
6. It must be disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs than any other incompatible
hypothesis about the same subject; that is, when conjoined with accepted
truths it must imply fewer observations statements and other statements which
are believed to be false.
7. It must exceed other incompatible hypotheses about the same subject by so
much, in characteristics 2 to 6m that there is a little chance of an incompatible
hypothesis, after further investigation, soon exceeding it in these respects.

McCullagh sums up, “if the scope and strength of an explanation are very
great, so that it explains a large number and variety of facts, many more are competing
explanation, then it is likely to be true.” (McCullagh, 1984; Wikipedia, 2018)

i. Generalization in Historical Research

As in all research, researchers who conducted historical studies should

exercise caution in generalizing from small or non-representative samples. (Fraenkel &
Wallen, n.d.)