GEC 2 – Readings in the Philippine History University of Antique – Libertad Campus

Module 3 College of Business and Management

KADESH EXODUS T. BERDEBLANCO, MAEd Libertad, Antique
Course Facilitator

External and internal criticism

Historical data has to be examined for its authenticity and truthfulness. This examination is done through
criticism; by asking and researching to determine truthfulness, bias, omissions, and consistency in data.
(“Historical Research Methods, “n.d)

External Criticism

External Criticism refers to the genuineness of the documents a researcher uses in a historical study.
(Fraenkel and Wallace, n.d)

Questions to establish the genuineness of a document or relic (Key, 1997)

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

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

• When was the source, written or unwritten, produced (date)?

• Where was it produced (localization)?
• By whom was it produced (authorship)?
• From what pre-existing material was it produced (analysis)?
• In what original form was it produced (integrity)?

Internal Criticism

Internal Criticism refers to the accuracy of the contents of a documents. Whereas external criticism has
to do with the authenticity of a document, internal criticism has to do with what the documents says.
(Fraenkel and Wallace, n.d.)

Questions to check the content of a source of information (Key, 1997)

• What was meant by the author by each word and statement?

• How much credibility can the author’s statement be given?
• What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)? (Gilbert J. Garraghan, 1946)

General Principles for Determining Reliability (Olden-Jorgensen, 1998 and Thuren, 1997)

• Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint; or narrative such as statement or a letter. Relics
are more credible sources than narratives.
• Any given source may be forged or corrupted. Strong indications of the originality of the source
increase its reliability.
• The closer a 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.
GEC 2 – Readings in the Philippine History University of Antique – Libertad Campus
Module 3 College of Business and Management
KADESH EXODUS T. BERDEBLANCO, MAEd Libertad, Antique
Course Facilitator
• An eyewitness is more reliable than testimony at second hand, which is more reliable than hearsay at
further remove, and so on.
• If a number of independent sources contain same message, the credibility of the message is strongly
increased.
• The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be
minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations.
• If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias then the
credibility of the message is increased.

TASK 3: “Examining Documents”. Read the following excerpts and do a

comparative analysis. Support your answers by using external and
internal criticism on the topic. (80 pts.) . Present your output in the class
once you accomplish this Task
The following documents discuss the findings on the remains of what was then
considered the earliest known human remains in the Philippines – Tabon Man
• Robert B. Fox. The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations on Palawan Island, Philippines
(Manila, 1970) p.40.

Tabon Man.-During the initial excavations of Tabon Cave June and July, 1962, the scattered fossil
bones of at least three individuals were excavated, including a large fragment of a frontal bone with the
brows and portions of the nasal bones. These fossil bones were recovered towards the rear of the cave
along the left wall. Unfortunately, the area in which the fossil human bones were recovered had been
disturbed by Megapode birds.
It was not possible in 1962 to •establish the association of these bones with a specific flake assemblage,
although they were provisionally related to either Flake Assemblage II or III. Subsequent excavations in the
same area now strongly suggest that the fossil human bones were associated with Flake Assemblage III, for
only the flakes of this assemblage have been found to date in this area of the cave.3. The available data
would suggest that
Tabon Man may be dated from 22,000 to 24,000 years ago. But, only further excavations in the cave and
chemical analysis of human and animal bones from disturbed and undisturbed levels in the cave will define
the exact age of the human fossils.

The fossil bones are those of Homo sapiens. These will form a separate study by a specialist which will
be included in the final site report for Tabon Cave. It is important to point out, however, because of a
recent publication (Scott 1969), that a preliminary study of the fossil bones of Tabon Man shows that it is
above average in skull dimensions when compared to the modern Filipino. There is no evidence that Tabon
Man was "... a less brainy individual..."[Scott (1969) 36]. Moreover, Scott's study includes many
misstatements about the Tabon Caves, always the problem when writers work from "conversations."
GEC 2 – Readings in the Philippine History University of Antique – Libertad Campus
Module 3 College of Business and Management
KADESH EXODUS T. BERDEBLANCO, MAEd Libertad, Antique
Course Facilitator

• William Henry Scott. Prehistoric Source Materials for the Study of the Philippine History (Revised
Edition) Quezon City, 1984), pp.14-15.

Tabon Man-the earliest human skull remains known in the Philippines are the fossilized fragments of a
skull and jawbone of three individuals who are collectively called “Tabon Man” after the place where they
found on the west coast of Palawan. Tabon Cave appears to be kind of little Stone Age factory: both
finished tools and waste cores and flakes have been found at four different levels in the main chamber.
Charcoal left cooking fires has recovered from three of these assemblages and dated by C-14 to roughly
7,000 BC., 20,000 BC. , and 28,000 B.C. with an earlier level lying so far below these that it must
represent Upper Pleistocene dates like 45 or 50 thousand years ago… Physical anthropologists who have
examined the Tabon skullcap, agreed that it belonged to the modern man- that is Homo sapiens as
distinguished from mid-Pleistocene species nowadays called Homo erectus. Two experts have given the
further opinion that the mandible is “Australian” in physical type, and that skullcap measurements are
mostly nearly like those Ainus as Tasmanians. What is basically means is that Tabon man was "pre-
Mongoloid,” Mongoloid being the term anthropologists apply to the racial stock which entered Southeast
Asia during the Holocene and absorbed earlier peoples to produce the modern Malay, Indonesian, Filipino,
and Pacific peoples popularity – and unscientifically – called, “the brown race.” Tabon Man presumably
belonged to one of those earlier peoples, but, if decently clothed in flesh, T-shirt, and blue jeans, might
pass unnoticed in Quiapo today, whatever his facial features are concerned, nothing can be said about the
color of his skin or hair, or shape of his nose or eyes-except one thing: Tabon Man was not a Negrito.

TASK 3: “Examining Documents”. Read the following excerpts and do a

comparative analysis. Support your answers by using external and
internal criticism on the topic. (80 pts.) . Present your output in the class
once you accomplish this Task.

References

Fox. R, The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations on Palawan Island, Philippines (Manila, 1970)
p.40.

Scott. W, Prehistoric Source Materials for the Study of the Philippine History (Revised Edition)
Quezon City, 1984), pp.14-15.

Louis Gottschalk, Understanding History, (pp. 41-61; 117-170)

Key, J. (1997) Historical. Retrieved from

https://www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980/newpage19.htm