Discussion and Reading Guide for Howell and Prevenier,

From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods, Chapter 2, p. 60-68

I have selected only eight pages from Chapter 2, “Technical Analysis of Sources,” for several
reasons, but primarily because most of the chapter is (unsurprisingly) highly technical. Since
you are reading only eight pages, I expect you to do a thorough reading and to complete this
study guide with great insight and detail.

Source Criticism: The Great Tradition

Explain what Howell and Prevenier mean by “the great tradition” of source criticism. Then,
explain why they think the great tradition should not be completely discarded.

They mean “the great tradition” of how sources are deemed creditable. The traditional way
they’re referring to is the questions applied to a source including, what was “the intended
meaning of a source, was the author of the text in a position to know what he reported?” Modern
historians recognize that historians are not “reporters or detectives” and aren’t positive those
questions are appropriate. The questions restrict different facets of a source from being looked at
such as, ignoring the theories about how knowledge is acquired concerning “the kind of
knowledge any source can reveal,” and the relationship between an unrestricted access to the
past and unplanned outcomes. “The great tradition” shouldn’t be discarded because, if used
moderately, it provides responsible meaning for some sources.

The “Genealogy” of the Document

1. What do Howell and Prevenier mean by a document’s genealogy?

-they mean whether the document is the original, a copy of the original, or a copy of a
copy of the original, etc.
-using a medieval method, the genealogy of a document can be traced back through its
“family tree” following corresponding mistakes.

2. What are the many possible “faults” of copies?

-they are not always accurate copies
-there can be accidental or intended manipulation of the original in the copy
-old technology accounts for a lot of mistakes in copies

3. How do historians try to figure out the relationship between the copy and its original?
-they trace it using a method developed in the medieval era. If a copy has a mistake that
is shared by some other copies, then it is safe to assume that the copies with the exact
same mistake must be from the same publishing source and can be traced back to the
original in this fashion.
 4. When should and shouldn’t copies be “corrected?”
-they shouldn’t because that would interfere with the ability to trace their origins and
would also be a manipulation of the history that was created through the fault’s creation.
Whether the error was purposeful or not, it is a part of history because of its difference
from the original.

5. How should an historian present an edited text to the reader?

-they should make it as evident as possible through footnotes and editorial prefaces. They
stress the obviousness of informing the reader of the text’s history including “the
location, its relationship to the original, previous editions of the text, its place of
composition, its date, etc.”

Genesis of the Document

1. How are Howell and Prevenier differentiating genesis from genealogy?

-“the questions are less technical”, it pertains more to the actual importance of the
information, the institution or person providing it, what “authority” they had to deliver it,
and what the circumstances were. The surrounding events on the date/ location’s “special
meaning” is also important.

2. How do some sources answer the questions about genesis?

- “Juridical sources such as charters usually explicitly state the issuer and the date of the
issuance, unless they are delivering a message requiring immediate action.”

3. What are the many reasons provided by Howell and Prevenier that make the
identifications provided by the source itself potentially misleading?
-They can be potentially misleading because as with the falsehoods mentioned with the
copies, the genesis of the source can be deliberately misleading by the desire of the
author. Sometimes the provided false source is a disguise for an actual source.

Originality of the Document

1. In what way are Howell and Prevenier using the term “originality?”
-They are referring to a historian’s ability to determine the age of a source based on
comparison knowledge of other sources from the time period.
 2. What is its significance to source texts?
-they allow the reader to look into where the information actually comes from.

Interpretation of the Document

1. How has the concept of interpretation changed from the 19th century historians who
founded history writing as a scholarly discipline to the present?
-modern historians look for less narrow views of a concept than in the 10th century.

Authorial Authority

2. What are the various factors that determine authorship and authority of a source?

3. What points do Howell and Prevenier make about observers of events that they use as a
way of explaining authorship and authority of source documents?

Competence of the Observer

1. How is the trustworthiness of an observer’s account determined?

a. Factors particular to the individual observer

b. Factors pertaining to the climate of the times in which the observer lived

The Trustworthiness of the Observer

1. What factors must a historian consider in determining the trustworthiness of the

observer?(author) of source text?