CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AS DISCIPLINE

LESSON 3: EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL CRITICISM

Researches 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 Methods,”n.d.)
Two kinds of Criticism.
1. External Criticism – refers to the genuineness of the documents a researcher uses in a historical study.
(Fraenkel and Wallen, n.d.)
2. 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 what the documents says.
(Fraenkel and Wallen, n.d.)
A. External Criticism
Is the part of the historical method which determines authenticity of the source. The document is
somewhat like a prisoner at the bar. Its genuineness must be tested, where possible, by palaeographical
and diplomatic criticism. It must be be localized in time and place. It must be ascertained, whether in its
present state it exists exactly as its author left it. In order to test its genuineness, the student must ask
himself if it is what it appears to be or if it is a forgery. One is too apt to imagine that historical forgeries
passed out of style with the Middle Ages. The document must be viewed from every possible angle. Its
agreement or disagreement with facts known from other genuine sources of the same place and period,
or on the same subject, will often be a deciding factor in its authenticity. The writers ignorance of facts
which he should have known and which should have been mentioned in the document, or the record of
events which he clearly could not have known at the time of writing, are other signs of genuinity or of tis
absence. A document proven probably genuine by these tests can be often be heightened in value by an
analysis which may restore it to its original state or which may accentuate the historicity of the facts it
contains.
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 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 have not been known during that period?
4. Has the original manuscript has 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 clues internally as to its origin?
(Key, 1997)
Gilbert J. Garraghan (1946) provides the following questions:

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

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

B. Internal Criticism
CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AS DISCIPLINE

Is the part of historical methods which determines the historicity of the facts contained in the
document. It is not of absolute necessity that the document be proven genuine; even forgeries or
documents with truncated truths may contain available material. But before any conclusion is admissible,
the facts contained in the document must be tested. In order to determine the values of these facts, the
characters of the sources, the knowledge of the author, and the influences prevalent at the time of writing
must be carefully investigated. We must first be certain that we know exactly what the author said and
that we understand what he wrote as he understood it.
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?

Gilbert J Garraghan (1946) asks the question below for internal criticism
1. What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?

According to Louis Gottschalk, (1950) ‘’for each particular of a 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.
External and Internal criticism may be summed up as follows:
a. External Criticism

1. Testing the genuineness of the source.

2. Localizing it (time, place, author)
3. Analyzing it (Recension and restoration of text)

b. Internal Criticism

1. Determining the value of the source

2. Interpretation of the source
3. Establishment of facts.