ARELLANO UNIVERSITY

PLARIDEL CAMPUS
53 Gen. Kalentong St., Mandaluyong City

GCAS 04-Readings in Philippine History

Sahagun, Nina Samantha C. Mr. Eric Malabanan
1AB-Psych Act#3

Give a concise explanation/discussion on the followings.

1. What is historical criticism?

Literary analysis known as historical criticism takes into account historical data or the
context in which a work was written, such as the author's background and the historical and
social atmosphere of the time. This contrasts with other types of criticism, such as textual and
formal criticism, which places an emphasis on textual analysis while neglecting outside
influences on the text. Finding the text's primitive or original meaning in its original historical
setting and its literal sense, or sensus literalis historicus, is the main objective of historical
criticism. The secondary objective aims to create a historical reconstruction of the author and the
text's audience.

2. Discuss the importance of historical criticism.

Historians need to be careful when evaluating the quality of the sources they employ in
their research. Regarding the worth and dependability of a source, not all are created equal.
Historical criticism is the process of analyzing written works from the past, particularly those
from the distant past, in the context of the author's time period. In other words, historians don't
believe everything they read in a source. When determining whether a source is reputable,
experts take into account the author's intentions, their political affiliation, if any, what was
significant at the time the author was writing, and other elements. For instance, because to the
propensity for prejudice against an opponent, an ancient author who wrote about a civilization
with which his own culture was at war could not be regarded as a reputable source. Likewise,
due to a lack of firsthand experience, it might be questioned if a writer described the history or
customs of a location they had never visited.

3. Do you believe that writing history is subjective? Why? Explain.

Yes, I believe there are subjective instances in writing history due to one’s beliefs and
experiences that sometimes may agree or disagree with certain significant events in history.
Conforming bias due to religious or cultural beliefs may result in misleading articles or
assessments by historians that’s why historical criticism is crucial. This includes that the primary
source should also be checked and the one provided as the primary source should always be
questioned and has been run on deep and vast background checks to make sure that there is no
misinformation disseminated that shows favors and bias.
 ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
PLARIDEL CAMPUS
53 Gen. Kalentong St., Mandaluyong City

4. How can the writings of history be objective? Explain.

It is highly unachievable to make writing history objectively. It can only be achieved if

historians and even mere readers who have different beliefs weigh on evidence and facts and not
on personal emotions and judgments. People should have the integrity to stick to the facts and
not let personal feelings and beliefs tarnish their way of judging and assessing a historical event.