CRITICAL

EVALUATION
OF SOURCES
“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
 1. First pay attention to when the source was
created. Can you determine if it was created
within the time period under study?
HOW DO YOU
KNOW IF IT IS A 2. Did the creator witness the event or
PRIMARY participate in the event when it happened?
SOURCE? 3. Did you find this primary source at a
reputable information unit such as a library,
museum or on the website of a library,
museum, educational institution, or
government organization?
 ○ GARRAGHAN 1. BY WHOM WAS IT
(1946) PROVIDES A PRODUCED
SERIES OF (AUTHORSHIP)?
QUESTIONS TO 2. FROM WHAT PRE-
ESTABLISH THE EXISTING MATERIAL
GENUINENESS OF
EXTERNAL A DOCUMENT OR
WAS IT PRODUCED
(ANALYSIS)?
CRITICISM RELIC:
3. IN WHAT ORIGINAL
1. WHEN WAS THE FORM WAS IT
SOURCE, WRITTEN PRODUCED
OR UNWRITTEN, (INTEGRITY)?
PRODUCED
– REFERS TO THE
(DATE)?
GENUINENESS OF 2. WHERE WAS IT
THE DOCUMENTS A PRODUCED
RESEARCHER USES (LOCALIZATION)?
IN A HISTORICAL
STUDY
 ○ GARRAGHAN (1946) ○ GOTTSCHALK (1950),
ASKS THE QUESTION “FOR EACH
BELOW FOR INTERNAL PARTICULAR OF A
CRITICISM: DOCUMENT THE
1. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF
INTERNAL EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF ESTABLISHING
CREDIBILITY SHOULD
ITS CONTENTS
CRITICISM (CREDIBILITY)? BE SEPARATELY
UNDERTAKEN
REGARDLESS OF THE
GENERAL CREDIBILITY
OF THE AUTHOR.”
○ Even if an author is
trustworthy and reliable,
still, each piece of
– REFERS TO THE evidence extracted must
ACCURACY OF THE be weighed individually.
CONTENTS OF A
DOCUMENT.
 1. HUMAN SOURCES MAY BE RELICS SUCH AS
FINGERPRINTS; OR NARRATIVES SUCH AS A
GENERAL STATEMENT OR LETTER.
PRINCIPLES
2. STRONG INDICATIONS OF THE ORIGINALITY
FOR OF THE SOURCE INCREASE ITS RELIABILITY.
DETERMINING
RELIABILITY

OLDEN-JORGENSEN (1998) AND

THUREN (1997) HAVE
FORMULATED THE FOLLOWING
GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN
DETERMINING RELIABILITY
3. 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.
4. AN EYEWITNESS IS MORE RELIABLE THAN
TESTIMONY AT SECOND HAND.
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.
7. IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE WITNESS OR
SOURCE HAS NO DIRECT INTEREST IN CREATING
BIAS THEN THE CREDIBILITY IS INCREASED.
 1. IF THE SOURCES ALL AGREE ABOUT AN EVENT,
HISTORIANS CAN CONSIDER THE EVENT
PROVED.
2. HOWEVER, MAJORITY DOES NOT RULE; EVEN IF
CONTRADICTORY MOST SOURCES RELATE EVENTS IN ONE WAY,
SOURCES THAT VERSION WILL NOT PREVAIL UNLESS IT
PASSES THE TEST OF CRITICAL TEXTUAL
ANALYSIS.
3. THE SOURCE WHOSE ACCOUNT CAN BE
SEVEN-STEP PROCEDURE CONFIRMED BY REFERENCE TO OUTSIDE
FOR SOURCE CRITICISM AUTHORITIES IN SOME OF ITS PARTS CAN BE
IN HISTORY BY BERNHEIM
(1889) AND LANGLOIS &
TRUSTED IN ITS ENTIRETY IF IT [IS IMPOSSIBLE
SEIGNOBOS (1898) MIGHT SIMILARLY TO CONFIRM THE ENTIRE TEXT.
BE HELPFUL:
3. WHEN TWO SOURCES DISAGREE ON A PARTICULAR POINT,
THE HISTORIAN WILL PREFER THE SOURCE WITH MOST
“AUTHORITY” – THAT IS THE SOURCE CREATED BY THE
EXPERT OR BY THE EYEWITNESS.
4. EYEWITNESSES 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.
5. IF TWO INDEPENDENTLY CREATED SOURCES AGREE ON A
MATTER, THE RELIABALITY OF EACH IS MEASURABLY
ENHANCED.
6. 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.
  GOALS OF CONTENT ANALYSIS:

CONTENT 1. WHICH DATA ARE ANALYZED?

ANALYSIS 2. HOW ARE THE DATA DEFINED?
3. FROM WHAT POPULATION ARE DATA
DRAWN?
- IS A RESEARCH METHOD 4. WHAT IS THE RELEVANT CONTEXT?
FOR STUDYING
DOCUMENTS AND
5. WHAT ARE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
COMMUNICATION ANALYSIS?
ARTIFACTS, WHICH CAN
BE TEXTS OF VARIOUS 6. WHAT IS TO BE MEASURED?
FORMATS, PICTURES,
AUDIO OR VIDEO.
  HOW TO USE CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS:

1. WHAT DOES THE TEXT REVEAL ABOUT

CONTEXTUAL
ITSELF AS A TEXT?
ANALYSIS
2. WHAT DOES THE TEXT TELL US ABOUT ITS
APPARENT INTENDED AUDIENCE(S)?
- IS AN ANALYSIS OF A TEXT (IN 3. WHAT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN THE
WHATEVER MEDIUM,
INCLUDING MULTI-MEDIA) THAT AUTHOR’S INTENTION?
HELPS US TO ASSESS THAT TEXT
WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF ITS
HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL
SETTING, AND ALSO IN TERMS OF
ITS TEXTUALITY – OR THE
QUALITITES THAT
CHARACTERIE THE TEXT AS A
TEXT.
HOW TO USE CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS:

4. WHAT IS THE OCCASION FOR THIS TEXT?

5. IS THE TEXT INTENDED AS SOME SORT OF CALL TO –
OR FOR – ACTION?
6. IS THE TEXT INTENDED RATHER AS SOME SORT OF
CALL TO – OR FOR – REFLECTION OR CONSIDERATION
RATHER THAN DIRECT ACTION?
7. CAN WE IDENTIFY ANY NON-TEXTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT AFFECTED THE CREATION AND RECEPTION OF
THE TEXT?
 EXTERNAL CRITICISM INTERNAL CRITICISM
it concerns with the authenticity of it concerns the accuracy of the
the document PRIMARY document
AND
SECONDARY
SOURCES
CONTENT ANALYSIS CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS
it concerns the body of the text it concerns the background of the
text