Chapter 2
Historical Sources, External and Internal Criticisms and Importance of Primary Sources in History
Hello our dear students! How's your day? Hope you're feeling great today. Anyway, this chapter
tackles the different sources in line with the historical subject matter as being studied by the historian and
the methodology or methodologies they used for analyzing the historical evidences.
The learning objectives for today are the following:
1. To know about the historical sources and the external and internal criticism
2. To apply the knowledge on how to examine and assess critically the value of primary sources and
historical evidences
Historical Sources
The most important research tool for the historian is the historical sources. In general, the historical
sources can be classified between primary and secondary sources. Primary source provides direct or
firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art. Primary sources include historical and
legal documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing,
audio and video recordings, speeches, and art objects. Interviews, surveys, fieldwork, and Internet
communications via email, blogs, listservs, and newsgroups are also primary sources. In the natural and
social sciences, primary sources are often empirical studies—research where an experiment was
performed or a direct observation was made. The results of empirical studies are typically found in scholarly
articles or papers delivered at conferences. Whereas, the Secondary sources describe, discuss, interpret,
comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and process primary sources. Secondary source materials
can be articles in newspapers or popular magazines, book or movie reviews, or articles found in scholarly
journals that discuss or evaluate someone else's original research.
External and Internal Criticism
Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning history. However, historians
and students should be critical in scrutinizing these historical sources to avoid deception and to come up
with the historical truth. The historian and students should be able to conduct an external and internal
criticism of the source, especially the primary sources which can age in centuries. External criticism refers
to the genuineness of the documents a researcher uses in a historical study. Examples of the things that
will be examined when conducting external criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the type
of the ink, and the language and words used in the material, among others.
On the other hand, internal criticism refers to the accuracy of the contents of a document. It looks
at the content of the source and examines the circumstance of its production. Internal criticism looks at the
truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source, its context, the agenda
behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended purpose, among others. For example,
Japanese reports and declarations during the period of the war should not be taken as a historical fact
hastily. Internal criticism entails that the historian acknowledge and analyze how such reports can be
manipulated to be used as war propaganda. Validating historical sources is important because the use of
Historical Sources, External and Internal Criticisms and Importance of Primary Sources in History
Hello our dear students! How's your day? Hope you're feeling great today. Anyway, this chapter
tackles the different sources in line with the historical subject matter as being studied by the historian and
the methodology or methodologies they used for analyzing the historical evidences.
The learning objectives for today are the following:
1. To know about the historical sources and the external and internal criticism
2. To apply the knowledge on how to examine and assess critically the value of primary sources and
historical evidences
Historical Sources
The most important research tool for the historian is the historical sources. In general, the historical
sources can be classified between primary and secondary sources. Primary source provides direct or
firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art. Primary sources include historical and
legal documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing,
audio and video recordings, speeches, and art objects. Interviews, surveys, fieldwork, and Internet
communications via email, blogs, listservs, and newsgroups are also primary sources. In the natural and
social sciences, primary sources are often empirical studies—research where an experiment was
performed or a direct observation was made. The results of empirical studies are typically found in scholarly
articles or papers delivered at conferences. Whereas, the Secondary sources describe, discuss, interpret,
comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and process primary sources. Secondary source materials
can be articles in newspapers or popular magazines, book or movie reviews, or articles found in scholarly
journals that discuss or evaluate someone else's original research.
External and Internal Criticism
Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning history. However, historians
and students should be critical in scrutinizing these historical sources to avoid deception and to come up
with the historical truth. The historian and students should be able to conduct an external and internal
criticism of the source, especially the primary sources which can age in centuries. External criticism refers
to the genuineness of the documents a researcher uses in a historical study. Examples of the things that
will be examined when conducting external criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the type
of the ink, and the language and words used in the material, among others.
On the other hand, internal criticism refers to the accuracy of the contents of a document. It looks
at the content of the source and examines the circumstance of its production. Internal criticism looks at the
truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source, its context, the agenda
behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended purpose, among others. For example,
Japanese reports and declarations during the period of the war should not be taken as a historical fact
hastily. Internal criticism entails that the historian acknowledge and analyze how such reports can be
manipulated to be used as war propaganda. Validating historical sources is important because the use of
