Readings in Philippine History: Lesson 2 - Tests of Authenticity and Credibility

Introduction

The usual mistake committed by a researcher, especially a budding one, is the consideration of any apparent authentic record as a credible source of information. Without rigorous examination and establishment of the originality and competence of the source, readers may be misled or worse, misinformed, potentially carrying these inaccuracies throughout their lives.

Importance of Examination: Sources must be scrutinized to ascertain the accuracy of the information for the greater benefit of readers.
Value of Historical Sources: Sources are deemed worthless if not used by historians; likewise, historical accounts hold little significance if not read by students and enthusiasts of history.
Internal and External Criticism: Every piece of information to be used must be accurate, which emphasizes the importance of internal and external criticisms, fundamental components of historical methodologies.

Learning Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

Discern the significance of external and internal criticisms.
Apply external and internal criticisms in the scrutiny of sources.

Difference between Method [of History] and Historiography

Method: Refers to the process of thoroughly examining and critically analyzing historical records and remnants from the past. It involves the accumulation and application of data following scientific rules to determine the validity of historical happenings.

Historiography: Encompasses the reconstruction of historical data that has already undergone reliable methods. It includes synthesizing historical data into narratives or discourses, such as the writing of history books, theses, dissertations, and articles for publication.

External Criticism: The Test of Authenticity

Definition of Authenticity: In history, authenticity indicates originality. Primary sources are preferred over secondary sources as they provide raw data unmarred by subsequent interpretations.

Purpose of Authenticity Testing: To determine the genuineness of sources, distinguishing real accounts from hoaxes or fabricated stories.
Example - Maragtas: Alleged historical accounts like the Maragtas, purported by Pedro Monteclaro, were scrutinized by William Henry Scott in his work on prehispanic source materials, highlighting the necessity of authentic sources.
Potential Fabrications: Sources can be fabricated to support false historical narratives, as seen in practices like Negative Revisionism, which attempts to alter the historical record.

Importance of Identifying Context

Understanding the authorship, timing, and spatial context of an event is crucial to establishing a source's authenticity and credibility. Historical events must be evaluated within their proper context for accurate analysis.

Internal Criticism: The Test of Credibility

Once authenticity is established, historians conduct internal criticism to evaluate credibility, which ensures that the source is worthy of use in historical study.

Criteria for Credibility:

Competence of the source in presenting the truth.
Willingness of the source to convey the truth.
Completeness and adequacy of data.
Reliability of information when corroborated by independent sources.

Role of the Historian: The historian functions as various roles (e.g., prosecutor, judge) in evaluating evidence, capable of recognizing credibility even in biased or obtained sources.
Understanding Independence: Independent sources offer firsthand accounts and are instrumental in establishing the credibility of historical narratives.

Basic Assumptions with Sources

Several assumptions guide historians when examining primary sources:

Sources are accurate when verified as authentic and credible.
Authenticity enhances credibility.
Primary sources are more reliable than secondary sources.
Corroboration by independent sources bolsters credibility.
Sources may exhibit bias, especially related to their provenance.
Independent witnesses, with no direct interest in the events, offer more credible testimonies.
Universal agreement among independent sources often legitimizes historical claims.
Witness testimonies are reliable if the witnesses are in a sound state to provide accurate accounts.
Sources contradicting their contextual milieu may be deemed fabricated.

Dealing with Disagreeing or Hostile Sources

When faced with conflicting or hostile sources, historians should consider the following:

If sources disagree, assess the logical reasoning backing each; favor sources aligned with commonsense.
Sources demonstrating greater authenticity and credible proof are preferred in case of disagreement.
Hostile sources require corroboration from additional independent sources to ascertain their reliability.
Examine the milieu and orientation of sources in relation to broader narratives.

Ethics in Historical Research

Historians are expected to maintain certain ethical standards during research, including:

Recognizing personal biases and perspectives.
Striving for objectivity and accuracy in source examination.
Remaining impartial and rational in data interpretation.
Utilizing all relevant sources, including those that contradict their own position.
Committing to truth over external influences and pressures.
Citing sources properly and acknowledging assistance received.
Avoiding any form of academic dishonesty.
Engaging in rigorous and scientific methodology.
Facilitating access to sources for collective benefit in historical research.

In summary, historical analysis demands a conscientious approach, acknowledging biases while striving for accuracy and objectivity. This integrity ensures that the discipline remains relevant and educational.

Activity

Students are encouraged to obtain their original birth certificate issued by the Philippine Statistics Authority and discuss its:

Competence and impartiality in truth-telling.
Willingness to convey the truth.
Adequacy of the data it presents.

Additionally, consider what other sources might corroborate your birth certificate.

References

Block, M. (1953). The historian’s craft. Alfred A. Knopf.
Gottschalk, L. (1950). Understanding History. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Gripaldo, E. M., et al. (2009). Kasaysayan ng Filipinas at mga institusyong Filipino. Sentro ng Wikang Filipino, Unibersidad ng Pilipinas.
Howell, M., & Prevenier, W. (2001). From reliable sources: An introduction to historical methods. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Pascual, M. (n.d.) Ethics in historical research [PowerPoint Slides].
Scott, W. H. (1984). Prehispanic source materials for the study of Philippine history. New Day Publishers.

Tests of Authenticity and Credibility in Philippine History

Tests of Authenticity and Credibility in Philippine History