3 Historical Criticisms

HISTORICAL CRITICISMS
INSTRUCTOR: MRS. JGCT-ARAGONCILLO, LPT

❑ Examines the origins of the earliest text to appreciate the
underlying circumstances upon which the text came to be
(Soulen & Soulen, 2001).
2 Important Goals:
1. To discover the original meaning of the
text in its primitive or historical
context and its literal sense or sensus
literalis historicus.
2. To establish a reconstruction of the
historical situation of the author and
recipients of the text.
2 Types of Historical Criticism:
1. External criticism 2. Internal criticism
 Historical criticism has its roots in
the 17th century during the
Protestant Reformation and gained
popular recognition in the 19th and
20th centuries (Ebeling, 1963).
 The absence of historical

investigation paved the way for
historical criticism to rest on
philosophical and theological
interpretation.
The passing of time has advanced
it into various methodologies used
today such as;
1. Source criticism (analyzes
and studies the sources used by
biblical authors);
2. Form criticism (seek to
determine a unit’s original
form and historical context
of the literary tradition);
3. Redaction criticism (regards
the author of the text as
editor of the source
materials);
4. Tradition criticism (attempts
to trace the developmental
stages of the oral tradition from
its historical emergence to its
literary presentation);
5. Canonical criticism (focuses its
interpretation of the bible on the
text of biblical canon), and
related methodologies. (Soulen,
2001).
2 Parts of Historical Criticism:
1. Determine the authenticity of the
material also called provenance of
a source.
▪ The critic should determine the
origins of the material, its author,
and the sources of information
used.
▪ The external criticism is used in
determining these facts.
2 Parts of Historical Criticism:
2. Weigh the testimony to the truth.
▪ the critic must examine the
trustworthiness of the testimonies as
well as determine the probability of
the statement to be true.
▪ This process is called internal
criticism or higher criticism since it
deals with more important matters
than the external form.
1. EXTERNAL CRITICISM
✓ Determines the authenticity of the
source.
✓ the authenticity of the material may be

tested in two ways, by palaeographical
(the deciphering and dating of historical
manuscripts) and diplomatic criticism
(critical analysis of historical document to
understand how the document came to
be, the information transmitted, and the
relationships between the facts purported
in the document and the reality).
✓ The material must be investigated based on the time and place
it is written. The critic must determine whether the material
under investigation is raw, meaning unaltered, and it exists
exactly as the author left it.
✓ The authenticity of the material can be examined from other

genuine sources having the same subject or written during
the same period.
✓ The similarities or agreements and differences or disagreements

of some common details, such as culture and traditions, and
events during the period by which the document was made can
be a basis for judging the authenticity of the text.
2. Internal Criticism determines the historicity of the facts
contained in the documents. It is not necessary to prove the
authenticity of the material or document.
✓ In determining the value of the facts, the character of the

sources, the knowledge of the author, and the influences
prevalent at the time of writing must be carefully
investigated.
✓ It must be ascertained first that the critic knows exactly what

the author said and that he/she understands the document
from the standpoint of the author.
Test of Authenticity:
▪ To distinguish a hoax or a misrepresentation from a
genuine document, the historian must use tests common in
police and legal detection.
▪ Making the best guess of the date of the document, he/she

examines the materials to see whether they are not
anachronistic: paper was rare in Europe before the fifteenth
century, and printing was unknown; pencils did not exist there
before the 16th century; typewriting was not invented until the
19th century; and Indian paper came only at the end of that
century.
▪ As the Historians also examine the inks for signs of age or of
anachronistic chemical composition.
▪ Make the best guess of the possible author of the document, see if
they can identify the handwriting, signature, seal, letterhead, or
watermark.
▪ One of the unfulfilled needs of the historian is more of what the

French call “isographies” or the dictionaries of biography giving
examples of handwriting.
▪ For some period of history,

experts using techniques known
as paleography and diplomatic
have long known that in certain
regions at certain times
handwriting and the style and
forms of official were
conventionalized.
▪ Anachronistic styles (Idioms,
orthography, punctuation) can be
detected by specialists who are
familiar with contemporary
writing.
▪ Often spelling particularly of

proper names and signatures,
reveals forgery as would also
unhistorical grammar.
▪ Anachronistic reference to events (too early or too late or too

remote) the dating of a document at a time when the alleged
writer could not possibly have been at the place designated
(alibi) uncovers fraud.

3 Historical Criticisms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3 Historical Criticisms

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3 Historical Criticisms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HISTORICAL CRITICISMS

INSTRUCTOR: MRS. JGCT-ARAGONCILLO, LPT

 The absence of historical

✓ the authenticity of the material may be

✓ The authenticity of the material can be examined from other

✓ The similarities or agreements and differences or disagreements

✓ In determining the value of the facts, the character of the

✓ It must be ascertained first that the critic knows exactly what

▪ Making the best guess of the date of the document, he/she

▪ One of the unfulfilled needs of the historian is more of what the

▪ For some period of history,

▪ Often spelling particularly of

▪ Anachronistic reference to events (too early or too late or too

You might also like