Reviewers for Readings in Ph History | Study notes History

SOCSCI REVIEWER 1ST SEMESTER DIFFERENT SOURCES OF HISTORY

History (from the Greek ἱστορία, meaning ‘a learning or knowing by inquiry’) can

be broadly taken to indicate the past in general but is usually defined as the study of the

past from the point at which there were written sources onwards.

What are the Sources of Historical knowledge?

Sources are our window into the past, yet each has perks and drawbacks. Primary

and secondary sources are different. A primary source is first-hand material from the

historical period being studied, whereas a secondary source is a'second-hand' work that

reconstructs and interprets the past using primary sources, such as textbooks, journals,

and websites like this one.

A. PRIMARY SOURCES

Some general questions you should ask of any type of source are:

• What type of source is it? What does its form tell us? Is it a neatly engraved

inscription, an undecorated, heavily used bit of earthenware, or a roughly scribbled

letter on cheap paper?

• Who created the source? How did they gather the necessary information? Were

they an eyewitness, or did they rely on researching other sources or on the stories of

people who had witnessed the event? Could they be biased?

• With which goal was the source created? Did the creator want to tell a truthful story

or, for instance, influence others through propaganda? How reliable does that make

it?

• What is the context in which the source was created? To understand a source, it

helps to know something about the society and immediate context in which it was

made. Compare it with other sources from the same period/that concern the same

subject to help you assess how reliable the source may be and help you interpret its

content.

• What is the content of the source and how do we interpret it? What does it tell us

and what does it not tell us? What are its limitations? What sorts of questions could

this source answer?

1. Written Sources

Primary written materials include contemporary letters, eyewitness reports,

official documents, political declarations and decrees, administrative texts, and histories

and biographies.

The first hurdle with written sources is their transmission; materials such as

papyrus, parchment, and paper do not have infinite lifespans, so the sources we have in

front of us right now have usually been copied, reviewed, edited, even translated, at some

point in time, and may include mistakes or deliberate changes. This puts a thin barrier

between us and the original text.

Partial preview of the text

Download Reviewers for Readings in Ph History and more Study notes History in PDF only on Docsity!

SOCSCI REVIEWER 1ST SEMESTER DIFFERENT SOURCES OF HISTORY

History (from the Greek ἱστορία, meaning ‘a learning or knowing by inquiry’) can be broadly taken to indicate the past in general but is usually defined as the study of the past from the point at which there were written sources onwards. What are the Sources of Historical knowledge? Sources are our window into the past, yet each has perks and drawbacks. Primary and secondary sources are different. A primary source is first-hand material from the historical period being studied, whereas a secondary source is a'second-hand' work that reconstructs and interprets the past using primary sources, such as textbooks, journals, and websites like this one. A. PRIMARY SOURCES Some general questions you should ask of any type of source are:

What type of source is it? What does its form tell us? Is it a neatly engraved inscription, an undecorated, heavily used bit of earthenware, or a roughly scribbled letter on cheap paper?
Who created the source? How did they gather the necessary information? Were they an eyewitness, or did they rely on researching other sources or on the stories of people who had witnessed the event? Could they be biased?
With which goal was the source created? Did the creator want to tell a truthful story or, for instance, influence others through propaganda? How reliable does that make it?
What is the context in which the source was created? To understand a source, it helps to know something about the society and immediate context in which it was made. Compare it with other sources from the same period/that concern the same subject to help you assess how reliable the source may be and help you interpret its content.
What is the content of the source and how do we interpret it? What does it tell us and what does it not tell us? What are its limitations? What sorts of questions could this source answer? 1. Written Sources Primary written materials include contemporary letters, eyewitness reports, official documents, political declarations and decrees, administrative texts, and histories and biographies. The first hurdle with written sources is their transmission; materials such as papyrus, parchment, and paper do not have infinite lifespans, so the sources we have in front of us right now have usually been copied, reviewed, edited, even translated, at some point in time, and may include mistakes or deliberate changes. This puts a thin barrier between us and the original text.

Second, authors may be unreliable, biased, or have intentions that compromise objectivity. The Donation of Constantine shows that forgery is equally possible. These topics can be explored through the following questions:

Who created the source and what was his or her background? People are undeniably connected with their backgrounds – upbringing, family, the times they lived in, and so forth, and we have to examine the source from within this framework.
- What do we know of the context in which the source was created? Values, schools of thought, religion, the political climate, condemnation, and whether the source was commissioned all affect its substance. Comparing a source to others from the same period or about the same topic can help establish its reliability and paint a picture of what may have happened.
Did the creator have a specific goal or a specific audience? Thirdly, it is important to check whether the author was actually around for the events they are writing about. Questions to ask are:
Was the author a contemporary and/or an eyewitness?
If no: where did they get their information and how reliable was that information? It could have come from documents, eyewitnesses, or other sources available to them.
If yes: did they personally witness the event they are describing? How accurate is their memory? 2. Epigraphy Epigraphy is the study of inscriptions engraved on stone, metal, wood, clay tablets, or wax, which can range from shortened phrases to whole official decrees. Inscriptions are usually durable due to the materials employed, but exposure to the environment might affect durability. They were generally meant to be publicly visible, like a giant neon sign, with their material spread widely. This public character doesn't mean inscriptions should be taken at face value; their authors or commissioners had specific goals. Inscriptions are sometimes falsified or moved from their original positions. Remember:
Who created or commissioned the inscription?
What is the goal of the inscription? Perhaps it was created to inform, to record, to glorify, or to influence public opinion.
Can it be dated (by things like the context, monument, or the language), and does the date match the content of the inscription? 3. Settlements, buildings, & monument The ruins of people's homes and buildings, such as courts, bakeries, and schools, reveal their daily activities. Monuments can expose the messages their strong founders yelled out to the world through their architecture and art. As so, they can restructure society's structure.

their story). Always study multiple secondary sources to avoid being mislead. After examining each source's credibility, strengths, and flaws, compare books and articles on your topic to acquire a complete view. When using secondary sources, it thus helps to ask these questions:

Has the author been trained in the right field, and does he or she have decent credit in the academic world? Reading reviews can be of great assistance here.
Where was the source published and could that impact the contents at all? Also, when it comes to articles, some journals have better reputations than others.
When was the source published? Times change. A textbook written in the 1960s CE may not have had access to all the information we have right now and may be colored by the time’s prevailing ideas about how to approach the study of history.
What is the scope of the source? Social histories paint a different picture than military ones, so be sure to choose sources that correspond with the questions you yourself want to answer.
Which sources has the author used and how critical has he or she been? It is important the author has documented his or her use of sources, so you can examine them yourself if need be. Keep an eye out for selective use of sources; an author should not simply choose the sources that fit their hypothesis but should take the full range of primary information into account. The materials to be questioned vary from, for instance, textbooks and course books to independent books, articles (including scientific ones, whose accuracy may be hard to judge by a non-scientist), and websites – but be sure to pick ones that show source lists and authors’ names.

Reviewers for Readings in Ph History, Study notes of History

Related documents

Partial preview of the text

Download Reviewers for Readings in Ph History and more Study notes History in PDF only on Docsity!

SOCSCI REVIEWER 1ST SEMESTER DIFFERENT SOURCES OF HISTORY