haavt.blogg.se

Strong indications of the originality of the source increase its reliability.

Any given source may be forged or corrupted.Relics are more credible sources than narratives. Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint or narratives such as a statement or a letter.Source criticism Core principles The following core principles of source criticism were formulated by two Scandinavian historians, Olden-Jørgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997): The study of historical method and writing is known as historiography. The question of the nature, and even the possibility, of a sound historical method is raised in the philosophy of history as a question of epistemology. With some notable exceptions, they are not laboratory manuals.Historical method 1 Historical method Historical method comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use primary sources and other evidence to research and then to write histories in the form of accounts of the past.

The available textbooks on historical method, despite their sometimes obvious merit, rarely meet the needs of students in a course of this nature. Neither questions regarding causality, frames of reference, and the philosophy of history nor analyses of the major controversies of historical interpretation are avoided, but a conscious effort is made to subordinate them to concrete ones such as how to choose a subject, how to use a library, how to take notes, when to quote, when to use a footnote, how to evaluate evidence, how to tell a good work of history from a bad one, how to prepare a manuscript, and how to write a historical composition. Since little serious historical research can be done without an adequate library, much of the actual note-taking and writing has to take place before the work is submitted for the criticism of the class, but in class, subjects, methods, tools, and the theoretical problems of the students are discussed as the occasions arise.