Importance of Historical Criticism.

By: Venus Monica C. Calungsod

I.
As we all know the word criticism has not always borne with a good name, as well as
Historical criticism. It may sound negative or somewhat approaches the Bible in the wrong way, as
some people would say. However, Historical Criticism has something to great offer, as it seeks
greater understanding of texts by analyzing the historical and social contexts. It is also known as
the historical-critical method, is a branch of criticism that studies the origins of ancient texts in
order to comprehend, "the world behind the text." It is literary criticism based on historical
evidence or the context in which a work was written, including facts about the author's life, as well
as the historical and social circumstances of the time. In simple terms, Historical Criticism explores
the origins of oldest text to appreciate the underlying circumstances upon which the text came to
be. As to which, the following parts of the paper will enlighten the importance and discuss deeply
the idea of Historical Criticism.

II.
A. The phrase “what actually happened” is no means free from difficulties of interpretation, but
a common-sense view of it will suffice us in the present discussion. This idea was highlighted on
the paper by I.H. Marshall (1977), entitle “Historical Criticism.” In which, he defined historical
criticism as the study of any narrative which purports to convey historical information in order to
understand what actually happened and is depicted or alluded to in the passage in question. He
also added that a historical study is important, as it was conducted in order to throw more light on
a mysterious narrative by analyzing the nature of the events to which it bears witness. One thing is
the study how the meaning of various statements in the New Testament becomes apparent to the
modern reader only when they are placed within their historical context. Truly, his paper
enlightened us the idea of Historical Criticism and its great contribution to understanding the
context from the bible.
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly
The question of how firm internationalisation evolves over time is best answered by
the careful use of historical research methods duly

1|Page
B. The historian's reconstruction of the past is influenced by a variety of factors, and it is
evident that it cannot always be certain. This is one of the reasons why Historical Criticism was
brought about to convey historical information into understanding of several text, as what Marshall
(1977) wanted to imply in his study. My understanding about his thought is that the details from the
history or past offered an important information to the original readers, but to the present reader.
In simple terms, those historical text is just a time note without any explanation in the present,
without the essence of Historical Criticism. Noting that the existence of this historical criticism
brought understanding of artifacts, clearly remarking its importance to literature.

III.
A. Furthermore, Catholic University of America Press (1917) authorized a paper that
discussed further the Historical Criticism. As they stated that Historical criticism rose to
prominence at a time when so-called Higher Criticism of the Scriptures, and the latter's dubious
reputation in circles where the Bible was still revered as the Inspired Word cast a pall over the
former's value as a constructive science or inquiry into the truth. In addition, they summed up that
the value and the necessity of Historical Criticism were to test the genuineness of the source,
analyze the text, determine and interpret the value of the source and the establishment of truth.
Consequently, they conclude, historical work is absolutely critical, and anybody who embarks on it
without first being warned against his instincts is doomed to drown in it.

B. On my end, Catholic University of America Press (1917) implies to give a picture that
historical criticism entails the understanding of events and experiences surrounding the creation of
the work, particularly the source, and applying the results to interpret that piece of literature. In
which, by analyzing the details of the text and by localizing them in place and time, we are enabled
to see the constant use of material whose could never have known. The importance of a strict test
for historical material is easily recognizable when one reflects that truth at the end. Hence, to test
is to criticize; and while criticism is not the chief end of historical research, still, no conclusions
may be made by the research-worker until all material has passed through the sieve of historical
criticism.

IV.
Several disciplines make up historical criticism. It contains source criticism, which is a set of
skills that assists you in carefully learning about the substance of historical sources. The internal
dialectic of historical criticism is an essential aspect of it. The historical understanding develops
through a process in which historians criticize the ways in which their ancestors' present-
mindedness caused them to misinterpret the past. Historical criticism's main purpose is to find the
text's primal or original meaning in its original historical context and literal sense. The secondary
purpose is to develop a reconstruction of the author's and receivers' historical circumstances.
From that idea and principles, we can formulate a conclusion of how important Historical Criticism,
as it contributed to many aspects.

V.
“The literary text is itself part of the interplay of discourses, a thread in the dynamic web of
social meaning,” a famous quote by Lois Tyson. This statement caught an eye to people, as it
2|Page
brought a deep understanding of Historical Criticism. Since as we all know, writing history is
subjective because certain events happened so long ago, and because sometimes the evidence is
incomplete, different historians have different approaches and views about what happened in the
past. This is the subjective nature of history. One historian claims an event happened a certain
way, while another disagrees completely. From this thoughts and notion, historical criticism is
made to bring understanding, through establishing one conception which everyone agrees. In
general, Historical criticism is the process of separating convention from the individual, and
uncovering the intentions underlying the process of construction, one important aspect that we
truly need.

VI. References
I.H. Marshall. (1977). “Historical Criticism,” I. Howard Marshall, ed., New Testament Interpretation:
Essays on Principles and Methods. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, revised 1979. Pbk.
ISBN: 0853644241. pp.126-138.
Catholic University of America Press. (Oct, 1917). Historical Criticism. The Catholic Historical
Review, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 368-371. Catholic University of America Press: Retrieved from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25011528

3|Page