Lesson 3

Historical Criticisms
 Historical Criticism
Historical Criticism examines the origins of earliest text to appreciate the
underlying circumstances upon which the text came to be (Soulen & Soulen, 2001)
Two 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.
 Two Types of Historical Criticism
1. External Criticism 2. Internal Criticism
When was Where was Eyewitness or Secondhand Account?
it written? it written?
Why was
it written
Primary Primary
Document Why did Literal Document
it survive? Meaning?
?
Authentic? Who was Meaning
Internal
the real in Context
Consistenc Connotations?
author?
y
 Historical 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.
 Various Methodologies used today
1. Source Criticism: which analyzes and studies the sources used by biblical authors.
2. Form Criticism: which seeks to determine a unit’s original form and historical context of the
literary tradition.
3. Redaction Criticism: which regards the author of the text as editor of the source materials
(intention of the author).
4. Tradition Criticism: which attempts to trace the developmental stages of the oral tradition
from its historical emergence to its literary presentation.
5. Canonical Criticism: which focuses its interpretation of the bible on the text of biblical canon.
(Soulen, 2001)
 Two Parts to a Historical Criticism

Part 1: To determine the authenticity of the material or

provenance of a source.
The critic should determine the origin of the material,
its author, and the sources of information used.
External Criticism is used in determining these facts.
 Two Parts to a Historical Criticism

Part 2: To weigh the testimony to the truth.

The critic must examine the trustworthiness of the
testimonies as well as determine the probability of the
statements to be true.
Internal Criticism or higher criticism is most likely to
be used.
 Test of Authenticity

• To distinguish a hoax or a misrepresentation from a

genuine document, the historian must use test
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 (chronological
inconsistency):

• Paper was rare in Europe before the 15th century, and printing was
unknown;
• Pencils did not exist there before the 16th century;
• Typewriting was not invented until the 19th century;
• Indian paper came only at the end of 19th centry.
• The historian also examines the inks for signs of age or of
anachronistic chemical composition.
 Making the best guess of the possible author of the document, he/she sees if
he/she can identify the handwriting, signature, seal, letterhead, or watermark. If
unfamiliar, the handwriting will be compared with authenticated specimens.

Experts used techniques known as paleography and

diplomatics.
These disciplines were founded in 17th century by Dom Jean
Mabillon, a French Benedictine monk and scholar of the
Congregation of Saint Maur.
Seals have been the subject of special study by sigillographers.