Source Criticism: Source Criticism In Specific Domains
Related Resources : Source Criticism
Source Criticism In Specific Domains
Source Criticism Of Different Media
Photos are often manipulated during wars and for political purposes. One well known example is Joseph Stalin's manipulation of a photograph from May 5, 1920 on which Stalin's predecessor Lenin held a speech for Soviet troops that Leon Trotsky attended. Stalin had later Trotsky retouched out of this photograph. cf. King, 1997. A recent example is reported by Healy 2008 about President Kim Jong Il, North Korea.
Source Criticism Of Internet Sources
Examples of literature examining Internet sources include Chesney 2006, Fritch & Cromwell 2001, Leth & Thurén 2000 and Wilkinson, Bennett, & Oliver 1997.
Special topics such as the reliability of search engines and Wikipedia have their own investigations.
Source criticism of Wikipedia
Source Criticism In Archaeology And History
"In history, the term historical method was first introduced in a systematic way in the sixteenth century by Jean Bodin in his treatise of source criticism, Methodus ad facilem historiarium cognitionem 1566. Characteristically, Bodin's treatise intended to establish the ways by which reliable knowledge of the past could be established by checking sources against one another and by so assessing the reliability of the information conveyed by them, relating them to the interests involved." Lorenz, 2001, p. 6870.
Two of the best-known rule books from History's childhood are Bernheim 1889 and Langlois & Seignobos 1898. These books provided a seven-step procedure here quoted from Howell & Prevenier, 2001, p. 70-71:
- If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event proved.
- However, majority does not rule; even if most sources relate events in one way, that version will not prevail unless it passes the test of critical textual analysis.
- The source whose account can be confirmed by reference to outside authorities in some of its parts can be trusted in its entirety if it is impossible similarly to confirm the entire text.
- When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with most "authority" - - i.e. the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness.
- Eyewittnesses are, in general, to be preferred, especially in circumstances where the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically, when they deal with facts known by most contemporaries.
- If two independently created sources agree on a matter, the reliability of each is measureably enhanced.
- When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, then historians take the source which seems to accord best with common sense.
Gudmundsson 2007, p. 38 writes: ”Source criticism should not totally dominate later courses. Other important perspectives, for example, philosophy of history/view of history, should not suffer by being neglected” Translated by BH. This quote makes a distinction between source criticism on the one hand and historical philosophy on the other hand. However, different views of history and different specific theories about the field being studied may have important consequences for how sources are selected, interpreted and used. Feminist scholars may, for example, select sources made by women and may interpret sources from a feminist perspective. Epistemology should thus be considered a part of source criticism. It is in particular related to "tendency analysis".
Brundage 2007 and Howell & Prevenier 2001 provide introductions to the field.
Source Criticism In The Arts
Source Criticism In Astronomy
Source Criticism In Biblical Studies
Source Criticism In Journalism
Source Criticism In Legal Studies
The most important legal sources are created by parliaments, governments, courts, and legal researchers. They may be written or unformal and based on established practices.
In assessing the relative value of different kinds of information sources and evidence are court decisions always decisive — directly or indirectly. The discussion of the relevance and importance of kinds of sources must be seen as what kind of evidence is most important in court rooms, both in a descriptive way what do courtrooms actually use and in a normative way what should courtrooms ideally use. Although legal information is mostly used outside courtrooms, its relevance and validity is tested by its use in courtrooms or as thought esperiments: What would be the case if tried in court.
Source Criticism In Medicine
Other Relevant or Related Items
Some of the content on this page has been obtained from the Source criticism
page on Wikipedia and used under the CC-BY-SA
. - Serving History pages are not affiliated with, or endorsed by, anyone associated with the sources of this content