Source criticism for cultural history

ABSTRACT

Source criticism has been used for various scholarly purposes since the late eighteenth century. History as a science has changed significantly since then and historians of the twenty-first century use different sources than previous generations. Looking at teaching materials for history studies, the method of analysing textual sources does not appear to have changed in the last 150 years. However, a critical assessment of source criticism for cultural history will reveal the implicit and explicit changes to the method as well as possible points of further development. The article begins with a brief overview of the steps of source criticism as a method of historical research (heuristic, source analysis, interpretation, presentation). Its application to early modern diplomatic correspondence as an example of textual sources leads to a reflection on source criticism as a method for cultural history. Although the formal analysis of a textual source may remain the same, today’s cultural historians are interested in different questions than earlier generations, leading to different interpretations. The final step of the historical method – the presentation – remains largely unreflected, even by cultural historians; it needs to be rethought and redeveloped in the future in order to truly reflect the aims of cultural history.

KEYWORDS:

• Source criticism
• historiography
• historical method
• diplomatic correspondence
• Johann Gustav Droysen
• early modern sources

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. From the 3rd edition onwards, Bernheim published his book under a slightly different title: Lehrbuch der historischen Methode und der Geschichtsphilosophie: Mit Nachweis der wichtigsten Quellen und Hilfsmittel zum Studium der Geschichte (Bernheim 1903, 1908).

2. I am thankful for the participants of the Enlightenment Reading Group to discuss this point openly and frankly, and also wish to thank an anonymous reviewer for further commenting on this point.

3. See Cathleen Sarti’s article on source genres in this collection.

4. The praxeology of diplomatic reports is the claimed focus of an edited collection by Dorfner, Kirchner, and Roll (2021), but, as Marian Füssel pointed out in his commentary, the chapters are ‘normal’ case studies of diplomatic history with only loose links to praxeological methods (e.g. Füssel 2021, 160–165).

5. Jana Dambrogio and the Unlocking History Research Group filmed such a reconstruction of letterlocking (2016). The newest method virtually reconstructs a letter without unfolding it (Dambrogio et al. 2021).

6. By the eighteenth century, a formal letter by a diplomat (= relation) would include most of the following parts: a salutation or address, an acknowledgement of letters received (with type of mailing/courier’s name), a list of letters sent before the current letter, accounts of meetings with heads of state, ministers, other diplomats, then reports of policy making (laws issued, decrees, etc.), details of policy discussed at the court, in the city, or in the political community, and additionally rumours (with an assessment of their validity) as well as general or private remarks on the diplomat’s life. The letters ended with a (formal) salutation and address. A letter of instruction (= rescript) by a minister (in the name of a head of state or monarch) would contain much of the same, but also praise or scolding for the diplomat’s actions, explanation of politics or policy making, and orders for future conduct (Backerra 2018, Wien und London, 44–45).

7. In his hand-written newsletter on foreigners in London, Gulston (1786) also noted private events such as the birth of children: ‘Kinsky, the Lady of Count Ambassador from the Emperor was safely delivered of a son, London, April 1734’.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Charlotte Backerra

Charlotte Backerra is an Assistant Professor of Early Modern History at the University of Göttingen in Germany. Her first monograph discusses the functioning of international relations in the early eighteenth century, especially concerning the Anglo-Austrian relations: Wien und London, 1727–1735: Internationale Beziehungen im frühen 18. Jahrhundert (Backerra 2018). She currently works on economic, financial, and business strategies of dynasties in the Holy Roman Empire (1550–1650). Charlotte Backerra is further interested and has published on dynastic culture, confessional diplomacy, gender studies, early modern intelligence and espionage, and the history of historiography.