Last modified on 26 September 2018, at 17:27


Historiography is "the writing of history", or otherwise-preserving of historical facts to the generations in hence of the eyewitnesses of the events.

In the bulk of cases, this writing, or preserving, of a future knowledge of past events is based on such things as "the critical examination of sources, the selection of particulars from the authentic materials, and the synthesis of particulars into a narrative that will stand the test of critical methods."[1]

But this bulk of cases is made so partly by the fact that most documentations of history are created by those individuals who, by inspiration of some kind of journalistic desire, set out to gather the facts from eyewitnesses and other sources. In other words, both most preserved narratives of, and most narratives purporting to be, accurate of the pasts they respectively claim to represent are constructed by persons who were not eyewitnesses of the events. In short, the bulk of historiography is a kind of secular academic exercise of carefully, in many cases painstakingly, confirming the sources.

The implication of this bulk is that some historiography is that by eyewitnesses of the events represented in the preserved forms. And, contrary to secular critics and other skeptics, some of the most promising candidate instances of historiographic forms for this core minority of historiography are those accounts comprising the book of Genesis.

On the Core Historiography of Genesis and the Pentateuch

William Propp (UC San Diego Department of History), claims that the account of the Exodus shows no sign of authentication, and that the readers are being expected to take the account as that by an 'omniscient observer'. [1]

But Propp, in effect, assumes that a merely secular historiography is the original and universal default form of historiography. Though this assumption is justified for secular, or otherwise religiously disharmonious, societies, it is inconsistent with the natures of innocence, concern for preservation of historically crucial facts, and a ‘choir’ to which to pass on knowledge of those facts.

In other words, core historiography does not necessarily begin as a secular authorship to an audience that values skeptical reservation of judgment of authenticity; and may in fact begin with a core audience that, regardless of exact degree of assent by a wider set of associates, are as intent to have the knowledge preserved as the eye-witness author(s) is/are intent to.

So, despite its own necessary pragmatic standards, secular historiography in any culture may well be founded on a non-secular original set of direct accounts of some original events. And such original accounts easily could lack most or all anti-skeptic details, such as exact authorship, and such as the fact-and-form of other prior sources used.

See also

External links