6.[the history and proof]

*****back

Evidence is necessary to prove it.
"Historical materials" are a thing becoming the "evidence" in the history.

With "the historical materials ,"
"It is all the things which can give proof in a past human remarkable fact".

As well as documents, a folklore legend, "it is epigraph, remains, remains,
manners and customs, geography, thing all which can give proof" including nature.

But I think from the property, and it may be said that there are two kinds in historical materials.


(１) A certain historic case is related with a historic object as
material existence historical materials materially.

(２) For an object historic historical materials,
Via human recognition, it is arranged in the human logic and has
a relationship to be expressed by a language.

As an example,
(１) "A footprint" in the world where a footprint is left if walk は,
the world to be related to for a thing, the soft ground (trace). Or construct, geography, nature.

(a thing made 残 (遺) in the material world.) "It is remains";).

(２) To see は, a person walking, "it is testimony" in the world
testifying that a certain person walked.

(１) There is not the thing not to put in the range of the を
consideration despite the history.

The history is not a story and literature.

Need] of the [historical materials criticism

(1, forgery and mistake of historical materials)

To a thing donated as historical materials from experience, it is often it

As for "(forgery) that all or a part is not genuine" or
It occurs to say "(mistake of the authorization) that was not virtually approved till then".

(come) About the forgery that appeared for a past

In the history in experience,
"An exhibit historical materials that were shown it is not unusual to be forgery".

Therefore, it is the first procedure "to examine closely whether historical materials
are genuine" and is basic.

In addition, as an example of the mistakes of the authorization "the historical materials
are affected by the different times, a person different",
ようなことがある which wrong explanation is added, and is just followed.

And such forgery and mistake may be parts not all.

In this way, a mistake of the forgery of historical materials or the explanation, confusion
of the constitution are common things.

Therefore legitimacy, validity of historical materials must be always considered carefully.

2, reli(ability of testimony contents)

In addition, it is necessary to evaluate it how there is value of evidence about the contents
that historical materials testify how reliable you are.

In this case a witness,
You must be considered with two points called (falsely) whether you were able to speak
a fact in a logical meaning (mistake of the recognition) whether there was will to speak a fact In an ethical meaning.

In this way, I cannot just treat "the historical materials" as "evidence" of the facts.
You must examine the "original or an imitation, mistake" and an aspect of
"the reliability of contents" by all means.

With that in mind, I consider it whether collected many historical materials are helpful
as an exhibit I carry it out again if helpful, and what kind of degree you help.

I call these work "historical materials criticism".

(come) Bad writing: "The history and proof"